[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69993-70060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28050]
[[Page 69993]]
Vol. 77
Wednesday,
No. 225
November 21, 2012
Part III
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species
That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual
Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of
Progress on Listing Actions; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 69994]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0050; MO-4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native
Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened;
Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description
of Progress on Listing Actions
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR), we, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service), present an updated list of plant and
animal species native to the United States that we regard as candidates
for or have proposed for addition to the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. Identification of candidate species can assist
environmental planning efforts by providing advance notice of potential
listings, allowing landowners and resource managers to alleviate
threats and thereby possibly remove the need to list species as
endangered or threatened. Even if we subsequently list a candidate
species, the early notice provided here could result in more options
for species management and recovery by prompting candidate conservation
measures to alleviate threats to the species.
The CNOR summarizes the status and threats that we evaluated in
order to determine that species qualify as candidates and to assign a
listing priority number (LPN) to each species or to determine that
species should be removed from candidate status. Additional material
that we relied on is available in the Species Assessment and Listing
Priority Assignment Forms (species assessment forms) for each candidate
species.
Overall, this CNOR recognizes two new candidates, changes the LPN
for nine candidates, and removes three species from candidate status.
Combined with other decisions for individual species that were
published separately from this CNOR in the past year, the current
number of species that are candidates for listing is 192.
This document also includes our findings on resubmitted petitions
and describes our progress in revising the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) during the period October 1,
2011, through September 30, 2012.
We request additional status information that may be available for
the 192 candidate species identified in this CNOR.
DATES: We will accept information on any of the species in this
Candidate Notice of Review at any time.
ADDRESSES: This notice is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cnor.html. Species assessment forms with information and references on
a particular candidate species' range, status, habitat needs, and
listing priority assignment are available for review at the appropriate
Regional Office listed below in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION or at the
Office of Communications and Candidate Conservation, Arlington, VA (see
address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or on our Web site
(http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp). Please
submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions of a
general nature on this notice to the Arlington, VA, address listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please submit any new
information, materials, comments, or questions pertaining to a
particular species to the address of the Endangered Species Coordinator
in the appropriate Regional Office listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Endangered Species Coordinator(s)
in the appropriate Regional Office(s), or Chief, Office of
Communications and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203
(telephone 703-358-2171). Persons who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We request additional status information
that may be available for any of the candidate species identified in
this CNOR. We will consider this information to monitor changes in the
status or LPN of candidate species and to manage candidates as we
prepare listing documents and future revisions to the notice of review.
We also request information on additional species to consider including
as candidates as we prepare future updates of this notice.
You may submit your information concerning this notice in general
or for any of the species included in this notice by one of the methods
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
Species-specific information and materials we receive will be
available for public inspection by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the appropriate Regional Office listed below under Request
for Information in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. General information we
receive will be available at the Office of Communications and Candidate
Conservation, Arlington, VA (see address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Candidate Notice of Review
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) (ESA), requires that we identify species of wildlife and plants
that are endangered or threatened, based on the best available
scientific and commercial information. As defined in section 3 of the
ESA, an endangered species is any species which is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a
threatened species is any species which is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Through the Federal rulemaking
process, we add species that meet these definitions to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 CFR 17.12. As part of this
program, we maintain a list of species that we regard as candidates for
listing. A candidate species is one for which we have on file
sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to
support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened, but for which
preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-
priority listing actions. We may identify a species as a candidate for
listing after we have conducted an evaluation of its status on our own
initiative, or after we have made a positive finding on a petition to
list a species, in particular we have found that listing is warranted
but precluded by other higher priority listing actions (see the
Petition Findings section, below).
We maintain this list of candidates for a variety of reasons: To
notify the public that these species are facing threats to their
survival; to provide advance knowledge of potential listings that could
affect decisions of environmental planners and developers; to provide
information that may stimulate and guide conservation efforts that will
remove or reduce threats to these species and possibly make listing
unnecessary; to request input from interested parties to help us
identify
[[Page 69995]]
those candidate species that may not require protection under the ESA
or additional species that may require the ESA's protections; and to
request necessary information for setting priorities for preparing
listing proposals. We strongly encourage collaborative conservation
efforts for candidate species, and offer technical and financial
assistance to facilitate such efforts. For additional information
regarding such assistance, please contact the appropriate Regional
Office listed under Request for Information or visit our Web site,
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cca.html.
Previous Notices of Review
We have been publishing candidate notices of review (CNOR) since
1975. The most recent CNOR (prior to this CNOR) was published on
October 26, 2011 (76 FR 66370). CNORs published since 1994 are
available on our Web site, http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cnor.html. For copies of CNORs published prior to 1994, please contact
the Office of Communications and Candidate Conservation (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above).
On September 21, 1983, we published guidance for assigning an LPN
for each candidate species (48 FR 43098). Using this guidance, we
assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to 12, depending on the magnitude of
threats, immediacy of threats, and taxonomic status; the lower the LPN,
the higher the listing priority (that is, a species with an LPN of 1
would have the highest listing priority). Section 4(h)(3) of the ESA
(16 U.S.C. 1533(h)(3)) requires the Secretary to establish guidelines
for such a priority-ranking guidance system. As explained below, in
using this system we first categorize based on the magnitude of the
threat(s), then by the immediacy of the threat(s), and finally by
taxonomic status.
Under this priority-ranking system, magnitude of threat can be
either ``high'' or ``moderate to low.'' This criterion helps ensure
that the species facing the greatest threats to their continued
existence receive the highest listing priority. It is important to
recognize that all candidate species face threats to their continued
existence, so the magnitude of threats is in relative terms. For all
candidate species, the threats are of sufficiently high magnitude to
put them in danger of extinction, or make them likely to become in
danger of extinction in the foreseeable future. But for species with
higher magnitude threats, the threats have a greater likelihood of
bringing about extinction or are expected to bring about extinction on
a shorter timescale (once the threats are imminent) than for species
with lower magnitude threats. Because we do not routinely quantify how
likely or how soon extinction would be expected to occur absent
listing, we must evaluate factors that contribute to the likelihood and
time scale for extinction. We therefore consider information such as:
The number of populations or extent of range of the species affected by
the threat(s) or both; the biological significance of the affected
population(s), taking into consideration the life-history
characteristics of the species and its current abundance and
distribution; whether the threats affect the species in only a portion
of its range, and if so, the likelihood of persistence of the species
in the unaffected portions; the severity of the effects and the
rapidity with which they have caused or are likely to cause mortality
to individuals and accompanying declines in population levels; whether
the effects are likely to be permanent; and the extent to which any
ongoing conservation efforts reduce the severity of the threat.
As used in our priority-ranking system, immediacy of threat is
categorized as either ``imminent'' or ``nonimminent'' and is based on
when the threats will begin. If a threat is currently occurring or
likely to occur in the very near future, we classify the threat as
imminent. Determining the immediacy of threats helps ensure that
species facing actual, identifiable threats are given priority for
listing proposals over those for which threats are only potential or
species that are intrinsically vulnerable to certain types of threats
but are not known to be presently facing such threats.
Our priority ranking system has three categories for taxonomic
status: Species that are the sole members of a genus; full species (in
genera that have more than one species); and subspecies and distinct
population segments of vertebrate species (DPS).
The result of the ranking system is that we assign each candidate a
listing priority number of 1 to 12. For example, if the threats are of
high magnitude, with immediacy classified as imminent, the listable
entity is assigned an LPN of 1, 2, or 3 based on its taxonomic status
(i.e., a species that is the only member of its genus would be assigned
to the LPN 1 category, a full species to LPN 2, and a subspecies or DPS
would be assigned to LPN 3). In summary, the LPN ranking system
provides a basis for making decisions about the relative priority for
preparing a proposed rule to list a given species. No matter which LPN
we assign to a species, each species included in this notice as a
candidate is one for which we have sufficient information to prepare a
proposed rule to list because it is in danger of extinction or likely
to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
For more information on the process and standards used in assigning
LPNs, a copy of the 1983 guidance is available on our Web site at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/48fr43098-43105.pdf. For
more information on the LPN assigned to a particular species, the
species assessment for each candidate contains the LPN chart and a
rationale for the determination of the magnitude and immediacy of
threat(s) and assignment of the LPN; that information is summarized in
this CNOR.
This revised notice supersedes all previous animal, plant, and
combined candidate notices of review.
Summary of This CNOR
Since publication of the previous CNOR on October 26, 2011 (76 FR
66370), we reviewed the available information on candidate species to
ensure that a proposed listing is justified for each species, and
reevaluated the relative LPN assigned to each species. We also
evaluated the need to emergency-list any of these species, particularly
species with high priorities (i.e., species with LPNs of 1, 2, or 3).
This review and reevaluation ensures that we focus conservation efforts
on those species at greatest risk first.
In addition to reviewing candidate species since publication of the
last CNOR, we have worked on numerous findings in response to petitions
to list species, and on proposed and final determinations for rules to
list species under the ESA. Some of these findings and determinations
have been completed and published in the Federal Register, while work
on others is still under way (see Preclusion and Expeditious Progress,
below, for details).
Based on our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information, with this CNOR we identify 2 new candidate species (see
New Candidates, below), change the LPN for 9 candidates (see Listing
Priority Changes in Candidates, below) and determine that a listing
proposal is not warranted for 3 species and thus remove them from
candidate status (see Candidate Removals, below). Combined with the
other decisions published separately from this CNOR, a total of 192
species (including 69 plant and 123 animal species) are now candidates
awaiting preparation of rules proposing
[[Page 69996]]
their listing. These 192 species, along with the 94 species currently
proposed for listing (including 6 species proposed for listing due to
similarity in appearance), are included in Table 1.
Table 2 lists the changes from the previous CNOR, and includes 47
species identified in the previous CNOR as either proposed for listing
or classified as candidates that are no longer in those categories.
This includes 41 species for which we published a final listing rule, 1
species for which we published a withdrawal of a proposed rule, 2
candidate species for which we published separate not-warranted
findings and removed from candidate status, plus the 3 species in this
notice that we have determined do not meet the definition of an
endangered or threatened species and therefore do not warrant listing.
We have removed these species from candidate status in this CNOR.
New Candidates
Below we present a brief summary of one new mammal (Pe[ntilde]asco
least chipmunk), and one new fish (Cumberland arrow darter), that are
additions to this year's CNOR. Complete information, including
references, can be found in the species assessment forms. You may
obtain a copy of these forms from the Regional Office having the lead
for the species, or from our Web site http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp. For these species, we find that we have on
file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to
support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened, but that
preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-
priority listing actions (i.e., it met our definition of a candidate
species). We also note below that two other species--San Francisco Bay-
Delta longfin smelt DPS and Arapahoe snowfly--were identified as
candidates earlier this year as a result of separate petition findings
published in the Federal Register.
Mammals
Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk (Tamias minimus atristriatus)--The
Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk is endemic to the White Mountains, Otero
and Lincoln Counties, and the Sacramento Mountains, Otero County, New
Mexico. The Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk historically had a broad
distribution throughout the Sacramento Mountains within ponderosa pine
forests. The last verification of persistence of the Sacramento
Mountains population of Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk was in 1966, and
the subspecies appears to be extirpated from the Sacramento Mountains.
The only remaining known distribution of the least chipmunk is
restricted to open, high elevation, talus slopes within a subalpine
grassland, located in the Sierra Blanca area, White Mountains, Lincoln
and Otero Counties, New Mexico.
The Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk faces threats from present or
threatened destruction, modification, and curtailment of its habitat
from the alteration or loss of mature ponderosa pine forests in one of
the two historically-occupied areas. The documented decline in occupied
localities, in conjunction with the small numbers of individuals
captured, are linked to widespread habitat alteration. Moreover, the
highly-fragmented nature of its current distribution is a significant
contributor to the vulnerability of this subspecies and increases the
likelihood of very small, isolated populations being extirpated. As a
result of this fragmentation, even if suitable habitat exists (or is
restored) in the Sacramento Mountains, the likelihood of recolonization
of historical habitat or population expansion from the White Mountains
is extremely remote. Considering the magnitude and imminence of these
threats to the subspecies and its habitat, and the vulnerability of the
White Mountains population, we conclude that the least chipmunk is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its known range now or in the
foreseeable future.
The remaining population of Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk in the
White Mountains is particularly susceptible to extinction as a result
of small, reduced population sizes and its isolation. Because of the
reduced population size and lack of contiguous habitat adjacent to the
extant White Mountains population, even a small impact on the White
Mountains could have a very large impact on the status of the species
as a whole. As a result of its restricted range, apparent small
population size, and fragmented historical habitat, the one known
remaining extant population in the White Mountains is inherently
vulnerable to extinction due to effects of small, population sizes.
These impacts are likely to be seen in the population at some point in
the foreseeable future, but do not appear to be affecting this
population currently. Therefore, we conclude the threats to this
population are of high magnitude, but not imminent. Therefore, we
assign an LPN of 6 to the subspecies.
Fish
Cumberland arrow darter (Etheostoma sagitta sagitta)--The following
summary is based on information in our files. The Cumberland arrow
darter is a brightly colored darter with a total length of 116
millimeters (4.6 inches). It is restricted to the upper Cumberland
River basin in southeastern Kentucky and northeastern Tennessee. The
Cumberland arrow darter typically inhabits small, headwater streams
(first to third order) but is sometimes observed in larger streams or
small rivers. Its preferred habitat consists of pools or transitional
areas between riffles and pools (runs and glides) in moderate to high
gradient streams with bedrock, boulder, and cobble substrates.
Cumberland arrow darters feed on a variety of aquatic invertebrates,
but adults feed predominantly on larval mayflies (order Ephemeroptera),
specifically the families Heptageniidae and Baetidae. Rangewide surveys
from 2010 to 2012 revealed that the Cumberland arrow darter has been
extirpated from portions of its range. During these efforts, the
subspecies was observed at 60 of 101 historical streams and 72 of 123
historical sites.
The subspecies' habitat and range have been degraded and limited by
water pollution from surface coal mining and gas exploration
activities; removal of riparian vegetation; stream channelization;
increased siltation associated with poor mining, logging, and
agricultural practices; and deforestation of watersheds. The magnitude
of these threats is most severe in the eastern half of the range, where
resource extraction activities are more common and public ownership is
sparse. The threat magnitude is lower in the western half of the range
where resource extraction activities are less severe and a larger
proportion of the range is in public ownership. Since the species and
its life cycle and habitat requirements are fairly evenly distributed
across its range, overall, the magnitude of the threats is moderate. We
also consider these threats to be imminent because the threats are
ongoing and will continue for the foreseeable future. Consequently, we
assigned an LPN of 9 to the Cumberland arrow darter.
Longfin smelt, San Francisco Bay-Delta DPS (Spirinchus
thaleichthys)--We previously announced candidate status for this DPS,
and described the reasons and data on which the finding was based, in a
separate warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding published on
April 2, 2012 (77 FR 19756).
Insects
Arapahoe snowfly (Capnia arapahoe)--We previously announced
candidate status for this species, and
[[Page 69997]]
described the reasons and data on which the finding was based, in a
separate warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding published on
May 10, 2012 (77 FR 27386).
Listing Priority Changes in Candidates
We reviewed the LPN for all candidate species and are changing the
numbers for the following species discussed below. Some of the changes
reflect actual changes in either the magnitude or immediacy of the
threats. For some species, the LPN change reflects efforts to ensure
national consistency as well as closer adherence to the 1983 guidelines
in assigning these numbers, rather than an actual change in the nature
of the threats.
Reptiles
Sonoran desert tortoise (Gopherus morafkai)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. Sonoran desert
tortoises are most closely associated with Sonoran and Mojave Desert
scrub vegetation types, but may also be found in other habitat types
within their distribution and elevation range. They occur most commonly
on rocky, steep slopes and bajadas in paloverde-mixed cacti
associations. Washes and valley bottoms may be used in dispersal and,
in some areas, as all or part of home ranges. Most Sonoran desert
tortoises in Arizona occur between 904 to 4,198 feet (275 to 1280
meters) in elevation. The Sonoran desert tortoise is distributed south
and east of the Colorado River in Arizona in all counties except for
Navajo, Apache, Coconino, and Greenlee Counties, south to the Rio Yaqui
in southern Sonora, Mexico.
Threats known to affect Sonoran desert tortoises include nonnative
plant species invasions and altered fire regimes; urban and
agricultural development, and human population growth; barriers to
dispersal and genetic exchange; off-highway vehicles; roads and
highways; historical ironwood and mesquite tree harvest in Mexico;
improper livestock grazing (predominantly in Mexico); undocumented
human immigration and interdiction activities; illegal collection;
predation from feral dogs; human depredation and vandalism; drought;
and climate change. Threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise differ
geographically in type and scope, and are highly synergistic in their
effects. However, in their totality, these threats are high in
magnitude because of the large amount of habitat that is likely to be
affected and the irreversible nature of the effect of these threats in
sensitive habitats that are slow to rebound. While some threats are
ongoing, the more significant ones are not. Thus, overall, the threats
are nonimminent. Recent phylogenetic research confirmed what has been
suspected for decades within the scientific community that the Sonoran
desert tortoise is a distinct species. Therefore, we changed the LPN
from a 6 to a 5, reflecting that this entity is now a full species and
no longer a DPS.
Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The Sonoyta mud turtle occurs in a spring and pond at
Quitobaquito Springs on Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona,
and in the Rio Sonoyta and Quitovac Spring of Sonora, Mexico. Loss and
degradation of stream habitat from water diversion and groundwater
pumping, along with its very limited distribution, are the primary
threats to the Sonoyta mud turtle. The Sonoyta mud turtle may also be
vulnerable to aerial spraying of pesticides on nearby agricultural
fields. Sonoyta mud turtles are highly aquatic and depend on permanent
water for survival. The area of southwest Arizona and northern Sonora
where the Sonoyta mud turtle occurs is one of the driest regions in the
Southwest. Due to continued drought and irrigated agriculture in the
region, we expect surface water in the Rio Sonoyta to further dwindle
in the foreseeable future but not as imminently as previously believed
since National Park Service staff have implemented several actions to
stabilize the water levels at Quitobaquito Springs. However, surface
water use will have a significant impact on the survival of this
subspecies. Based on a change in the timing of the threat from the
reduction of surface water to nonimminent (i.e., expected to occur in
foreseeable future), we are changing the LPN for Sonoyta mud turtle
from a 3 to a 6.
Amphibians
Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
The Black Warrior waterdog is a salamander that inhabits streams above
the Fall Line within the Black Warrior River Basin in Alabama. There is
very little specific locality information available on the historical
distribution of the Black Warrior waterdog because little attention was
given to this species between its description in 1937 and the 1980s.
During this time, there were a total of only 11 known historical
records from 4 Alabama counties. Two of these sites have now been
inundated by impoundments. Extensive survey work was conducted in the
1990s to look for additional populations. As a result of that work, the
species was documented at 14 sites in 5 counties.
Water-quality degradation is the biggest threat to the continued
existence of the Black Warrior waterdog. Most streams that have been
surveyed for the waterdog showed evidence of pollution and many
appeared biologically depauperate. Sources of point and nonpoint
pollution in the Black Warrior River Basin have been numerous and
widespread. Pollution is generated from inadequately treated effluent
from industrial plants, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment plants,
poultry operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface mining represents
another threat to the biological integrity of waterdog habitat. Runoff
from old, abandoned coal mines generates pollution through
acidification, increased mineralization, and sediment loading. The
North River, Locust Fork, and Mulberry Fork, all streams that this
species inhabits, are on the Environmental Protection Agency's list of
impaired waters. An additional threat to the Black Warrior waterdog is
the creation of large impoundments that have flooded thousands of
square hectares of its habitat. These impoundments are likely marginal
or unsuitable habitat for the salamander. Suitable habitat for the
Black Warrior waterdog is limited, and available data indicate extant
populations are small and their viability is questionable. This
situation is pervasive and problematic; water quality issues are
persistent and regulatory mechanisms are not ameliorating these ongoing
threats. The most current survey information indicates all populations
except one may have decreased below detectable limits indicating the
threats have increased in their severity and effects on the species.
Based on this updated information, the threats are now of high
magnitude overall. Water quality degradation in the Black Warrior Basin
is ongoing, therefore, the threats are imminent. We have changed the
LPN from an 8 to a 2 for this species.
Snails
Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. The Page springsnail is
known from a complex of springs located within an approximately 0.93-mi
(1.5-km) stretch along the west side of Oak
[[Page 69998]]
Creek around the community of Page Springs, and within springs located
along Spring Creek, tributary to Oak Creek, Yavapai County, Arizona.
The primary threat to the Page springsnail has been modification of
habitat by domestic use, agriculture, ranching, fish hatchery
operations, recreation, and groundwater withdrawal. Many of the springs
where the species occurs have been subjected to some level of
modification. However, the immediacy of the threat of groundwater
withdrawal is uncertain, due to conflicting information regarding
immediacy. Based on recent survey data, it appears that the Page
springsnail is abundant within natural habitats and persists in
modified habitats, albeit at reduced densities. Arizona Game and Fish
Department (AGFD) management plans for the Bubbling Ponds and Page
Springs fish hatcheries include commitments to replace lost habitat and
to monitor remaining populations of invertebrates such as the Page
springsnail. The candidate conservation agreement with assurances
(CCAA) for the Page springsnail has resulted in the implementation of
conservation measures such as restoration and creation of spring
ecosystems, including springs on AGFD properties. The implementation of
the CCAA has resulted in measurable benefits to the species and its
habitats. Additionally, the National Park Service has expressed an
interest in restoring natural springhead integrity to Shea Springs, a
site historically occupied by Page springsnail.
Accordingly, we find that ongoing implementation of the CCAA
continues to substantially reduce the magnitude and immediacy of
threats to, and to appreciably improve the conservation status of, the
species. Therefore, we are changing the LPN for the Page springsnail
from an 8 to an 11.
Insects
Nevares Spring naucorid bug (Ambrysus funebris)--The Nevares Spring
naucorid bug is an aquatic insect that has a distribution that is
limited to the Travertine-Nevares Springs Complex within Death Valley
National Park, Inyo County, California. Surveys indicate that it is a
rare species within the aquatic invertebrate community. The Travertine
and Nevares Springs areas have eight water collection facilities that
provide water for commercial and domestic uses. Information pertaining
to the historical distribution of the Nevares Spring naucorid bug prior
to the development of the local water collection systems is not
available. However, several of the aquatic habitats where the insect
occurred have been eliminated or substantially reduced in size. It is
likely that the species occupied a large area of habitat where suitable
micro-habitat features were present. The widespread loss of aquatic
habitat within the Travertine-Nevares Springs Complex since the water
collection systems were installed suggests the species has experienced
major reductions in abundance and distribution as springbrook
environments were eliminated or reduced in extent. The adverse effects
of water diversion activities are most pronounced during the summer
months, when aquatic habitats and the species that occupy those
habitats are most restricted, and therefore vulnerable to perturbation.
In addition, as the human population in southwestern Nevada grows, the
demand for ground water and the application for permits to pump more
ground water from the underground aquifer that supplies water to desert
springs, seeps, and streams in Death Valley National Park will grow.
This would likely reduce the quantity of water supplies to desert
seeps, springs, and streams and reduce the habitat available to the
Nevares Spring naucorid bug.
Nonnative mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) may prey on and compete
with Nevares Spring naucorid bugs for food resources. Crayfish
(Procambarus sp.) are in close proximity to the naucorid bug's range,
and if ever introduced into the same habitat, could pose an immediate
threat to the species. The presence of nonnative plants may also reduce
water availability or alter microhabitat features. Climate change will
likely affect the species because increasing temperatures will likely
result in greater evaporation rates and increasingly arid conditions,
which may result in decreased recharge rates into the groundwater
system. In previous years, magnitude of threats was classified as high
and immediacy of threats was classified as nonimminent for this
species, resulting in an LPN of 5. However, the primary threats to this
species are ongoing, and, thus, to ensure consistency in the
application of our listing priority process, we have changed the
immediacy of threats from nonimminent to imminent, resulting in an LPN
of 2 (high magnitude and imminent threats) for the Nevares Spring
naucorid bug.
Stephan's riffle beetle (Heterelmis stephani)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The
Stephan's riffle beetle is an endemic riffle beetle historically found
in limited spring environments within the Santa Rita Mountains, Pima
County, Arizona. In the most recent surveys conducted in 1993, the
beetle was only documented in Sylvester Spring in Madera Canyon, within
the Coronado National Forest. Suspected potential threats to that
spring are largely from habitat modification, and potential changes in
water quality and quantity due to catastrophic natural events and
climate change. The threats are of low to moderate magnitude based on
our current knowledge that the effects of these threats are unlikely to
be permanent as they stem from occasional natural events that do not
result in permanent water quality degradation. Additionally, there is a
higher likelihood that the species will persist in areas that are
unaffected by the threats; it is unlikely that all areas of the spring
would be simultaneously be affected. Threats from habitat modification
have already occurred and are no longer ongoing, and the threats from
climate change are expected to occur over many years. Therefore, the
threats are nonimminent. Thus, we are changing the LPN for the
Stephan's riffle beetle from an 8 to an 11.
Flowering Plants
Astragalus anserinus (Goose Creek milkvetch)--The following summary
is based on information in our files and in the petition received on
February 3, 2004. The majority (over 80 percent) of Goose Creek
milkvetch sites in Idaho, Utah, and Nevada occur on Federal lands
managed by the Bureau of Land Management. The rest of the sites occur
as small populations on private and State lands in Utah and on private
land in Idaho and Nevada. Goose Creek milkvetch occurs in a variety of
habitats, but is typically associated with dry, tuffaceous soils (made
up of rock consisting of smaller kinds of volcanic detritus) from the
Salt Lake Formation. The species grows on steep or flat sites, with
soil textures ranging from silty to sandy to somewhat gravelly. The
species tolerates some level of disturbance, based on its occurrence on
steep slopes where downhill movement of soil is common.
The primary threat to Goose Creek milkvetch is habitat degradation
and modification resulting from an altered wildfire regime, fire
suppression activities, and rehabilitation efforts to recover lands
that have burned. Other factors that also appear to threaten Goose
Creek milkvetch include livestock use; invasive, nonnative species; and
the inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms to address these threats.
Climate change effects to Goose
[[Page 69999]]
Creek drainage habitats are possible, but we are unable to predict the
specific impacts of this change to Goose Creek milkvetch at this time.
We originally assigned the species an LPN of 5 based on high
magnitude threats that were capable of destroying entire populations,
but that were nonimminent, or not currently ongoing. However, our
recent review reveals that the threats have increased and are now
imminent, or currently occurring, largely a result of land management
actions taken since fires initially altered the habitat. We now
consider the threats associated with livestock grazing and invasive
species to be imminent throughout a large portion of the species'
range. The increased magnitude and immediacy of threats leaves the
species and its small populations more vulnerable to stochastic events.
Additionally, surveys have not identified new populations that would
significantly increase the range or extent of the species. Therefore,
we are changing the LPN for Goose Creek milkvetch from a 5 to a 2.
Calochortus persistens (Siskiyou mariposa lily)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition
we received on September 10, 2001. The Siskiyou mariposa lily is a
narrow endemic that is restricted to three disjunct ridge tops in the
Klamath-Siskiyou Range near the California-Oregon border. The
southernmost occurrence of this species is composed of nine separate
sites on approximately 17.6 hectares (ha) (43.4 acres (ac)) of Klamath
National Forest and privately owned lands that stretch for 10
kilometers (km) (6 miles (mi)) along the Gunsight-Humbug Ridge,
Siskiyou County, California. In 2007, a new occurrence was confirmed in
the locality of Cottonwood Peak and Little Cottonwood Peak, Siskiyou
County, where several populations are distributed over 164 ha (405 ac)
on three individual mountain peaks in the Klamath National Forest and
on private lands. The northernmost occurrence consists of not more than
five Siskiyou mariposa lily plants that were discovered in 1998, on
Bald Mountain, west of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon.
Major threats include competition and shading by native and
nonnative species fostered by suppression of wildfire; increased fuel
loading and subsequent risk of wildfire; fragmentation by roads, fire
breaks, tree plantations, and radio-tower facilities; maintenance and
construction around radio towers and telephone relay stations located
on Gunsight Peak and Mahogany Point; and soil disturbance, direct
damage, and exotic weed and grass species introduction as a result of
heavy recreational use and construction of fire breaks. Dyer's woad
(Isatis tinctoria), an invasive, nonnative plant that may prevent
germination of Siskiyou mariposa lily seedlings, affects 75 percent of
the known lily habitat on Gunsight-Humbug Ridge, the southernmost
California occurrence. U.S. Forest Service staff and the Klamath-
Siskiyou Wildlands Center cite competition with dyer's woad as a
significant and chronic threat to the survival of Siskiyou mariposa
lily.
The combination of restricted range, extremely low numbers (five
plants) in one of three disjunct populations, poor competitive ability,
short seed dispersal distance, slow growth rates, low seed production,
apparently poor survival rates in some years, herbivory, habitat
disturbance, and competition from exotic plants threaten the continued
existence of this species. However, because efforts are underway to
reduce the threat of dyer's woad where it is found and because there is
no evidence of a decline in the populations of any of the three C.
persistens occurrences since the time this species was added to the
list of candidate species, we now classify the magnitude of existing
threats as moderate rather than high. As the threats of competition
from exotic plants are not anticipated to overwhelm a large portion of
the species' range in the immediate future, the threats are
nonimminent. Therefore, we have changed the LPN from a 5 to an 11 to
this species.
Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The whorled
sunflower is found in moist, prairie-like openings in woodlands and
along adjacent creeks. Despite extensive surveys throughout its range,
only four populations are known for this species. There is one
population (consisting of two subpopulations) documented in Cherokee
County, Alabama; one population in Floyd County, Georgia; and one
population each in Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee.
This species appears to have restricted ecological requirements and
is dependent upon the maintenance of prairie-like openings for its
survival. Active management of habitat is needed to keep competition
and shading under control. Much of its habitat has been degraded or
destroyed for agricultural, silvicultural, and residential purposes.
Populations near roadsides or powerlines are threatened by herbicide
usage in association with right-of-way maintenance. The majority of the
Georgia population is protected due to its location within a
conservation easement; however, only 15 to 20 plants are estimated to
occur at this site. The remaining three populations are not formally
protected, but efforts have been taken to abate threats associated with
highway right-of-way maintenance at one Alabama subpopulation. However,
timber growth, following a 2001 timber harvest that benefitted the
plants, now threatens the other Alabama subpopulation. Last year, this
species was assigned an LPN of 8 based on imminent threats of moderate
magnitude. However this year, we have evidence that one Alabama
subpopulation is facing new threats from shading by trees, and
additional information on the variable reproductive fitness of the
species. Because small population size poses a threat to all known
populations of H. verticillatus, threats associated with land uses
affect all populations except for the one in Georgia, and the
reproductive fitness of the Georgia population is apparently
diminished, we currently consider threats to be of high magnitude, and
have changed the LPN to 2 for this species.
Candidate Removals
As summarized below, we have evaluated the threats to the following
species and considered factors that, individually and in combination,
currently or potentially could pose a risk to these species and their
habitats. After a review of the best available scientific and
commercial data, we conclude that listing these species under the
Endangered Species Act is not warranted because these species are not
likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges. Therefore, we
find that proposing a rule to list them is not warranted, and we no
longer consider them to be candidate species for listing. We will
continue to monitor the status of these species and to accept
additional information and comments concerning this finding. We will
reconsider our determination in the event that new information
indicates that the threats to the species are of a considerably greater
magnitude or imminence than identified through assessments of
information contained in our files, as summarized here.
Snails
Elongate mud meadows springsnail (Pyrgulopsis notidicola)--The
following summary is based on information
[[Page 70000]]
contained in our files. Pyrgulopsis notidicola, a freshwater snail, is
endemic to Soldier Meadow, which is located at the northern extreme of
the western arm of the Black Rock Desert in the transition zone between
the Basin and Range Physiographic Province and the Columbia Plateau
Province, Humboldt County, Nevada. The species is currently known to
occupy four separate stretches of thermal (between 45 and 32 [deg]
Celsius, 113 and 90 [deg] Fahrenheit) aquatic habitat. The first
stretch is the largest at approximately 600 m (1,968 ft) long and 2 m
(6.7 ft) wide. The other stretches where Pyrgulopsis notidicola occurs
are less than 6 m (19.7 ft) long and 0.5 m (1.6 ft) wide. Pyrgulopsis
notidicola occurs only in shallow, flowing water on gravel substrate.
The species does not occur in deep water (i.e., impoundments) where
water velocity is low, gravel substrate is absent, and sediment levels
are high.
The primary threat to Pyrgulopsis notidicola identified when the
species was elevated to candidate status was associated with the
pattern and amount of recreational use in Soldier Meadow, particularly
bathing and camping in the immediate vicinity of the only spring known
to contain the species at that time. However, management actions
implemented by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have greatly reduced
recreation impacts in Soldier Meadow and thus have appreciably reduced
the threat of habitat destruction or modification for Pyrgulopsis
notidicola. BLM constructed a designated central campground to preclude
dispersed camping in sensitive habitats. Established walkways were also
constructed to direct foot traffic away from sensitive habitats,
including springs occupied by Pyrgulopsis notidicola. BLM implemented a
campground host system during periods of peak recreation use, and the
site steward interacts with recreationists, directing them to
designated camping and bathing areas. Educational signs that provide
information on the need to protect sensitive species like Pyrgulopsis
notidicola and their habitats were also installed. In addition, BLM has
increased on-site presence of staff, including law enforcement staff,
within the area. Another conservation action implemented was
construction of a 1,215-ha (3,000-ac) exclosure fence to exclude
livestock, wild horses, and burros from the majority of the hot
springs, including Pyrgulopsis notidicola habitat. Some of these
conservation actions began before Pyrgulopsis notidicola became a
candidate, but most have been implemented since that time.
Only one population was known at the time Pyrgulopsis notidicola
was designated as a candidate in 2002. Since then, three additional
populations have been discovered, indicating the species is more widely
distributed and abundant than previously thought. As a result, the
species is less vulnerable to stochastic events than previously
thought.
Because conservation actions implemented in Soldier Meadow have
greatly reduced threats to Pyrgulopsis notidicola and are likely to
stay in place for the foreseeable future, and because the population
status of the species is more secure than originally thought as a
result of the discovery of three additional populations, we conclude
that Pyrgulopsis notidicola no longer meets the definition of an
endangered or threatened species under section 3 of the ESA. There are
no portions of its range where threats remain, therefore, it is not
threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range.
Therefore, we find that listing of Pyrgulopsis notidicola throughout
all or a significant portion of its range is no longer warranted, and
we have removed it from candidate status.
Flowering Plants
Castilleja christii (Christ's paintbrush)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and the petition we
received on January 2, 2001. Castilleja christii occurs as a single
population within an approximately 85-ha (220-ac) area of subalpine
meadow and sagebrush habitats found near the summit of Mount Harrison,
Cassia County, Idaho, between 2,621 and 2,804 meters (8,600 to 9,200
feet (ft)). This endemic species is considered a hemiparasite that
grows in association with native host plants found in its subalpine-
meadow and sagebrush habitats. The species is subject to annual
population fluctuations likely resulting from a variety of factors,
such as biological interactions, anthropogenic disturbances, and
environmental effects. The most recent population estimate, conducted
in 2005, used distance sampling to estimate the overall population size
for C. christii of 1,267,580 plants, with lower and upper confidence
limits of 819,126 and 1,716,033 plants, respectively. The overall C.
christii population is currently stable throughout a large portion of
its range.
Castilleja christii was previously threatened by destruction,
modification, and curtailment of its habitat by the effects from the
nonnative smooth brome (Bromus inermis), recreation-based impacts, and
inadequate regulatory mechanisms. It was also thought that
hybridization with nearby Castilleja spp. may be affecting C. christii.
The U.S. Forest Service has successfully implemented numerous
conservation actions that have ameliorated most of the previously known
threats and established long-term monitoring programs to document their
effectiveness on conservation actions. There is a long-term commitment
by the Forest Service, through a 2005 Candidate Conservation Agreement
and 2012 Memorandum of Agreement with the Service, to continue to
implement conservation actions for C. christii. Furthermore, recent
research by Boise State University has demonstrated that hybridization
is not a factor affecting C. christii. Finally, the species' estimated
population is much larger--by as much as two orders of magnitude --than
earlier estimates had indicated. Therefore, we find that this species
is no longer warranted for listing throughout all or a portion of its
range. The species no longer meets our definition of a threatened or
endangered species, and we have removed it from candidate status.
Narthecium americanum (bog asphodel)--Over the last 20 years
frequent monitoring activities, studies, and increases in regulatory
protections have improved our understanding and outlook for the status
of Narthecium americanum. Based on our current review of the best
available information, we have determined that the species is less
imperiled than previously believed and therefore does not warrant
listing as threatened or endangered.
The historical range of Narthecium americanum included three
counties in the Pinelands Area of New Jersey and one county each in
Delaware and South Carolina. The Delaware and South Carolina
occurrences are documented by a single sample in each state collected
in 1895 and 1922, respectively. The species' current range includes the
same three New Jersey counties. The species' distribution consists of
18 occurrences covering approximately 80 ac. The relatively broad
distribution of the species reduces the risk or loss of the species
from stochastic, habitat-modifying events. While some historical
locations have been lost on the periphery of the species' range due to
habitat loss, other new locations have been found.
There are no manmade or natural threats affecting Narthecium
americanum to the level that the species meets the definition of
threatened or
[[Page 70001]]
endangered. Approximately 97 percent of N. americanum occurs on public
land or on private conservation land. Therefore, the historical threats
of wetland filling, draining, flooding, and conversion to commercial
cranberry bogs that resulted in the decline of the species are no
longer occurring. Other manmade threats that we once thought were
severely affecting the species such as upland development, water
withdrawal, disturbance from recreational activities such as off-road
vehicles (ORV), and collection are either adequately regulated
(development and water withdrawal) or at most having a de minimus
impact (ORV and collection) on a small number of populations. The
regulations controlling the manmade threats are expected to stay in
place, and the de minimus level of impacts are expected to remain
stable or further decrease. The natural threats of habitat succession,
deer and waterfowl browsing, and beaver flooding are also not affecting
N. americanum as we once believed. For example, new information
suggests that the species is able to persist in closed canopy
conditions and that greater than 20 percent of the distribution of N.
americanum is found in cedar forest cover that has remained relatively
stable for the past 61 years. In addition, wetter microhabitat
conditions created by deer trails may allow N. americanum to expand and
colonize into forested areas. Beaver flooding of the species' habitat
does occur, but only five percent of all N. americanum occurrences are
negatively influenced by beaver activities. These natural threats are
not anticipated to increase. And lastly, climate change is not now
impacting the species, and we are unable to accurately predict if or
how N. americanum may be impacted by climate change in the future. It
is possible that future climate conditions in the New Jersey Pinelands
may cause changes in water table, precipitation, or evapotranspiration
levels. However, these climate processes may increase or decrease or
the potential effects may be off-setting. Therefore, based on the best
available information, we cannot conclude that climate change is a
threat to N. americanum.
In summary, Narthecium americanum is secure within its current
range. There are no manmade or natural threats affecting the species to
such a degree that N. americanum warrants listing in all or a
significant portion of its range. The species no longer meets our
definition of a threatened or endangered species, and we have removed
it from candidate status.
Petition Findings
The ESA provides two mechanisms for considering species for
listing. One method allows the Secretary, on his own initiative, to
identify species for listing under the standards of section 4(a)(1). We
implement this through the candidate program, discussed above. The
second method for listing a species provides a mechanism for the public
to petition us to add a species to the Lists. The CNOR serves several
purposes as part of the petition process: (1) In some instances (in
particular, for petitions to list species that the Service has already
identified as candidates on its own initiative), it serves as the
petition finding; (2) for candidate species for which the Service has
made a warranted-but-precluded petition finding, it serves as a
``resubmitted'' petition finding that the ESA requires the Service to
make each year; and (3) it documents the Service's compliance with the
statutory requirement to monitor the status of species for which
listing is warranted-but-precluded to ascertain if they need emergency
listing.
First, the CNOR serves as a petition finding in some instances.
Under section 4(b)(3)(A), when we receive a listing petition, we must
determine within 90 days, to the maximum extent practicable, whether
the petition presents substantial information indicating that listing
may be warranted (a ``90-day finding''). If we make a positive 90-day
finding, we must promptly commence a status review of the species under
section 4(b)(3)(A); we must then make and publish one of three possible
findings within 12 months of the receipt of the petition (a ``12-month
finding''):
(1) The petitioned action is not warranted;
(2) The petitioned action is warranted (in which case we are
required to promptly publish a proposed regulation to implement the
petitioned action; once we publish a proposed rule for a species,
sections 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) of the ESA govern further procedures
regardless of whether we issued the proposal in response to a
petition); or
(3) The petitioned action is warranted but (a) the immediate
proposal of a regulation and final promulgation of a regulation
implementing the petitioned action is precluded by pending proposals to
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened, and (b)
expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to the
Lists. We refer to this third option as a ``warranted-but-precluded
finding.''
We define ``candidate species'' to mean those species for which the
Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability
and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but for
which issuance of the proposed rule is precluded (61 FR 64481; December
5, 1996). The standard for making a species a candidate through our own
initiative is identical to the standard for making a warranted-but-
precluded 12-month petition finding on a petition to list, and we add
all petitioned species for which we have made a warranted-but-precluded
12-month finding to the candidate list.
Therefore, all candidate species identified through our own
initiative already have received the equivalent of substantial 90-day
and warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings. Nevertheless, we review
the status of the newly petitioned candidate species and through this
CNOR publish specific section 4(b)(3) findings (i.e., substantial 90-
day and warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings) in response to the
petitions to list these candidate species. We publish these findings as
part of the first CNOR following receipt of the petition. On October 5,
2011, we received a petition to list the Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk
(see summary above under New Candidates) after we had initiated our
assessment of this species for candidate status. As part of this
notice, we are making the substantial 90-day and warranted-but-
precluded 12-month findings for this species. We have identified the
candidate species for which we received petitions by the code ``C*'' in
the category column on the left side of Table 1 below.
Second, the CNOR serves as a ``resubmitted'' petition finding.
Section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA requires that when we make a
warranted-but-precluded finding on a petition, we are to treat such a
petition as one that is resubmitted on the date of such a finding.
Thus, we must make a 12-month petition finding in compliance with
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA at least once a year, until we publish a
proposal to list the species or make a final not-warranted finding. We
make these annual findings for petitioned candidate species through the
CNOR.
Third, through undertaking the analysis required to complete the
CNOR, the Service determines if any candidate species needs emergency
listing. Section 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the ESA requires us to ``implement
a system to monitor effectively the status of all species'' for which
we have made a warranted-but-precluded 12-month finding, and to ``make
prompt use of the [emergency listing] authority [under section 4(b)(7)]
to prevent a significant
[[Page 70002]]
risk to the well being of any such species.'' The CNOR plays a crucial
role in the monitoring system that we have implemented for all
candidate species by providing notice that we are actively seeking
information regarding the status of those species. We review all new
information on candidate species as it becomes available, prepare an
annual species assessment form that reflects monitoring results and
other new information, and identify any species for which emergency
listing may be appropriate. If we determine that emergency listing is
appropriate for any candidate we will make prompt use of the emergency
listing authority under section 4(b)(7). For example, on August 10,
2011, we emergency listed the Miami blue butterfly (76 FR 49542). We
have been reviewing and will continue to review, at least annually, the
status of every candidate, whether or not we have received a petition
to list it. Thus, the CNOR and accompanying species assessment forms
constitute the Service's system for monitoring and making annual
findings on the status of petitioned species under sections
4(b)(3)(C)(i) and 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the ESA.
A number of court decisions have elaborated on the nature and
specificity of information that must be considered in making and
describing the petition findings in the CNOR. The CNOR published on
November 9, 2009 (74 FR 57804), describes these court decisions in
further detail. As with previous CNORs, we continue to incorporate
information of the nature and specificity required by the courts. For
example, we include a description of the reasons why the listing of
every petitioned candidate species is both warranted and precluded at
this time. We make our determinations of preclusion on a nationwide
basis to ensure that the species most in need of listing will be
addressed first and also because we allocate our listing budget on a
nationwide basis (see below). Regional priorities can also be discerned
from Table 1, below, which includes the lead region and the LPN for
each species. Our preclusion determinations are further based upon our
budget for listing activities for unlisted species only, and we explain
the priority system and why the work we have accomplished does preclude
action on listing candidate species.
In preparing this CNOR, we reviewed the current status of, and
threats to, the 172 candidates for which we have received a petition to
list and the 5 listed species and for which we have received a petition
to reclassify from threatened to endangered, where we found the
petitioned action to be warranted but precluded. Included in this work
is our review of the current status of, and threats to, the Canada lynx
in New Mexico for which we received a petition to add that State to the
listed range. We find that the immediate issuance of a proposed rule
and timely promulgation of a final rule for each of these species has
been, for the preceding months, and continues to be, precluded by
higher priority listing actions. Additional information that is the
basis for this finding is found in the species assessments and our
administrative record for each species.
Our review included updating the status of, and threats to,
petitioned candidate or listed species for which we published findings,
under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA, in the previous CNOR. We have
incorporated new information we gathered since the prior finding and,
as a result of this review, we are making continued warranted-but-
precluded 12-month findings on the petitions for these species.
The immediate publication of proposed rules to list these species
was precluded by our work on higher priority listing actions, listed
below, during the period from October 1, 2011, through September 30,
2012. Below we describe the actions that continue to preclude the
immediate proposal and final promulgation of a regulation implementing
each of the petitioned actions for which we have made a warranted-but-
precluded finding, and we describe the expeditious progress we are
making to add qualified species to, and remove species from, the Lists.
We will continue to monitor the status of all candidate species,
including petitioned species, as new information becomes available to
determine if a change in status is warranted, including the need to
emergency-list a species under section 4(b)(7) of the ESA.
In addition to identifying petitioned candidate species in Table 1
below, we also present brief summaries of why each of these candidates
warrants listing. More complete information, including references, is
found in the species assessment forms. You may obtain a copy of these
forms from the Regional Office having the lead for the species, or from
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Internet Web site: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp. As described above, under
section 4 of the ESA, we identify and propose species for listing based
on the factors identified in section 4(a)(1), and section 4 also
provides a mechanism for the public to petition us to add species to
the Lists of Endangered or Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the
ESA.
Preclusion and Expeditious Progress
To make a finding that a particular action is warranted-but-
precluded, the Service must make two findings: (1) That the immediate
proposal and timely promulgation of a final regulation is precluded by
pending listing proposals, and (2) that expeditious progress is being
made to add qualified species to either of the lists and to remove
species from the lists. 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B)(iii).
Preclusion
A listing proposal is precluded if the Service does not have
sufficient resources available to complete the proposal, because there
are competing demands for those resources, and the relative priority of
those competing demands is higher. Thus, in any given fiscal year (FY),
multiple factors dictate whether it will be possible to undertake work
on a listing proposal regulation or whether promulgation of such a
proposal is precluded by higher priority listing actions--(1) the
amount of resources available for completing the listing function, (2)
the estimated cost of completing the proposed listing, and (3) the
Service's workload and prioritization of the proposed listing in
relation to other actions.
Available Resources
The resources available for listing actions are determined through
the annual Congressional appropriations process. In FY 1998 and for
each fiscal year since then, Congress has placed a statutory cap on
funds that may be expended for the Listing Program. This spending cap
was designed to prevent the listing function from depleting funds
needed for other functions under the ESA (for example, recovery
functions, such as removing species from the Lists), or for other
Service programs (see House Report 105-163, 105th Congress, 1st
Session, July 1, 1997). The funds within the spending cap are available
to support work involving the following listing actions: Proposed and
final listing rules; 90-day and 12-month findings on petitions to add
species to the Lists or to change the status of a species from
threatened to endangered; annual ``resubmitted'' petition findings on
prior warranted-but-precluded petition findings as required under
section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA; critical habitat petition findings;
proposed and final rules designating critical habitat; and litigation-
related, administrative, and program-management functions
[[Page 70003]]
(including preparing and allocating budgets, responding to
Congressional and public inquiries, and conducting public outreach
regarding listing and critical habitat).
We cannot spend more for the Listing Program than the amount of
funds within the spending cap without violating the Anti-Deficiency Act
(see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In addition, since FY 2002, the
Service's budget has included a critical habitat subcap to ensure that
some funds are available for completing Listing Program actions other
than critical habitat designations (``The critical habitat designation
subcap will ensure that some funding is available to address other
listing activities'' (House Report No. 107-103, 107th Congress, 1st
Session. June 19, 2001)). In FY 2002 and each year until FY 2006, the
Service had to use virtually the entire critical habitat subcap to
address court-mandated designations of critical habitat, and
consequently none of the critical habitat subcap funds were available
for other listing activities. In some FYs since 2006, we have been able
to use some of the critical habitat subcap funds to fund proposed
listing determinations for high-priority candidate species. In other
FYs, while we were unable to use any of the critical habitat subcap
funds to fund proposed listing determinations, we did use some of this
money to fund the critical habitat portion of some proposed listing
determinations so that the proposed listing determination and proposed
critical habitat designation could be combined into one rule, thereby
being more efficient in our work. In FY 2012, based on the Service's
workload, we were able to use some of the critical habitat subcap funds
to fund proposed listing determinations.
For FY 2012 Congress also put in place two additional subcaps
within the listing cap: One for listing actions for foreign species and
one for petition findings. As with the critical habitat subcap, if the
Service does not need to use all of the funds within the subcap, we are
able to use the remaining funds for completing proposed or final
listing determinations. In FY 2012, based on the Service's workload, we
were able to use some of the funds within the foreign species subcap
and the petitions subcap to fund proposed listing determinations.
We make our determinations of preclusion on a nationwide basis to
ensure that the species most in need of listing will be addressed first
and also because we allocate our listing budget on a nationwide basis.
Through the listing cap, the three subcaps, and the amount of funds
needed to complete court-mandated actions within those subcaps,
Congress and the courts have in effect determined the amount of money
available for other listing activities nationwide. Therefore, the funds
in the listing cap--other than those within the subcaps needed to
comply with court orders or court-approved settlement agreements
requiring critical habitat actions for already-listed species, listing
actions for foreign species, and petition findings--set the framework
within which we make our determinations of preclusion and expeditious
progress.
For FY 2012, on December 23, 2011, Congress passed a Consolidated
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 112-74) which provided funding through the
end of the fiscal year. In particular, it included a spending cap of
$20,902,000 for the Listing Program. Of that, no more than $7,472,000
was available for determinations of critical habitat for already listed
species. In addition, no more than $1,500,000 could be used for listing
actions for foreign species and no more than $1,500,000 could be used
to make 90-day or 12-month findings on petitions. The Service thus had
$10,430,000 available to work on proposed and final listing
determinations for domestic species. In addition, if the Service had
funding available within the critical habitat, foreign species, or
petition subcaps after those workloads had been completed, it could use
those funds to work on listing actions other than critical habitat
designations or foreign species.
Costs of Listing Actions. The work involved in preparing various
listing documents can be extensive, and may include, but is not limited
to: Gathering and assessing the best scientific and commercial data
available and conducting analyses used as the basis for our decisions;
writing and publishing documents; and obtaining, reviewing, and
evaluating public comments and peer review comments on proposed rules
and incorporating relevant information into final rules. The number of
listing actions that we can undertake in a given year also is
influenced by the complexity of those listing actions; that is, more
complex actions generally are more costly. The median cost for
preparing and publishing a 90-day finding is $39,276; for a 12-month
finding, $100,690; for a proposed rule with critical habitat, $345,000;
and for a final listing rule with critical habitat, $305,000.
Prioritizing Listing Actions. The Service's Listing Program
workload is broadly composed of four types of actions, which the
Service prioritizes as follows: (1) Compliance with court orders and
court-approved settlement agreements requiring that petition findings
or listing or critical habitat determinations be completed by a
specific date; (2) section 4 (of the Act) listing and critical habitat
actions with absolute statutory deadlines; (3) essential litigation-
related, administrative, and listing program-management functions; and
(4) section 4 listing actions that do not have absolute statutory
deadlines. In FY 2010, the Service received many new petitions and a
single petition to list 404 species, significantly increasing the
number of actions within the second category of our workload--actions
that have absolute statutory deadlines. As a result of the petitions to
list hundreds of species, we currently have over 460 12-month petition
findings yet to be initiated and completed.
To prioritize within each of the four types of actions, we
developed guidelines for assigning a listing priority number (LPN) for
each candidate species (48 FR 43098; September 21, 1983). As discussed
above, under these guidelines, we assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to
12, depending on the magnitude of threats (high or moderate to low),
immediacy of threats (imminent or nonimminent), and taxonomic status of
the species (in order of priority: monotypic genus (a species that is
the sole member of a genus), species, or part of a species (subspecies
or distinct population segment)). The lower the listing priority
number, the higher the listing priority (that is, a species with an LPN
of 1 would have the highest listing priority). A species with a higher
LPN would generally be precluded from listing by species with lower
LPNs, unless work on a proposed rule for the species with the higher
LPN can be combined with work on a proposed rule for other high-
priority species.
Finally, proposed rules for reclassification of threatened species
to endangered species are lower priority, because as listed species,
they are already afforded the protections of the Act and implementing
regulations. However, for efficiency reasons, we may choose to work on
a proposed rule to reclassify a species to endangered if we can combine
this with work that is subject to a court ordered or court-approved
deadline.
Since before Congress first established the spending cap for the
Listing Program in 1998, the Listing Program workload has required
considerably more resources than the amount of funds Congress has
allowed for the Listing Program. It is therefore important that we be
as efficient as possible in our listing process. Therefore, as we
implement our listing work plan and
[[Page 70004]]
work on proposed rules for the highest priority species in the next
several years, we are preparing multi-species proposals when
appropriate, and these may include species with lower priority if they
overlap geographically or have the same threats as one of the highest-
priority species. In addition, we take into consideration the
availability of staff resources when we determine which high-priority
species will receive funding to minimize the amount of time and
resources required to complete each listing action.
Listing Program Workload. Each FY we determine, based on the amount
of funding Congress has made available within the Listing Program
spending cap, specifically which actions we will have the resources to
work on in that FY. We then prepare Allocation Tables that identify the
actions that we are funding for that FY, and how much we estimate it
will cost to complete each action; these Allocation Tables are part of
our record for this notice and the listing program. Our Allocation
Table for FY 2012, which incorporated the Service's approach to
prioritizing its workload, was adopted as part of a settlement
agreement in a case before the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia (Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No.10-
377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (``MDL Litigation''), Document 31-1 (D.
D.C. May 10, 2011) (``MDL Settlement Agreement'')). The requirements of
paragraphs 1 through 7 of that settlement agreement, combined with the
work plan attached to the agreement as Exhibit B, reflected the
Service's Allocation Tables for FY 2011 and FY 2012. In addition,
paragraphs 2 through 7 of the agreement require the Service to take
numerous other actions through FY 2017--in particular, complete either
a proposed listing rule or a not-warranted finding for all 251 species
designated as ``candidates'' in the 2010 candidate notice of review
(``CNOR'') before the end of FY 2016, and complete final listing
determinations within one year of proposing to list any of those
species. Paragraph 10 of that settlement agreement sets forth the
Service's conclusion that ``fulfilling the commitments set forth in
this Agreement, along with other commitments required by court orders
or court-approved settlement agreements already in existence at the
signing of this Settlement Agreement (listed in Exhibit A), will
require substantially all of the resources in the Listing Program.'' As
part of the same lawsuit, the court also approved a separate settlement
agreement with the other plaintiff in the case; that settlement
agreement requires the Service to complete additional actions in
specific fiscal years -- including 12-month petition findings for 11
species, 90-day petition findings for 477 species, and proposed listing
determinations or not-warranted findings for 39 species.
These settlement agreements have led to a number of results that
affect our preclusion analysis. First, the Service has been, and will
continue to be, limited in the extent to which it can undertake
additional actions within the Listing Program through FY 2017 beyond
what is required by the MDL Settlement Agreements. Second, because the
settlement is court-approved, two broad categories of actions now fall
within the Service's highest priority (compliance with a court order):
(1) the Service's entire prioritized workload for FY 2012, as reflected
in its Allocation Table, and (2) completion, before the end of FY 2016,
of proposed listings or not-warranted findings for most of the
candidate species identified in this CNOR (in particular, for those
candidate species that were included in the 2010 CNOR). Therefore, each
year, one of the Service's highest priorities is to make steady
progress towards completing by the end of 2017 proposed and final
lisiting determinations for the 2010 candidate species--based on its
LPN prioritization system, preparing multi-species actions when
appropriate, and taking into consideration the availability of staff
resources.
Based on these prioritization factors, we continue to find that
proposals to list the petitioned candidate species included in Table 1
are all precluded by higher-priority listing actions including those
with court-ordered and court-approved settlement agreements and listing
actions with absolute statutory deadlines.
Expeditious Progress
As explained above, a determination that listing is warranted but
precluded must also demonstrate that expeditious progress is being made
to add and remove qualified species to and from the Lists. As with our
``precluded'' finding, the evaluation of whether progress in adding
qualified species to the Lists has been expeditious is a function of
the resources available for listing and the competing demands for those
funds. (Although we do not discuss it in detail here, we are also
making expeditious progress in removing species from the list under the
Recovery program in light of the resource available for delisting,
which is funded by a separate line item in the budget of the Endangered
Species Program. During FY 2012, we completed delisting rules for two
species.) As discussed below, given the limited resources available for
listing, we find that we are making expeditious progress in FY 2012 in
the Listing Program.
We provide below tables cataloguing the work of the Service's
Listing Program in FY 2012. This work includes all three of the steps
necessary for adding species to the Lists: (1) Identifying species that
warrant listing, (2) undertaking the evaluation of the best available
scientific information about those species and the threats they face,
and preparing proposed and final listing rules, and (3) adding species
to the Lists by publishing proposed and final listing rules that
include a summary of the data on which the rule is based and show the
relationship of that data to the rule. After taking into consideration
the limited resources available for listing, the competing demands for
those funds, and the completed work catalogued in the tables below, we
find that we are making expeditious progress to add qualified species
to the Lists in FY 2012.
First, we are making expeditious progress in the third and final
step: listing qualified species. In FY 2012, we resolved the status of
44 species that we determined, or had previously determined, qualified
for listing. Moreover, for 43 of those 44 species, the resolution was
to add them to the Lists, most with concurrent designations of critical
habitat. We also proposed to list an additional 85 qualified species,
most with concurrent critical habitat proposals.
Second, we are making expeditious progress in the second step:
working towards adding qualified species to the Lists. In FY 2012, we
worked on developing proposed listing rules for 39 species (most of
them with concurrent critical habitat proposals). Although we have not
yet completed those actions, we are making expeditious progress towards
doing so.
Third, we are making expeditious progress in the first step towards
adding qualified species to the Lists: identifying additional species
that qualify for listing. In FY 2012, we completed 90-day petition
findings for 76 species and 12-month petition findings for 53 species.
Of those 51 species, we determined that listing 9 of the species was
warranted but precluded. In FY 2012, we also worked on evaluating the
best available scientific information towards preparing 90-day findings
for an additional 3 species and 12-month findings for 1 additional
species.
[[Page 70005]]
In addition to the work the Service has completed towards adding
qualified species to the Lists, as we described above, on May 10, 2011,
the Service filed in the MDL Litigation a settlement agreement that
incorporated the Service's work plan for FY 2012; the court approved
that settlement agreement on September 9, 2011. Paragraph 10 of that
settlement agreement provides, ``The Parties agree that the timetables
for resolving the status of candidate species outlined in this
Agreement constitute expeditious progress in adding qualified species
to the lists of threatened and endangered species.'' The Service also
filed a second settlement agreement that required even more work in FY
2012. The Service had already begun in FY 2011 to implement that work
required by the work plan, and many of these initial actions in our
work plan include work on proposed rules for candidate species with an
LPN of 2 or 3. Therefore, both by entering into the first settlement
agreement and by completing the listing actions required by both
settlement agreements, the Service is making expeditious progress to
add qualified species to the lists. As provided for in the settlement
agreements and the work plan incorporated into the first agreement, the
Service's progress in FY 2012 included completing and publishing the
following determinations:
FY 2012 Completed Listing Actions \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Publication date Title Actions FR Pages
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10/4/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 61298-61307
Petition to List the Lake petition finding, Not
Sammamish Kokanee warranted.
Population of Oncorhynchus
nerka as an Endangered or
Threatened Distinct
Population Segment.
10/4/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 61307-61321
Petition to List Calopogon petition finding, Not
oklahomensis as Threatened warranted.
or Endangered.
10/4/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 61321-61330
Petition To List the petition finding, Not
Amargosa River Population warranted.
of the Mojave Fringe-toed
Lizard as an Endangered or
Threatened Distinct
Population Segment.
10/4/2011............... Endangered Status for the Proposed Listing 76 FR 61482-61529
Alabama Pearlshell, Round Endangered.
Ebonyshell, Southern
Sandshell, Southern
Kidneyshell, and Choctaw
Bean, and Threatened
Status for the Tapered
Pigtoe, Narrow Pigtoe, and
Fuzzy Pigtoe; with
Critical Habitat.
10/4/2011............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 76 FR 61532-61554
Petition To List 10 Petition Finding,
Subspecies of Great Basin Substantial and Not
Butterflies as Threatened substantial.
or Endangered with
Critical Habitat.
10/5/2011............... 90[dash]Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 76 FR 61826-61853
Petition to List 29 Petition Finding,
Mollusk Species as Substantial and Not
Threatened or Endangered substantial.
With Critical Habitat.
10/5/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 61856-61894
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy- warranted.
Owl as Threatened or
Endangered with Critical
Habitat.
10/5/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 61896-61931
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Northern Leopard Frog in warranted.
the Western United States
as Threatened.
10/6/2011............... Endangered Status for the Final Listing 76 FR 61956-61978
Ozark Hellbender Endangered.
Salamander.
10/6/2011............... Red-Crowned Parrot......... Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62016-62034
petition finding,
Warranted but
precluded.
10/6/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62166-62212
Petition to List Texas petition finding,
Fatmucket, Golden Orb, Warranted but
Smooth Pimpleback, Texas precluded.
Pimpleback, and Texas
Fawnsfoot as Threatened or
Endangered.
10/6/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62214-62258
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Mohave Ground Squirrel as warranted.
Endangered or Threatened.
10/6/2011............... Partial 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 76 FR 62260-62280
Petition to List 404 Petition Finding, Not
Species in the substantial.
Southeastern United States
as Threatened or
Endangered With Critical
Habitat.
10/7/2011............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62504-62565
Petition to List the Black- petition finding, Not
footed Albatross as warranted.
Endangered or Threatened.
10/11/2011.............. 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62722-62740
Petition to List Amoreuxia petition finding, Not
gonzalezii, Astragalus warranted.
hypoxylus, and Erigeron
piscaticus as Endangered
or Threatened.
10/11/2011.............. 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 62900-62926
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Tehachapi Slender warranted.
Salamander as Endangered
or Threatened.
10/11/2011.............. Endangered Status for the Final Listing 76 FR 62928-62960
Altamaha Spinymussel and Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
10/11/2011.............. 12-Month Finding for a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 63094-63115
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
California Golden Trout as warranted.
Endangered.
10/12/2011.............. 12-Month Petition Finding, Notice of 12-month 76 FR 63420-63442
Proposed Listing of petition finding,
Coqu[iacute] Llanero as Warranted; Proposed
Endangered, and Listing Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat for Coqu[iacute]
Llanero.
10/12/2011.............. 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 63444-63478
Petition to List Northern petition finding, Not
Leatherside Chub as warranted.
Endangered or Threatened.
10/13/2011.............. 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 76 FR 63720-63762
Petition to List a petition finding,
Distinct Population Warranted but
Segment of the Red Tree precluded.
Vole as Endangered or
Threatened.
12/19/2011.............. 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 76 FR 78601-78609
Petition To List the Petition Finding,
Western Glacier Stonefly Substantial.
as Endangered With
Critical Habitat.
1/3/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 45-52
Petition to List Sierra Petition Finding,
Nevada Red Fox as Substantial.
Endangered or Threatened.
1/12/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 1900-1908
Petition To List the Petition Finding,
Humboldt Marten as Substantial.
Endangered or Threatened.
1/24/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 3423-3432
Petition to List the Petition Finding,
`I'iwi as Endangered or Substantial.
Threatened.
[[Page 70006]]
2/1/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 4973-4980
Petition to List the San Petition Finding,
Bernardino Flying Squirrel Substantial.
as Endangered or
Threatened With Critical
Habitat.
2/14/2012............... Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 8632-8665
Status for the Rayed Bean Endangered.
and Snuffbox Mussels
Throughout Their Ranges.
2/17/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 9618-9619
Petition to List the Petition Finding, Not
Thermophilic Ostracod as substantial.
Endangered or Threatened.
3/13/2012............... Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 14914-14949
Status for the Sheepnose Endangered.
and Spectaclecase Mussels
Throughout Their Range.
4/2/2012................ 12-month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 19756--19797
Petition to List the San petition finding,
Francisco Bay-Delta Warranted but
Population of the Longfin precluded.
Smelt as Endangered or
Threatened.
4/6/2012................ Listing of the Miami Blue Final Listing 77 FR 20948-20986
Butterfly as Endangered Endangered.
Throughout Its Range;
Listing of the Cassius
Blue, Ceraunus Blue, and
Nickerbean Blue
Butterflies as Threatened
Due to Similarity of
Appearance to the Miami
Blue Butterfly in Coastal
South and Central Florida.
4/12/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 21920-21936
Petition to List Either Petition Finding,
the Eastern Population or Substantial.
the Southern Rocky
Mountain Population of the
Boreal Toad as an
Endangered or Threatened
Distinct Population
Segment.
4/17/2012............... Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 23060-23092
Status for Three Forks Endangered and
Springsnail and Threatened Threatened.
Status for San Bernardino
Springsnail Throughout
Their Ranges and
Designation of Critical
Habitat for Both Species.
4/26/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 24908-24915
Petition to List Aliciella Petition Finding, Not
formosa (Aztec gilia) as substantial.
Endangered or Threatened
with Critical Habitat.
5/1/2012................ 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 25792-25828
Petition To List the petition finding, Not
Sonoran Desert Area Bald warranted.
Eagle as Threatened or
Endangered.
5/10/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 27386--27403
Petition to List the petition finding,
Arapahoe Snowfly as Warranted but
Threatened or Endangered. Precluded.
5/10/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 27403--27411
Petition to List the Petition Finding,
Eastern Diamondback Substantial.
Rattlesnake as Threatened.
5/15/2012............... Threatened Status for Proposed Listing 77 FR 28704-28740
Eriogonum codium (Umtanum Threatened.
Desert Buckwheat) and
Physaria douglasii subsp.
tuplashensis (White Bluffs
Bladderpod) and
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
6/5/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 33143-33155
Petition to List the Petition Finding,
Southern White-Tailed Substantial.
Ptarmigan and the Mt.
Rainier White-Tailed
Ptarmigan as Threatened
with Critical Habitat.
6/11/2012............... Listing 38 Species on Proposed Listing 77 FR 34464-34775
Molokai, Lanai, and Maui Endangered.
as Endangered and
Designating Critical
Habitat on Molokai, Lanai,
Maui, and Kahoolawe for
135 Species.
6/19/2012............... Withdrawal of the Proposed Proposed Listing 77 FR 36871-36899
Rule to List Dunes Withdrawal.
Sagebrush Lizard.
6/21/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 37367-37373
Petition to List the Black- Petition Finding,
capped Petrel as Substantial.
Endangered or Threatened.
7/5/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 39666-39670
Petition to List Maytenus Petition Finding, Not
cymosa as Endangered or substantial.
Threatened.
7/5/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 39670-39674
Petition to List a Petition Finding, Not
Distinct Population substantial.
Segment of the American
Black Bear in Nevada as
Endangered or Threatened.
7/12/2012............... Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 41088-41106
Status for the Chupadera Endangered.
Springsnail and
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
7/18/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 42238-42251
Petition to List Six Sand petition finding, Not
Dune Beetles as Endangered warranted.
or Threatened.
7/24/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 43218-43222
Petition to List the Petition Finding,
Sonoran talussnail as Substantial.
Endangered or Threatened.
7/26/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 43799-43803
Petition to List the Gila Petition Finding,
Mayfly as Endangered. Substantial.
7/26/2012............... Endangered Status for the Proposed Listing 77 FR 43905-43939
Diamond Darter and Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
8/7/2012................ 90-Day Finding on Petitions Notice of 90-day 77 FR 47003-47011
to List the Two Spring Petition Finding, Not-
Mountains Dark Blue substantial and
Butterflies and Morand's Substantial.
Checkerspot Butterfly as
Endangered or Threatened.
8/8/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 47352-47356
Petition to List Petition Finding,
Graptopetalum bartramii Substantial.
(Bartram Stonecrop) and
Pectis imberbis (Beardless
Chinch Weed) as Endangered
or Threatened and
Designate Critical Habitat.
8/9/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 47583-47587
Petition to List Desert Petition Finding,
Massasauga as Endangered Substantial.
or Threatened and to
Designate Critical Habitat.
8/15/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 48934-48947
Petition to List the Petition Finding,
Bicknell's Thrush Substantial.
(Catharus bicknelli) as
Endangered or Threatened.
8/16/2012............... Endangered Status for Six Proposed Listing and 77 FR 49601-49651
West Texas Aquatic Critical Habitat
Invertebrate Species and Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
8/17/2012............... Determination of Status for Proposed Listing and 77 FR 49893-49919
the Gierisch Mallow and Critical Habitat
Designation of Critical Endangered.
Habitat.
[[Page 70007]]
8/22/2012............... Endangered Status for Four Proposed Listing and 77 FR 50767-50854
Central Texas Salamanders Critical Habitat
and Designation of Endangered.
Critical Habitat.
8/28/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 51958-51964
Petition to List the Bay petition finding, Not
Skipper as Endangered or warranted.
Threatened.
8/29/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 52293-52300
Petition to List Mimulus Petition Finding,
gemmiparus (Rocky Mountain Substantial.
monkeyflower) as
Endangered or Threatened
and to Designate Critical
Habitat.
8/29/2012............... 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 52301-52308
Petition to List the Petition Finding, Not
Prince of Wales Flying substantial.
Squirrel as Threatened or
Endangered.
8/30/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 52650-52673
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Platte River Caddisfly as warranted.
Endangered or Threatened.
9/4/2012................ 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 54293-54329
Petition To List Four petition finding, Not
Subspecies of Great Basin warranted.
Butterflies as Endangered
or Threatened Species.
9/4/2012................ 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 54331-54352
Petition to List the petition finding, Not
Mardon Skipper as warranted.
Threatened or Endangered.
9/5/2012................ 90-Day Finding on a Notice of 90-day 77 FR 54548-54553
Petition to List the Eagle Petition Finding,
Lake Rainbow Trout as an Substantial.
Endangered or Threatened
Species.
9/5/2012................ Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 54434-54450
Status for Arctostaphylos Endangered.
franciscana (Franciscan
manzanita) Throughout Its
Range.
9/11/2012............... Determination of Status for Proposed Listing 77 FR 55967-56026
Texas Golden Gladecress Endangered,
and Neches River Rose- Threatened.
mallow and Designation of
Critical Habitat.
9/12/2012............... Proposed Endangered Status Proposed Listing 77 FR 56481-56513
for the Jemez Mountains Endangered.
Salamander and Proposed
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
9/18/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 57647-57862
Petition to List 14 petition finding, Not
Aquatic Mollusks as warranted.
Endangered or Threatened.
9/18/2012............... Endangered Status for 23 Final Listing 77 FR 57921-57948
Species on Oahu and Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat for 124 Species.
9/27/2012............... Proposed Listing of the Proposed Listing 77 FR 59517-59540
Mount Charleston Blue Endangered.
Butterfly as Endangered
and Proposed Listing of
Five Blue Butterflies as
Threatened Due to
Similarity of Appearance.
9/27/2012............... Endangered Status for Proposed Listing 77 FR 59487-59515
Grotto Sculpin and Endangered.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
9/27/2012............... 12-Month Finding on a Notice of 12-month 77 FR 59357-59371
Petition to List Spring petition finding, Not
Mountains Acastus warranted.
Checkerspot Butterfly as
an Endangered or
Threatened Species.
10/2/2012............... Proposed Threatened Status Proposed Listing 77 FR 60207-60235
for Coral Pink Sand Dunes Threatened.
Tiger Beetle and
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
10/2/2012............... 12-Month Petition Finding, Notice of 12-month 77 FR 60179-60206
Listing of the Spring petition finding,
Pygmy Sunfish as Warranted Proposed
Threatened, and Listing Threatened.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
10/3/2012............... 12-month Finding for the Notice of 12-month 77 FR 60509-60579
Lemmon Fleabane; petition finding, Not
Endangered Status for the warranted Proposed
Acu[ntilde]a Cactus and Listing Endangered.
the Fickeisen Plains
Cactus and Designation of
Critical Habitat.
10/4/2012............... Proposed Endangered Species Proposed Listing 77 FR 60749-60776
Status for the Florida Endangered.
Bonneted Bat.
10/4/2012............... Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 60777-60802
Species Status for Endangered.
Coqu[iacute] Llanero
Throughout Its Range and
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
10/4/2012............... Endangered Species Status Proposed Listing 77 FR 60803-60882
for the Fluted Kidneyshell Endangered.
and Slabside Pearlymussel
and Designation of
Critical Habitat.
10/9/2012............... 12-Month Finding on Notice of 12-month 77 FR 61375-61377
Petitions to List the petition finding, Not
Mexican Gray Wolf as an warranted.
Endangered Subspecies or
Distinct Population
Segment with Critical
Habitat.
10/10/2012.............. Determination of Endangered Final Listing 77 FR 61663-61719
Species Status for the Endangered and
Alabama Pearlshell, Round Threatened.
Ebonyshell, Southern
Kidneyshell, and Choctaw
Bean, and Threatened
Species Status for the
Tapered Pigtoe, Narrow
Pigtoe, Southern
Sandshell, and Fuzzy
Pigtoe, and Designation of
Critical Habitat.
10/11/2012.............. Endangered Species Status Proposed Listing 77 FR 61835-61894
for Cape Sable Endangered.
Thoroughwort, Florida
Semaphore Cactus, and
Aboriginal Prickly-apple,
and Designation of
Critical Habitat for Cape
Sable Thoroughwort.
10/11/2012.............. Listing Taylor's Proposed Listing 77 FR 61937-62058
Checkerspot Butterfly and Endangered and
Streaked Horned Lark and Threatened.
Designation of Critical
Habitat.
10/16/2012.............. Proposed Endangered Status Proposed Listing 77 FR 63439-63536
for the Neosho Mucket, Endangered and
Threatened Status for the Threatened.
Rabbitsfoot, and
Designation of Critical
Habitat for Both Species.
10/17/2012.............. Listing 15 Species on Proposed Listing 77 FR 63927-64018
Hawaii Island as Endangered.
Endangered and Designating
Critical Habitat for 3
Species.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While some of these actions were published in FY 13, they were all completed and submitted to the Federal
Register in FY 12.
[[Page 70008]]
Our expeditious progress also included work on listing actions that
we funded in previous fiscal years and in FY 2012 but have not yet been
completed to date. For these species, we have completed the first step,
and have been working on the second step, necessary for adding species
to the Lists. These actions are listed below. Actions in the top
section of the table are being conducted under a deadline set by a
court through a court order or settlement agreement. Actions in the
lower section of the table are being conducted to meet statutory
timelines, that is, timelines required under the Act.
Actions Funded in Previous FYs and in FY 2012 but not yet Completed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red knot (LPN = 3)............... Proposed listing.
Gunnison sage-grouse (LPN = 2)... Proposed listing.
Lesser prairie chicken (LPN = 2). Proposed listing.
Arizona gartersnakes (northern Proposed listing.
Mexican gartersnake (LPN = 3) &
narrowheaded gartersnake).
Zuni bluehead sucker............. Proposed listing.
21 Big Island (HI) species \5\ Proposed listing.
(includes 8 candidate species--6
plants & 2 animals; 4 with LPN =
2, 1 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN =
4, 2 with LPN = 8).
9 Puget trough species (9 Proposed listing.
subspecies of pocket gopher
(Thomomys mazama ssp.) (LPN = 3).
Dakota skipper (LPN = 8) and Proposed listing.
Poweshiek skipperling (LPN = 2).
Vandenberg monkeyflower.......... Proposed listing.
3 Sierra amphibians (Yosemite Proposed listing.
toad, mountain yellow-legged
frog--Sierra Nevada DPSs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions With Statutory Deadlines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ashy storm-petrel................ 12-month petition finding.
Alexander Archipelago wolf....... 90-day petition finding.
Sphinx date palm (Phoenix 90-day petition finding
dactylifera cv. Sphinx).
Black-backed woodpecker.......... 90-day petition finding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also funded work on resubmitted petitions findings for 172
candidate species (species petitioned prior to the last CNOR). In our
resubmitted petition finding for the Columbia Basin population of the
greater sage-grouse in this notice, although we completed a new
analysis of the threats facing the species, we did not include new
information, as the significance of the Columbia Basin DPS to the
greater sage-grouse will require further review and we will update our
finding when we resolve the status of the greater sage-grouse at a
later date (see 75 FR 13910; March 23, 2010). We also did not include
an updated assessment form as part of our resubmitted petition findings
for the 29 candidate species for which we are preparing proposed
listing determinations. However, for both the Columbia Basin DPS to the
greater sage-grouse and for the other resubmitted petition findings, in
the course of preparing proposed listing determinations, we continue to
monitor new information about their status so that we can make prompt
use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the well-being of any of these candidate
species; see summaries below regarding publication of these
determinations (these species will remain on the candidate list until a
proposed listing rule is published). We also funded revised 12-month
petition findings for the candidate species that we are removing from
candidate status, which are being published as part of this CNOR (see
Candidate Removals). Because the majority of these petitioned species
were already candidate species prior to our receipt of a petition to
list them, we had already assessed their status using funds from our
Candidate Conservation Program, so we continue to monitor the status of
these species through our Candidate Conservation Program. The cost of
updating the species assessment forms and publishing the joint
publication of the CNOR and resubmitted petition findings is shared
between the Listing Program and the Candidate Conservation Program.
During FY 2012, we also funded work on resubmitted petition
findings for uplisting two listed species (Delta smelt and Sclerocactus
brevispinus (Pariette cactus)), for which we had previously received a
petition and made a warranted-but-precluded finding.
Another way that we have been expeditious in making progress to add
qualified species to the Lists is that we have endeavored to make our
listing actions as efficient and timely as possible, given the
requirements of the relevant law and regulations, and constraints
relating to workload and personnel. We are continually considering ways
to streamline processes or achieve economies of scale, such as by
batching related actions together. Given our limited budget for
implementing section 4 of the ESA, these efforts also contribute
towards finding that we are making expeditious progress to add
qualified species to the Lists.
Although we have not been able to resolve the listing status of
many of the candidates, several programs in the Service contribute to
the conservation of these species. In particular, the Candidate
Conservation Program, which is separately budgeted, focuses on
providing technical expertise for developing conservation strategies
and agreements to guide voluntary on-the-ground conservation work for
candidate and other at-risk species. The main goal of this program is
to address the threats facing candidate species. Through this program,
we work with our partners (other Federal agencies, State agencies,
Tribes, local governments, private landowners, and private conservation
organizations) to address the threats to candidate species and other
species at-risk. We are currently working with our partners to
implement voluntary conservation agreements for more than 142 species
covering 5.5 million ac of habitat. In some instances, the sustained
implementation of strategically designed conservation efforts
culminates in making listing unnecessary for species that are
candidates for listing or for which listing has been proposed.
[[Page 70009]]
Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species
Below are updated summaries for petitioned candidates for which we
published findings, under section 4(b)(3)(B). We are making continued
warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings on the petitions for these
species (for our revised 12-month petition findings for species that we
are removing from candidate status, see summaries above under Candidate
Removals).
Mammals
Pacific sheath-tailed bat, American Samoa DPS (Emballonura
semicaudata semicaudata) -- The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This small bat is a member of
the Emballonuridae, an Old World bat family that has an extensive
distribution, primarily in the tropics. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat
was once common and widespread in Polynesia and Micronesia, and it is
the only insectivorous bat recorded from a large part of this area. The
species as a whole (E. semicaudata) occurred on several of the Caroline
Islands (Palau, Chuuk, and Pohnpei), Samoa (Independent and American),
the Mariana Islands (Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI)), Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. While populations appear to
be healthy in some locations, mainly in the Caroline Islands, they have
declined substantially in other areas, including Independent and
American Samoa, the Mariana Islands, Fiji, and possibly Tonga.
Scientists recognize four subspecies: Emballonura s. rotensis, endemic
to the Mariana Islands (Guam and the CNMI); E. s. sulcata, occurring in
Chuuk and Pohnpei; E. s. palauensis, found in Palau; and E. s.
semicaudata, occurring in American and Independent Samoa, Tonga, Fiji,
and Vanuatu. The candidate assessment form addresses the distinct
population segment (DPS) of E. s. semicaudata that occurs in American
Samoa.
Emballonura s. semicaudata historically occurred in American and
Independent Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. It is extant in Fiji and
Tonga, but may be extirpated from Vanuatu and Independent Samoa. There
is some concern that it is also extirpated from American Samoa, the
location of this DPS, where surveys are currently ongoing to ascertain
its status. The factors that led to the decline of this subspecies and
the DPS are poorly understood; however, current threats to this
subspecies and the DPS include habitat loss, predation by introduced
species, and its small population size and distribution, which make the
taxon extremely vulnerable to extinction due to typhoons and similar
natural catastrophes. Thus, the threats are high in magnitude. The
Pacific sheath-tailed bat may also be susceptible to disturbance to
roosting caves. The LPN for E. s. semicaudata is 3 because the
magnitude of the threats is high; the threats are ongoing, and
therefore, imminent; and the taxon is a distinct population segment of
a subspecies.
Pacific sheath-tailed bat (Emballonura semicaudata rotensis), Guam
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. This small bat is a member of the Emballonuridae, an Old World
bat family that has an extensive distribution, primarily in the
tropics. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat was once common and widespread
in Polynesia and Micronesia, and it is the only insectivorous bat
recorded from a large part of this area. Emballonura s. rotensis is
historically known from the Mariana Islands and formerly occurred on
Guam and in the CNMI on Rota, Aguiguan, Tinian (known from prehistoric
records only), Saipan, and possibly Anatahan and Maug. Currently, E. s.
rotensis appears to be extirpated from all but one island in the
Mariana archipelago. The single remaining population of this subspecies
occurs on Aguiguan, CNMI.
Threats to this subspecies have not changed over the past year. The
primary threats to the subspecies are ongoing habitat loss and
degradation as a result of feral goat (Capra hircus) activity on the
island of Aguiguan and the taxon's small population size and limited
distribution. Predation by nonnative species and human disturbance are
also potential threats to the subspecies. The subspecies is believed
near the point where stochastic events, such as typhoons, are
increasingly likely to affect its continued survival. The disappearance
of the remaining population on Aguiguan would result in the extinction
of the subspecies. Thus, the threats are high in magnitude. The LPN for
E. s. rotensis remains at 3 because the magnitude of the threats is
high; the threats are ongoing, and therefore, imminent; and the taxon
is a subspecies.
New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis) -- The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and information
received in response to our notice published on June 30, 2004, when we
announced our 90-day petition finding and initiation of a status review
(69 FR 39395). We received the petition on August 30, 2000.
The New England cottontail (NEC) is a medium to large-sized
cottontail rabbit that may reach 1,000 grams (g) in weight, and is one
of two species within the genus Sylvilagus occurring in New England.
The NEC is considered a habitat specialist, because it is dependent
upon early-successional habitats typically described as thickets. The
species is the only endemic cottontail in New England. Historically,
the NEC occurred in seven States and ranged from southeastern New York
(east of the Hudson River) north through the Champlain Valley, southern
Vermont, the southern half of New Hampshire, and southern Maine and
south throughout Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. The
current range of the NEC has declined substantially, and occurrences
have become increasingly separated. The species' distribution is
fragmented into five apparently isolated metapopulations. The area
occupied by the cottontail has contracted from approximately 90,000
square kilometers (km\2\) to 12,180 km\2\. Surveys indicate that the
long-term decline in NEC continues. For example, surveys for the
species in 2009 documented the presence of NEC in 7 of the 23 New
Hampshire locations that were known to be occupied in 2002 and 2003.
Similarly, surveys in Maine found the species no longer present in 9 of
the 19 towns identified in an extensive survey that spanned the years
2000 to 2004. Similar surveys were conducted during the winter of 2010-
2011 in Rhode Island. Rangewide, it is estimated that less than one-
third of the occupied sites occur on lands in conservation status and
fewer than 10 percent are being managed for early-successional forest
species.
The primary threat to the NEC is loss of habitat through succession
and alteration. Isolation of occupied patches by areas of unsuitable
habitat and high predation rates are resulting in local extirpation of
NECs from small patches. The range of the NEC has contracted by 75
percent or more since 1960, and current land uses in the region
indicate that the rate of change, about 2 percent range loss per year,
will continue. Additional threats include competition for food and
habitat with introduced eastern cottontails and large numbers of native
white-tailed deer, inadequate regulatory mechanisms to protect habitat,
and mortality from predation.
[[Page 70010]]
The magnitude of the threats continues to be high, because they occur
rangewide and have a negative effect on the population size and
survival of the species. Although conservation measures that address
the threats to the species are being developed, they are not yet in
place, and there is not yet any indication that they are having an
effect on the magnitude of the species. The threats are imminent
because they are ongoing. Thus, we retained an LPN of 2 for this
species.
Fisher, West Coast DPS (Martes pennanti)--The following summary is
based on information in our files and in the Service's initial
warranted-but-precluded finding published in the Federal Register on
April 8, 2004 (69 FR 18770). The fisher is a carnivore in the family
Mustelidae and is the largest member of the genus Martes. Historically,
the West Coast population of the fisher extended south from British
Columbia into western Washington and Oregon, and in the North Coast
Ranges, Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains, and Sierra Nevada in California.
Because of a lack of detections with standardized survey efforts over
much of the fisher's historical range, the fisher is believed to be
extirpated or reduced to scattered individuals from the lower mainland
of British Columbia through Washington and northern Oregon and in the
central and northern Sierra Nevada in California. Extant populations of
native fisher are isolated to the North Coast and Klamath-Siskiyou
Mountains of northern California and southwestern Oregon, and the
southern Sierra Nevada in California. Descendants of a fisher
reintroduction effort also occur in the southern Cascades in Oregon.
Two recent reintroduction efforts in Olympic National Park in
Washington and in the northern Sierra Nevada in California have
completed the movement and release of fishers to their respective study
areas. Several years of monitoring are still needed to determine if
these will become successfully-established populations.
Estimates of fisher numbers in native populations of the West Coast
DPS vary widely. A rigorous monitoring program is lacking for the
native northern California-southwestern Oregon and reintroduced
southern Oregon Cascades populations, making estimates of fisher
numbers for these two populations difficult. The fisher monitoring
program in the southern Sierra Nevada population has provided
preliminary estimates indicating no decline in the index of abundance
within the monitored portion of the population. The two populations of
native fisher in the northern California-southwestern Oregon and
southern Sierra Nevada are separated by several times greater than the
species' maximum dispersal distance. The extant fisher populations are
either small (southern Sierra Nevada and southern Oregon Cascades) and
isolated from one another or both.
Major threats that fragment or remove key elements of fisher
habitat include various forest vegetation management practices such as
timber harvest and fuels reduction treatments. Other potential major
threats in portions of the range include: large stand-replacing
wildfires, changes in forest composition and structure related to the
effects of climate change, forest and fuels management, and urban and
rural development. Threats to fishers that lead to direct mortality and
injury include: collisions with vehicles; predation; rodenticides; and
viral borne diseases such as rabies, parvovirus, and canine distemper
virus. Existing regulatory mechanisms on Federal, State, and private
lands do not provide sufficient protection for the key elements of
fisher habitat, or the certainty that conservation efforts will be
implemented or effective. The magnitude of threats is high as they
occur across the range of the DPS, resulting in a negative impact on
fisher distribution and abundance. However, the threats are nonimminent
as the greatest long-term risks to the fisher in its west coast range
are the subsequent ramifications of the isolation of small populations
and their interactions with the listed threats. Therefore, we assigned
an LPN of 6 to this DPS.
New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Mazama pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama ssp. couchi, douglasii,
glacialis, louiei, melanops, pugetensis, tacomensis, tumuli,
yelmensis)--We continue to find that listing these subspecies is
warranted but precluded as of the date of publication of this notice.
However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to
publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month
finding. In the course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are
continuing to monitor new information about this species' status so
that we can make prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in
the case of an emergency posing a significant risk to the species.
Canada lynx, within the State of New Mexico (Lynx canadensis)--In
our finding of December 17, 2009 (74 FR 66937), we determined that
adding the lynx in New Mexico to the listing of the lynx DPS was
warranted, because the lynx is now present in the State as a result of
the Colorado reintroduction effort, and we assigned an LPN of 12 to
amending the listing of lynx to include New Mexico. We reconfirm that
assigning an LPN of 12 is appropriate based on nonimminent threats of a
low magnitude. The threats to the lynx in New Mexico from human-caused
mortality are low in magnitude, because they do not occur at a level
that creates a significant threat to the lynx DPS in the contiguous
United States. We do not consider lynx in New Mexico, or its habitat in
New Mexico, to be essential to the survival or recovery of the DPS; as
a result, neither human-caused mortality nor habitat modification in
New Mexico creates a significant threat to the lynx DPS in the
contiguous United States. Potential impacts to the habitat in New
Mexico have not been documented to threaten lynx, either in New Mexico
or outside of it. The amount of suitable habitat for lynx in New Mexico
is considered negligible relative to the amount of habitat within the
listed range, and the majority of lynx habitats within the contiguous
United States are already protected by the ESA. The threats are also
nonimminent, because they occur infrequently. Because lynx in the lower
48 States are already listed as a DPS and conditions affecting the lynx
in New Mexico are neither imminent nor of sufficient magnitude to pose
a threat to the lynx DPS throughout the contiguous United States, the
appropriate LPN for this level of magnitude and immediacy of threats
for a DPS is 12.
Gunnison's prairie dog (Cynomys gunnisoni)--Gunnison's prairie dogs
occur in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. In our February 5,
2008, 12-month finding (73 FR 6660), we determined that listing the
Gunnison prairie dog was warranted but precluded, with an LPN of 2, due
to threats in a significant portion of its range--the montane portion
of the species' range within Colorado and New Mexico--where the effects
from plague and other factors threaten those populations. This finding
was challenged by WildEarth Guardians in
[[Page 70011]]
September of 2008. On September 30, 2010, the Court set aside our 2008
finding and remanded the matter back to us for further action. The
Court found that we arbitrarily and capriciously ``determined that
something other than a species was an endangered or threatened species
which warranted listing.'' In response to the decision of the Court, we
will reevaluate the status of the Gunnison's prairie dog and deliver a
revised 12-month finding to the Federal Register. However, we are
currently unable to complete a status review due to budget and workload
limitations. Furthermore, initiating a revised status review for the
species would be premature at this time because of a significant
ongoing genetics study initiated by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW)
(formerly the Colorado Division of Wildlife) along with researchers at
the University of Colorado Boulder addressing Gunnison's prairie dog
taxonomy. This work will be essential in determining whether or not
Gunnison's prairie dogs in the montane and prairie portions of the
species' range constitute two subspecies. We anticipate the analysis of
these genetic data will likely be completed by late 2012 and we will
evaluate the information thereafter. It is critical for us to consider
this potentially significant taxonomic revision in our revised status
review after the CPW releases its final genetics report. Gunnison's
prairie dogs will remain a candidate within the montane portion of
their range until we complete this analysis.
Southern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus endemicus)--
The following summary is based on information contained in our files.
No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The southern Idaho ground squirrel is endemic to 4 counties in
southwest Idaho; its total known range is approximately 426,000 ha
(1,050,000 ac). Threats to southern Idaho ground squirrels include:
habitat degradation and fragmentation; direct killing from shooting,
trapping, or poisoning; predation; competition with other ground
squirrel species; and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Habitat degradation and fragmentation appear to be the primary threats
to the species. Nonnative annuals such as Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass)
and Taeniatherum caput-medusae (medusahead) now dominate much of this
species' range and have altered the fire regime by accelerating the
frequency of wildfire. Nonnative annuals provide inconsistent forage
quality for southern Idaho ground squirrels as compared to native
vegetation. Habitat deterioration, destruction, and fragmentation
contribute to the current patchy distribution of southern Idaho ground
squirrels. Some human-altered landscapes, such as golf courses and row
crops of alfalfa, provide alternative habitats that maintain high
densities of southern Idaho ground squirrels. However, high densities
of ground squirrels in agricultural fields sometimes cause crop damage,
which results in reduced tolerance of the species by local landowners.
One programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances
(CCAA) has been completed for this species; it includes conservation
measures that minimize ground-disturbing activities, allow for the
investigation of methods to restore currently degraded habitat, provide
additional protection to southern Idaho ground squirrels from
recreational shooting and other direct killing on enrolled lands, and
allow for the translocation of squirrels to or from enrolled lands, if
necessary. The acreage enrolled through the CCAA encompasses
approximately 9 percent of the known range of the species. While the
ongoing conservation efforts have helped to reduce the magnitude of
threats to moderate, habitat degradation remains the primary threat to
the species throughout most of its range. This threat is imminent due
to the ongoing and increasing prevalence of nonnative vegetation, and
the current patchy distribution of the species. Thus, we assign an LPN
of 9 to this subspecies.
Washington ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni) -- The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and in
the petition we received on March 2, 2000. The Washington ground
squirrel is endemic to the Deschutes-Columbia Plateau sagebrush-steppe
and grassland communities in north-central Oregon and south-central
Washington. Although historically abundant and widespread,
approximately two-thirds of its total historical range has been
converted to agricultural and residential uses. The most contiguous,
least disturbed expanse of suitable habitat within the species' range
occurs on land in Oregon owned by Boeing, Inc., and on the Naval
Weapons Systems Training Facility near Boardman, Oregon. In Washington,
the largest area of suitable habitat occurs on State and Federal lands.
Agricultural, residential, and wind power development, among other
forms of development, continue to eliminate Washington ground squirrel
habitat in portions of its range. Throughout much of its range,
Washington ground squirrels are threatened by the establishment and
spread of invasive plant species, particularly cheatgrass (Bromus
tectorum), which alter available cover and food quantity and quality,
and increase fire frequency. Additional threats include habitat
fragmentation, recreational shooting, genetic isolation and drift, and
predation. Potential threats include disease, drought, and possible
competition with related species in disturbed habitat at the periphery
of the Washington ground squirrel's range.
In Oregon, some threats are being addressed as a result of the
State's listing the species as endangered under the Oregon State
Endangered Species Act (OESA), and by implementation of the Threemile
Canyon Farms Multi-Species CCAA. In Washington, there are currently no
formal agreements with private landowners or with State or Federal
agencies to protect the Washington ground squirrel. Additionally, no
State or Federal management plans have been developed to specifically
address the needs of the species. Since current and potential threats
are widespread, and, in some priority areas, could significantly affect
the survival of the species, we conclude the magnitude of threats
remains high. The Washington ground squirrel has both imminent and
nonimminent threats. At a rangewide scale, we conclude the threats are
nonimminent based largely on the following: The Threemile Canyon Farms
Multi-Species CCAA addressed the imminent loss of a large portion of
habitat to agriculture; there are currently no other large-scale
efforts to convert suitable habitat to agriculture; and wind power
project impacts can be minimized through compliance with the OESA and
the Columbia Basin Ecoregion wind energy siting and permitting
guidelines. We also consider the potential development of shooting
ranges on the Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility as nonimminent
because the proposed action is still under development and we are
unable to assess its timing and impact, which could be minimized
through compliance with the OESA. We, therefore, have retained an LPN
of 5 for this species.
Red tree vole, north Oregon coast DPS (Arborimus longicaudus)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and in
our initial warranted-but-precluded finding, published in the Federal
Register on October 13, 2011 (76 FR 63720). Red tree voles are small,
mouse-
[[Page 70012]]
sized rodents that live in conifer forests and spend almost all of
their time in the tree canopy. They are one of the few animals that can
persist on a diet of conifer needles, which is their principal food.
Red tree voles are endemic to the humid, coniferous forests of western
Oregon (generally west of the crest of the Cascade Range) and
northwestern California (north of the Klamath River). The north Oregon
coast DPS of the red tree vole comprises that portion of the Oregon
Coast Range from the Columbia River south to the Siuslaw River. Red
tree voles demonstrate strong selection for nesting in older conifer
forests, which are now relatively rare across the DPS; they avoid
nesting in younger forests.
Although data are not available to rigorously assess population
trends, information from retrospective surveys indicates red tree voles
have declined in the DPS and no longer occur, or are now scarce, in
areas where they were once relatively abundant. Older forests that
provide habitat for red tree voles are limited and highly fragmented,
while ongoing forest practices in much of the DPS maintain the
remaining patches of older forest in a highly fragmented and isolated
condition. Modeling indicates only 11 percent within the area of the
DPS currently contains tree vole habitat, largely restricted to the 22
percent of the area that is under Federal ownership. Existing
regulatory mechanisms on State and private lands are inadequate to
prevent continued harvest of forest stands at a scale and extent that
would be meaningful for conserving red tree voles. Biological
characteristics of red tree voles, such as small home ranges, limited
dispersal distances, and low reproductive potential, limits their
ability to respond to and persist in areas of extensive habitat loss
and alteration. These biological characteristics also make it difficult
for the tree voles to recolonize isolated habitat patches. Due to its
reduced distribution, the red tree vole is now vulnerable to random
environmental disturbances that may remove or further isolate large
blocks of already limited habitat, and to extirpation within the DPS
from such factors as genetic variability, inbreeding depression, and
demographic stochasticity. Although the entire population is
experiencing threats, the impact is less pronounced on Federal lands
where much of the red tree vole habitat remains. Hence, the magnitude
of threats is moderate to low. The threats are imminent because they
are currently occurring within the DPS. Therefore, we have assigned the
red tree vole north Oregon coast DPS an LPN of 9.
Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens)--The following
information is based on information in our files and our warranted-but-
precluded 12-month petition finding published on February 10, 2011 (76
FR 7634). The Pacific walrus is an ice-dependent species found across
the continental shelf waters of the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas.
Unlike seals that can remain in the water indefinitely, walrus must
haulout onto ice or land periodically. Pacific walrus is a traditional
and important source of food and products to native Alaskans,
especially those living on Saint Lawrence Island, and to native
Russians.
Annually, walrus migrate up to 1,500 km (932 mi) between winter
breeding areas in the sub-Arctic (northern Bering Sea) and summer
foraging areas in the Arctic. Historically, the females and calves
remained on pack ice over the continental shelf of the Chukchi Sea
throughout the summer, using it as a platform for resting after making
shallow foraging dives for invertebrates on the sea floor. Sea ice also
provides isolation from disturbance and terrestrial predators such as
polar bears. Since 1979, the extent of summer Arctic sea ice has
declined. The four lowest records of minimum sea ice extent occurred
from 2007 to 2011. Based on the best scientific information available,
we anticipate that sea ice will retreat northward off the Chukchi
continental shelf for 1 to 5 months every year in the foreseeable
future.
When the ice melts beyond the limits of the continental shelf (and
the ability of the walrus to obtain food), thousands of walrus
congregate at coastal haulouts. Although coastal haulouts have
historically provided a place to rest, the aggregation of so many
animals, in particular females and calves, at this time of year has
increased in the last 5 years. Not only are the number of animals more
concentrated at coastal haulouts than on widely dispersed sea ice, but
also the probability of disturbance from humans and terrestrial animals
is much higher. Disturbances at coastal haulouts cause stampedes,
leading to mortalities and injuries. In addition, because of the amount
of food these large animals need, there is also concern that the
concentration of animals will cause local prey depletion leading to
longer foraging trips, increased energy costs, and potential effects on
female fitness and calf survival. We expect these effects to lead to a
population decline.
We recognize that Pacific walrus face additional stressors from
ocean warming, ocean acidification, disease, oil and gas exploration
and development, increased shipping, commercial fishing, and
subsistence harvest, but none rise to the level of a threat except
subsistence harvest. We found that subsistence harvest will rise to the
level of a threat if the population declines but harvest levels remain
the same. Because the threat of sea ice loss is not having significant
population-level effects currently, but is projected to, we determined
the magnitude of this threat is moderate, not high. Because both the
loss of sea ice habitat and subsistence harvest are presently
occurring, these threats are imminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 9 to
this subspecies.
North American wolverine, contiguous U.S. DPS (Gulo gulo luscus)--
We continue to find that listing this species is warranted but
precluded as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are
working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to
making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the
course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to
monitor new information about this species' status so that we can make
prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an
emergency posing a significant risk to the species.
Birds
Spotless crake, American Samoa DPS (Porzana tabuensis)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. Porzana tabuensis is a small, dark, cryptic rail found in
wetlands and rank scrublands or forests in the Philippines, Australia,
Fiji, Tonga, Society Islands, Marquesas, Independent Samoa, and
American Samoa (Ofu, Tau). The genus Porzana is widespread in the
Pacific, where it is represented by numerous island-endemic and
flightless species (many of which are extinct as a result of
anthropogenic disturbances) as well as several more cosmopolitan
species, including P. tabuensis. No subspecies of P. tabuensis are
recognized.
The American Samoa population is the only population of spotless
crakes under U.S. jurisdiction. The available information indicates
that distinct populations of the spotless crake, a species not noted
for long-distance dispersal, are definable. The population of spotless
crakes in American Samoa is discrete in relation to the remainder of
[[Page 70013]]
the species as a whole, which is distributed in widely separated
locations. Although the spotless crake (and other rails) have dispersed
widely in the Pacific, flight in island rails has atrophied or been
completely lost over evolutionary time causing populations to become
isolated (and vulnerable to terrestrial predators such as rats). The
population of this species in American Samoa is therefore distinct
based on geographic and distributional isolation from spotless crake
populations on other islands in the oceanic Pacific, the Philippines,
and Australia. The American Samoa population of the spotless crake
links the Central and Eastern Pacific portions of the species' range.
The loss of this population would result in an increase of roughly 500
mi (805 km) in the distance between the central and eastern Polynesian
portions of the spotless crake's range, and could result in the
isolation of the Marquesas and Society Islands populations by further
limiting the potential for even rare genetic exchange. Based on the
discreteness and significance of the American Samoa population of the
spotless crake, we consider this population to be a distinct vertebrate
population segment.
Threats to this population have not changed over the past year. The
population in American Samoa is threatened by small population size,
limited distribution, predation by nonnative and native animals,
continued development of wetland habitat, and natural catastrophes such
as hurricanes. The co-occurrence of a known predator of ground-nesting
birds, the Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), and native predators, the
Pacific boa (Candoia bibroni) and the purple swamphen (Porphyrio
porphyrio), along with the extremely restricted observed distribution
and low numbers, indicate that the magnitude of the threats to the
American Samoa DPS of the spotless crake continues to be high, because
the threats significantly affect the species' survival. The threats are
ongoing, and therefore imminent. Based on this assessment of existing
information about the imminence and high magnitude of these threats, we
assigned the spotless crake an LPN of 3.
Yellow-billed cuckoo, western U.S. DPS (Coccyzus americanus)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Friendly ground-dove, American Samoa DPS (Gallicolumba stairi)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The genus Gallicolumba is distributed throughout the Pacific and
Southeast Asia. The genus is represented in the oceanic Pacific by six
species: Three are endemic to Micronesian islands or archipelagos, two
are endemic to island groups in French Polynesia, and G. stairi is
endemic to Samoa, Tonga, and Fiji. Some authors recognize two
subspecies of the friendly ground-dove, one, slightly smaller, in the
Samoan archipelago (G. s. stairi), and one in Tonga and Fiji (G. s.
vitiensis), but because morphological differences between the two are
minimal, we are not recognizing separate subspecies at this time.
In American Samoa, the friendly ground-dove has been found on the
islands of Ofu and Olosega (Manua Group). Threats to this subspecies
have not changed over the past year. Predation by nonnative species and
natural catastrophes such as hurricanes are the primary threats to the
subspecies. Of these, predation by nonnative species is thought to be
occurring now and likely has been occurring for several decades. This
predation may be an important impediment to population growth.
Predation by introduced species has played a significant role in
reducing, limiting, and extirpating populations of island birds,
especially ground-nesters like the friendly ground-dove, in the Pacific
and other locations worldwide. Nonnative predators known or thought to
occur in the range of the friendly ground-dove in American Samoa are
feral cats (Felis catus), Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans), black rats
(R. rattus), and Norway rats (R. norvegicus).
In January 2004 and February of 2005, hurricanes virtually
destroyed the habitat of G. stairi in the area on Olosega Island where
the species had been most frequently recorded. Although this species
has evolved on islands subject to severe storms, this example
illustrates the potential for natural disturbance to exacerbate the
effect of anthropogenic disturbance on small populations. Consistent
monitoring using a variety of methods over the last 5 years yielded few
observations and no change in the relative abundance of this taxon in
American Samoa. The total population size is poorly known, but is
unlikely to number more than a few hundred pairs. The distribution of
the friendly ground-dove is limited to steep, forested slopes with an
open understory and a substrate of fine scree or exposed earth; this
habitat is not common in American Samoa. The threats are ongoing and
therefore imminent, and the magnitude is moderate because relative
abundance has remained unchanged for several years. Thus, we assign
this DPS an LPN of 9.
Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa)--We continue to find that listing
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk
to the species.
Yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files and the petition we received on
April 5, 2004. The yellow-billed loon is a migratory bird. Solitary
pairs breed on lakes in the arctic tundra of the United States, Russia,
and Canada from June to September. During the remainder of the year,
the species winters in more southern coastal waters of the Pacific
Ocean and the Norway and North Seas.
The available information is not sufficient to dismiss subsistence
harvest as a threat to the species. While subsistence harvest
information, which has bias of unknown direction and magnitude, cannot
be used to precisely estimate harvest, it indicates that tens to
possibly low hundreds of yellow-billed loons are harvested throughout
Alaska, Russia, and Canada annually. The available information suggests
that the majority of harvest likely occurs during spring and fall
migrations, as yellow-billed loons move along the coast of Alaska or
through the Chukchi and Bering seas. As a result, what harvest actually
is occurring is extracted from a migrant population that likely
includes much of the species' total rangewide numbers of 16,000 to
32,000. Although uncertainty surrounding harvest levels, breeding-
population composition of the migrant population, and total population
size exists, the current information on subsistence harvest seems to
indicate that a small proportion of the migrant population is
[[Page 70014]]
harvested each year. While it currently appears that fewer yellow-
billed loons may be harvested than previously thought, we are
continuing to gather data and refine model-based predictions to address
the uncertainties regarding subsistence harvest and the effect it may
have at the population level. Therefore, we conclude that subsistence
harvest is a threat to the species.
Additionally, yellow-billed loons are subject to several stressors,
including oil and gas exploration and development, marine pollution,
the effects of climate change, the inadequacy of existing regulations,
and fishing by-catch. While these stressors may not rise to the level
of a threat individually, when taken collectively they could cause
population-level effects.
The primary threat of subsistence harvest is currently occurring;
therefore, the threat is imminent. The magnitude of subsistence harvest
is moderate based on what we currently know about the level of harvest.
Thus, we assigned the yellow-billed loon an LPN of 8.
Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris)--We continue to
find that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Xantus's murrelet (Synthliboramphus hypoleucus)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition
we received on April 16, 2002. The Xantus's murrelet is a small seabird
in the family Alcidae that occurs along the west coast of North America
in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The species has a limited
breeding distribution, only nesting on the Channel Islands in southern
California and on islands off the west coast of Baja California,
Mexico. Although data on population trends are scarce, scientists
believe the population declined greatly over the last century, mainly
due to introduced predators such as rats (Rattus sp.) and feral cats
(Felis catus) to nesting islands, with possible extirpations on three
islands in Mexico. A dramatic decline (up to 70 percent) from 1977 to
1991 was detected at the largest nesting colony in southern California,
possibly due to high levels of predation on eggs by the endemic deer
mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus elusus). Identified threats include
introduced predators at nesting colonies, oil spills and oil pollution,
reduced prey availability, human disturbance, and artificial light
pollution.
Although substantial declines in the Xantus's murrelet population
likely occurred over the last century, some of the largest threats are
being addressed and, to some degree, ameliorated. Declines and possible
extirpations at several nesting colonies were thought to have been
caused by nonnative predators, which have been removed from many of the
islands where they once occurred. Most notably, since 1994, Island
Conservation and Ecology Group has systematically removed rats, cats,
and dogs from every murrelet nesting colony in Mexico, with the
exception of cats and dogs on Guadalupe Island. In 2002, rats were
eradicated from Anacapa Island in southern California, which has
resulted in improvements in reproductive success at that island. In
southern California, efforts to restore nesting habitat on Santa
Barbara Island through the Montrose Settlements Restoration Project may
benefit the Xantus's murrelet population at that island.
Artificial lighting from squid fishing and other vessels, or from
lights on islands, remains a potential threat to the species. Bright
lights make Xantus's murrelets more susceptible to predation, and they
can also become disoriented and exhausted from continual attraction to
bright lights. Chicks can become disoriented and separated from their
parents at sea, which could result in death of the dependent chicks.
High-wattage lights on commercial market squid (Loligo opalescens)
fishing vessels used at night to attract squid to the surface of the
water in the Channel Islands was the suspected cause of unusually high
predation on Xantus's murrelets by western gulls (Larus occidentalis)
and barn owls (Tyto alba) at Santa Barbara Island in 1999. To address
this threat, in 2000, the California Fish and Game Commission required
light shields and a limit of 30,000 watts per boat; it is unknown if
this is sufficient to reduce impacts. Since 1999, no significant squid
fishing has occurred near any of the colonies in the Channel Islands;
however, this remains a potential future threat.
A proposal to build three liquid natural gas facilities near the
Channel Islands could affect the nesting colonies due to bright lights
at night from the facilities and visiting tanker vessels, noise from
the facilities or from helicopters visiting the facilities, and the
threat of oil spills associated with visiting tanker vessels. However,
these facilities are still early in the complex and long-term planning
processes, and it is possible that none of these facilities will be
built. In addition, none of them is directly adjacent to nesting
colonies, where their impacts would be expected to be more significant.
The threats from nonnative predators and artificial lighting are of a
high magnitude because they have been sufficient to cause significant
declines in the population. However, because of the efforts to
eliminate nonnative predators and reduce artificial lighting, they are
nonimminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 5 for this species.
Red-crowned parrot (Amazona viridigenalis)--The red-crowned parrot
occurs in fragmented isolated habitat in the Mexican states of
Veracruz, San Luis Potosi, Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, and northeast
Queretaro; and in Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, Texas. Feral
populations may also exist in southern California, Puerto Rico, Hawaii,
and Florida and escaped birds have been reported in central Texas. The
species generally occurs in tropical lowlands and foothills, inhabiting
tropical deciduous forest, gallery forest, evergreen floodplain forest,
Tamaulipan thornscrub, and semi-open areas; in Texas, the species is
known to nest in cavities in the urban centers of town in palm species.
Currently, the population of red-crowned parrots is extremely small
(less than 5,000 individuals) and fragmented, and a large portion
(approximately half) of the population occurs within the species'
historical range in Mexico. The primary threats to the red-crowned
parrot at this time include habitat loss, illegal capture for the pet
trade, and the inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms that address those
threats.
The primary threats to the red-crowned parrot are affecting a large
portion of the species' population throughout the historical range of
the species in Mexico. We consider the magnitude high because the
current population is small, a large portion of the population is
affected, and these factors may lead to extirpation in Mexico. Further,
we have no information indicating the Lower Rio Grande Valley
populations can persist in the absence of the Mexico populations.
Threats to the red-crowned parrot are currently affecting populations
and are expected to continue to occur in the future. Therefore, threats
to the red-crowned parrot are imminent. As a result of the imminent,
high magnitude threats, we assigned an LPN of 2 for the red-crowned
parrot.
[[Page 70015]]
Sprague's pipit (Anthus spragueii)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files and in the petition we received
on October 15, 2008. The Sprague's pipit is a small grassland bird
characterized by its high flight display and otherwise very secretive
behavior. Sprague's pipits are strongly tied to native prairie (land
which has never been plowed) throughout their life cycle. Its breeding
range includes portions of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, and Canada. The Sprague's pipit's wintering range includes
south-central and southeast Arizona, southern New Mexico, Texas,
southern Oklahoma, southern Arkansas, northwest Mississippi, southern
Louisiana, and northern Mexico. The vast majority of the U.S. winter
sightings have been in Texas but there have been migration sightings in
Michigan, western Ontario, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Gulf and Atlantic
States from Mississippi east and north to South Carolina. Sprague's
pipits also have been sighted in California during fall migration.
Threats to this species include: Habitat loss and conversion,
habitat fragmentation on the breeding grounds, energy development,
roads, and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Due to prairie
habitat loss and fragmentation, only 15 to 18 percent of the historical
breeding habitat in the United States remains in patches of sufficient
size for males to establish territories. The Breeding Bird Survey and
Christmas Bird Count both show a 40-year decline of 73 to 79 percent
(3.23 to 4.1 percent annually), although the population seems to have
stabilized in recent years. We anticipate that prairie habitat will
continue to be converted and fragmented. Most of the breeding range,
including those areas where grassland habitat still remains, has been
identified as a prime area for wind energy development, and an oil and
gas boom is occurring in the central part of the breeding range in the
United States and Canada. On the wintering range, conversion of
grassland to agriculture and other uses appears to be accelerating.
While habitat loss has occurred and will likely to continue to occur,
as noted above, approximately 15 to18 percent of the breeding range
remains in suitable habitat cover and in large enough patch sizes to
support nesting, and population decline seems to have slowed in recent
years. Thus, the threats are moderate in magnitude. The threats are
imminent because the species is currently facing them in many portions
of its range. Therefore, we have assigned the Sprague's pipit an LPN of
8.
Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus)--We continue to
find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded as of the
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus)--We continue to find
that listing this species is warranted, but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)--The following
summary is based on information in our files and in the petition we
received on January 30, 2002. Currently, greater sage-grouse occur in
11 States (Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Idaho, Montana,
Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, South Dakota, and North Dakota), and 2
Canadian provinces (Alberta and Saskatchewan), occupying approximately
56 percent of their historical range. Greater sage-grouse depend on a
variety of shrub-steppe habitats throughout their life cycle, and are
considered obligate users of several species of sagebrush.
The primary threat to greater sage-grouse is ongoing fragmentation
and loss of shrub-steppe habitats through a variety of mechanisms. Most
importantly, increasing fire cycles and invasive plants (and the
interaction between them) in more westerly parts of the range, along
with energy development and related infrastructure in more easterly
areas, are negatively affecting species. In addition, direct loss of
habitat and fragmentation is occurring due to agriculture,
urbanization, and infrastructure such as roads and power lines built in
support of several activities. We also have determined that existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to protect the species from these
ongoing threats. However, many of these habitat impacts are being
actively addressed through conservation actions taken by local working
groups, and State and Federal agencies. Notably, the National Resource
Conservation Service has committed significant financial and technical
resources to address threats to this species on private lands through
their Sage-grouse Initiative. These efforts, when fully implemented,
will potentially provide important conservation benefits to the greater
sage-grouse and its habitats. We consider the threats to the greater
sage-grouse to be of moderate magnitude, because the threats are not
occurring with uniform intensity or distribution across the wide range
of the species at this time, and substantial habitat still remains to
support the species in many areas. The threats are imminent because the
species is currently facing them in many portions of its range.
Therefore, we assigned the greater sage-grouse an LPN of 8.
Greater sage-grouse, Bi-State DPS (Centrocercus urophasianus)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Greater sage-grouse, Columbia Basin DPS (Centrocercus
urophasianus)--The following summary is based on information in our
files and a petition, dated May 14, 1999, requesting the listing of the
Washington population of the western sage-grouse (C. u. phaios). On May
7, 2001, we concluded that listing the Columbia Basin DPS of the
western sage-grouse was warranted, but precluded by higher priority
listing actions (66 FR 22984); this population was historically found
in northern Oregon and central Washington. Following our May 7, 2001,
finding, the Service received additional petitions requesting listing
actions for various other greater sage-grouse populations, including
one for the nominal western subspecies, dated January 24, 2002, and
three for the entire species, dated June 18, 2002, and March 19 and
December 22, 2003. The Service subsequently found that the petition for
the western subspecies did not present substantial
[[Page 70016]]
information (68 FR 6500; February 7, 2003), and that listing the
greater sage-grouse throughout its historical range was not warranted
(70 FR 2244; January 12, 2005). These latter findings were remanded to
the Service for further consideration. In response, we initiated a new
rangewide status review for the entire species (73 FR 10218; February
26, 2008). On March 5, 2010, we found that listing of the greater sage-
grouse was warranted but precluded by higher priority listing actions
(75 FR 13909; March 23, 2010), and it was added to the list of
candidates. We also found that the western subspecies of the greater
sage-grouse, the taxonomic entity we relied on in our DPS analysis for
the Columbia Basin population, was no longer considered a valid
subspecies. In light of our conclusions regarding the taxonomic
invalidity of the western sage-grouse subspecies, the significance of
the Columbia Basin DPS to the greater sage-grouse will require further
review. The Service intends to complete an analysis to determine if
this population continues to warrant recognition as a DPS in accordance
with our Policy Regarding the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate
Population Segments (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996) at the time we make
a listing decision on the status of the greater sage-grouse. Until that
time, the Columbia Basin DPS will remain a candidate for listing.
Band-rumped storm-petrel, Hawaii DPS (Oceanodroma castro)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and
the petition we received on May 8, 1989. No new information was
provided in the second petition received on May 11, 2004. The band-
rumped storm-petrel is a small seabird that is found in several areas
of the subtropical Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. In the Pacific, there
are three widely separated breeding populations--one in Japan, one in
Hawaii, and one in the Galapagos. Populations in Japan and the
Galapagos are comparatively large and number in the thousands, while
the Hawaiian birds represent a small, remnant population of possibly
only a few hundred pairs. Band-rumped storm-petrels are most commonly
found in close proximity to breeding islands. The three populations in
the Pacific are separated by long distances across the ocean where
birds are not found. Extensive at-sea surveys of the Pacific have
revealed a broad gap in distribution of the band-rumped storm-petrel to
the east and west of the Hawaiian Islands, indicating that the
distribution of birds in the central Pacific around Hawaii is disjunct
from other nesting areas. The available information indicates that
distinct populations of band-rumped storm-petrels are definable and
that the Hawaiian population is distinct based on geographic and
distributional isolation from other band-rumped storm-petrel
populations in Japan, the Galapagos, and the Atlantic Ocean. A
population also can be considered discrete if it is delimited by
international boundaries that have differences in management control of
the species. The Hawaiian population of the band-rumped storm-petrel is
the only population within U.S. borders or under U.S. jurisdiction.
Loss of the Hawaiian population would cause a significant gap in the
distribution of the band-rumped storm-petrel in the Pacific, and could
result in the complete isolation of the Galapagos and Japan populations
without even occasional genetic exchange. Therefore, the population is
both discrete and significant, and constitutes a DPS.
The band-rumped storm-petrel probably was common on all of the main
Hawaiian Islands when Polynesians arrived about 1,500 years ago, based
on storm-petrel bones found in middens on the island of Hawaii and in
excavation sites on Oahu and Molokai. Nesting colonies of this species
in the Hawaiian Islands currently are restricted to remote cliffs on
Kauai and Lehua Island and high-elevation lava fields on Hawaii.
Vocalizations of the species were heard in Haleakala Crater on Maui as
recently as 2006; however, no nesting sites have been located on the
island to date. The significant reduction in numbers and range of the
band-rumped storm-petrel is due primarily to predation by nonnative
species introduced by humans, including the domestic cat (Felis catus),
small Indian mongoose (Herpestes auropunctatus), common barn owl (Tyto
alba), black rat (R. rattus), Polynesian rat (R. exulans), and Norway
rat (R. norvegicus). These nonnative predators occur throughout the
main Hawaiian Islands, with the exception of the mongoose, which is not
established on Kauai. Attraction of fledglings to artificial lights,
which disrupts their night-time navigation, resulting in collisions
with building and other objects, and collisions with artificial
structures such as communication towers and utility lines are also
threats. Erosion of nest sites caused by the actions of nonnative
ungulates is a potential threat in some locations. Efforts are under
way in some areas to reduce light pollution and mitigate the threat of
collisions, but there are no large-scale efforts to control nonnative
predators in the Hawaiian Islands. The threats are imminent because
they are ongoing, and they are of a high magnitude because they are
reducing the population size of the DPS. Therefore, we assign this
distinct population segment an LPN of 3.
Elfin-woods warbler (Dendroica angelae)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Dendroica
angelae, or elfin-woods warbler, is a small entirely black and white
warbler, distinguished by its white eyebrow stripe, white patches on
ear covers and neck, incomplete eye ring, and black crown. The elfin-
woods warbler was at first thought to occur only in high elevations at
dwarf or elfin forests, but it has since been found at lower elevations
including shade coffee plantations and secondary forests. These birds
build a compact cup nest, usually close to the trunk and well hidden
among the epiphytes of small trees. Its breeding season extends from
March to June. Elfin-woods warblers forage in the middle part of trees,
gleaning insects from leaves in the outer portion of tree crowns. The
species has been documented from four locations in Puerto Rico:
Luquillo Mountains, Sierra de Cayey, and the Commonwealth forests of
Maricao and Toro Negro. However, it has not been recorded again in Toro
Negro and Cayey, following the passing of Hurricane Hugo in 1989. In
2003 and 2004, surveys were conducted for the elfin-woods warbler in
the Carite Commonwealth Forest, Toro Negro Forest, Guilarte Forest,
Bosque del Pueblo, Maricao Forest, and the El Yunque National Forest.
These surveys only reported sightings at Maricao Commonwealth Forest
(778 individuals) and El Yunque National Forest (196 individuals).
The elfin-woods warbler is currently threatened by habitat
modification. Elfin-woods warblers have been historically common in the
elfin woodland of El Yunque National Forest and the Podocarpus forest
type of Maricao Commonwealth Forest. Removal and replacement of this
forest vegetation with infrastructure (e.g., telecommunication towers
and recreational facilities) may have affected the species. Although
this loss of habitat has been permanent and restoration would take a
few decades, the present regulatory process, at both the Commonwealth
and Federal levels, have curtailed this threat. Unrestricted
development within the El Yunque buffer zone needs to be addressed to
determine the impact on the migratory
[[Page 70017]]
behavior of the species. Conversion of elfin-woods warbler habitat
(e.g., mature secondary forests, young secondary forests, and shaded-
coffee plantations) along the periphery of the Maricao Commonwealth
Forest to marginal habitat (e.g., pastures, dry slope forests,
residential rural forests, gallery forests, and unshaded coffee
plantations), has affected potential corridors for the elfin-woods
warbler, resulting in a reduced dispersal and expansion capability of
the species. These threats are not imminent because most of the range
of the species is within protected lands. The magnitude of threat to
the elfin-woods warbler is low to moderate because there is no
indication that the two populations of the elfin-woods warbler are
declining in numbers. The species can thrive in disturbed and
plantation habitats, although abundance of the species on these
habitats is lower than in primary habitats. Moreover, elfin-woods
warblers appear to recover well, and in a relatively short time, from
damaging effects of hurricanes to the forest structure. Therefore, we
assign a listing priority number of 11 to the elfin-woods warbler.
Reptiles
Northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. The Service
received a petition containing no new information on May 11, 2004.
Until 2011, the eastern massasauga was considered one of three
recognized subspecies of massasauga. Based on recent information, we
recognized the eastern massasauga rattlesnake as a distinct species
beginning in 2011. It is a small, thick-bodied rattlesnake that
occupies shallow wetlands and adjacent upland habitat in portions of
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario.
Although the current range of S. catenatus resembles the species'
historical range, the geographic distribution has been restricted by
the loss of the species from much of the area within the boundaries of
that range. Approximately 40 percent of the counties that were
historically occupied by S. catenatus no longer support the species. S.
catenatus is currently listed as endangered in every State and province
in which it occurs, except for Michigan where it is designated as a
species of special concern. Each State and Canadian province across the
range of S. catenatus has lost more than 30 percent of its historical
population of the species, and for the majority more than 50 percent.
Furthermore, fewer than 35 percent of the remaining populations are
considered secure. Approximately 59 percent of the remaining S.
catenatus populations occur wholly or in part on public land, and
Statewide and/or site-specific CCAAs are currently being developed for
many of these areas in Illinois and Michigan. In 2004, a Candidate
Conservation Agreement (CCA) with the Lake County Forest Preserve
District in Illinois was completed. In 2005, a CCA with the Forest
Preserve District of Cook County in Illinois was completed. In 2006, a
CCAA with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Natural
Areas and Preserves was completed for Rome State Nature Preserve in
Ashtabula County. In 2011, a CCAA with the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources was completed for the Lower Chippewa River Bottoms.
These agreements are addressing threats in those areas and thus reduce
the magnitude of threats for the species as a whole. Therefore, the
magnitude of threats is considered ``moderate'' at this time. However,
a recently completed extinction risk model and information provided by
species experts indicate that other populations are likely to suffer
additional losses in abundance and genetic diversity, and some will
likely be extirpated unless threats are removed in the near future.
Declines have continued or may be accelerating in several States. Thus
we are monitoring the status of this species to determine if a change
in listing priority is warranted. Threats of habitat modification,
habitat succession, incompatible land management practices, illegal
collection for the pet trade, and human persecution are ongoing and
constitute imminent threats to many remaining populations, particularly
those inhabiting private lands. Based on imminent threats of moderate
magnitude, we assigned this species an LPN of 8.
Black pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
There are historical records for the black pine snake from one parish
in Louisiana, 14 counties in Mississippi, and 3 counties in Alabama
west of the Mobile River Delta. Black pine snake surveys and trapping
indicate that this species has been extirpated from Louisiana and from
four counties in Mississippi. Moreover, the distribution of remaining
populations has become highly restricted due to the destruction and
fragmentation of the remaining longleaf pine habitat within the range
of the subspecies. Most of the known Mississippi populations are
concentrated on the DeSoto National Forest. In Alabama, populations
occurring on properties managed by State and other governmental
agencies, as gopher tortoise mitigation banks or wildlife sanctuaries,
represent the best opportunities for long-term survival of the
subspecies there. Other factors affecting the black pine snake include
vehicular mortality and low reproductive rates, which magnify the
threats from destruction and fragmentation of longleaf pine habitat and
increase the likelihood of local extinctions. Due to the imminent
threats of high magnitude caused by the past destruction of most of the
longleaf pine habitat of the black pine snake, and the continuing
persistent degradation of what remains, we assigned an LPN of 3 to this
subspecies.
Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis ruthveni)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and the petition we
received on July 20, 2000, and updated through April 30, 2011. The
Louisiana pine snake historically occurred in the fire-maintained
longleaf pine ecosystem within west-central Louisiana and extreme east-
central Texas. Most of the historical longleaf pine habitat of the
Louisiana pine snake has been destroyed or degraded due to logging,
fire suppression, roadways, short-rotation silviculture, and grazing.
The loss and fragmentation of the longleaf pine ecosystem has resulted
in extant Louisiana pine snake populations that are isolated and small.
The Louisiana pine snake is currently restricted to seven disjunct
populations; five of the populations occur on federal lands, and two
occur mainly on private industrial timberlands. Currently occupied
habitat in Louisiana and Texas is estimated to be approximately 159,000
ac. All remnant Louisiana pine
[[Page 70018]]
snake populations have been affected by habitat loss and all require
active habitat management. A CCA was completed in 2003 to maintain and
enhance occupied and potential habitat on public lands, and to protect
known Louisiana pine snake populations. This proactive habitat
management has likely slowed or reversed the rate of Louisiana pine
snake habitat degradation on many portions of federal lands. Because
all extant populations are currently isolated and fragmented by habitat
loss in the matrix between populations, there is little potential for
dispersal among remnant populations or for the natural re-colonization
of vacant habitat patches.
While the extent of Louisiana pine snake habitat loss has been
great in the past and much of the remaining habitat has been degraded,
habitat loss does not represent an imminent threat, primarily because
the rate of habitat loss appears to be declining on public lands.
However, all populations require active habitat management, and the
lack of adequate habitat remains a threat for several populations. The
potential threats to a large percentage of extant Louisiana pine snake
populations, coupled with the likely permanence of these effects and
the species' low fecundity and low population sizes (based on capture
rates and occurrence data), lead us to conclude that the threats have
significant effect on the survival of the species and therefore remain
high in magnitude. The threats are not imminent, because the rate of
habitat loss appears to be declining due to proactive habitat
management. Thus, based on nonimminent, high-magnitude threats, we
assign a listing priority number of 5 to this species.
Tucson shovel-nosed snake (Chionactis occipitalis klauberi)--The
Tucson shovel-nosed snake is a small, burrowing snake in the Colubridae
family that occupied a roughly 35-mile-wide swath running along the
Phoenix-Tucson corridor in northeastern Pima, southwestern Pinal, and
eastern Maricopa Counties, Arizona. No systematic surveys have been
conducted to assess the status of the subspecies throughout its range,
but it has apparently disappeared from some areas.
Threats to the Tucson shovel-nosed snake include urban and rural
development; road construction, use, and maintenance; concentration of
solar power facilities and transmission corridors; agriculture;
wildfires; and lack of adequate management and regulation.
Comprehensive plans encompassing the entire range of the snake
encourage large growth areas in the next 20 years and beyond. These
plans also call for an increase in roads and transportation corridors,
which have been documented to affect the snake through direct
mortality. Additionally, development of solar energy facilities and
transmission corridors throughout the State is being pursued, and
demand for these facilities will likely increase. Some of these
facilities are being considered within the range of the Tucson shovel-
nosed snake. Wildfires due to infestations of nonnative grasses in the
snake's habitat, dominated by native plants not adapted to survive
wildfires, are likely to increase in frequency and magnitude in the
future as these invasive grasses continue to spread rapidly.
Regulations are not in place to minimize or mitigate these threats to
the Tucson shovel-nosed snake and its habitat, and, therefore, they are
likely to put the snake at risk of local extirpation or extinction.
These threats, particularly those that lead to a loss of habitat, are
likely to reduce the population of the Tucson shovel-nosed snake across
its entire range. Given the limited geographic distribution of this
snake and the fact that its entire range lies within the path of
development in the foreseeable future, these threats are of high
magnitude. Because development, wildfires, and spread of nonnative
grasses are ongoing, and are likely to increase in the future, the
threats are imminent. Accordingly, we have assigned an LPN of 3 to the
Tucson shovel-nosed snake.
Desert tortoise, Sonoran (Gopherus morafkai)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Gopher tortoise, eastern population (Gopherus polyphemus)--The
following summary is based on information in our files. The gopher
tortoise is a large, terrestrial, herbivorous turtle that reaches a
total length up to 15 in (38 cm), and typically inhabits the sandhills,
pine/scrub oak uplands, and pine flatwoods associated with the longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris) ecosystem. A fossorial animal, the gopher
tortoise is usually found in areas with well-drained, deep, sandy
soils; an open tree canopy; and a diverse, abundant, herbaceous
groundcover. The gopher tortoise ranges from extreme southern South
Carolina south through peninsular Florida, and west through southern
Georgia, Florida, southern Alabama, and Mississippi, into extreme
southeastern Louisiana. The eastern population of the gopher tortoise
in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Alabama (east of the Mobile
and Tombigbee Rivers) is a candidate species; the gopher tortoise is
federally listed as threatened in the western portion of its range,
which includes Alabama (west of the Mobile and Tombigbee Rivers),
Mississippi, and Louisiana.
The primary threat to the gopher tortoise is habitat fragmentation,
destruction, and modification (either deliberately or from
inattention), including conversion of longleaf pine forests to other
silvicultural or agricultural habitats, urbanization, shrub/hardwood
encroachment (mainly from fire exclusion or insufficient fire
management), and establishment and spread of invasive species. Other
threats include disease, predation (mainly on nests and young
tortoises), and inadequate regulatory mechanisms, specifically those
needed to protect and enhance relocated tortoise populations in
perpetuity. The magnitude of threats to the eastern range of the gopher
tortoise is moderate to low, as populations extend over a broad
geographic area and conservation measures are in place in some areas.
However, because the species is currently being affected by a number of
threats including destruction and modification of its habitat, disease,
predation, exotics, and inadequate regulatory mechanisms, the threat is
imminent. Thus, we have assigned a listing priority number of 8 for
this species.
Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale)--See
above in ``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary
is based on information contained in our files.
Amphibians
Columbia spotted frog, Great Basin DPS (Rana luteiventris)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and
the petition we received on May 1, 1989. Currently, the Great Basin DPS
of Columbia spotted frogs appear to be widely distributed throughout
southwest Idaho, southeast Oregon, northeast and central Nevada, but
most populations within this range appear to be small and isolated from
each other. Recent work by researchers in Idaho and Nevada have
documented the loss of historically known sites, reduced numbers of
individuals within local populations, and declines in the reproduction
of those individuals.
Small, highly fragmented populations, characteristic of the
majority of existing populations of Columbia spotted frogs in the Great
Basin, are susceptible to extinction processes. Development and poor
management of Columbia spotted
[[Page 70019]]
frog habitat--including water development, improper grazing, mining
activities, and nonnative species--have contributed and continue to
contribute to the degradation and fragmentation of habitat. Emerging
fungal diseases such as chytridiomycosis, Ranavirus outbreaks, and the
spread of parasites may be contributing factors to Columbia spotted
frog population declines throughout portions of its range. Effects of
climate change such as drought and stochastic events such as fire often
have detrimental effects to small, isolated populations and can often
exacerbate existing threats. A 10-year Conservation Agreement and
Strategy was signed in September 2003 for both the Northeast and the
Toiyabe subpopulations in Nevada. The goals of the conservation
agreements are to reduce threats to Columbia spotted frogs and their
habitat to the extent necessary to prevent populations from becoming
extirpated throughout all or a portion of their historical range and to
maintain, enhance, and restore a sufficient number of populations of
Columbia spotted frogs and their habitat to ensure their continued
existence throughout their historical range. Additionally, a CCAA was
completed in 2006 for the Owyhee subpopulation at Sam Noble Springs,
Idaho. Several habitat enhancement projects have been conducted
throughout the DPS's range that have benefitted these populations.
Because the DPS is widely distributed and there are management actions
in place working to reduce the scope of threats to the speces, we
conclude that the threats are moderate. The threats are imminent,
because development and poor management of its habitat, and fungal
diseases and parasites are already present. Based on imminent threats
of moderate magnitude, we assigned an LPN of 9 to this DPS of the
Columbia spotted frog.
Mountain yellow-legged frog, Sierra Nevada DPS (Rana muscosa)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)--We continue to find that
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Relict leopard frog (Lithobates onca)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. Natural relict leopard
frog populations occur in two general areas in Nevada: Near the Overton
Arm area of Lake Mead, and Black Canyon below Lake Mead. These two
areas represent a small fraction of the historical distribution of the
species. Its historical range included springs, streams, and wetlands
within the Virgin River drainage downstream from the vicinity of
Hurricane, Utah; along the Muddy River, Nevada; and along the Colorado
River from its confluence with the Virgin River downstream to Black
Canyon below Lake Mead, Nevada and Arizona.
Factors contributing to the decline of the species include
alteration, loss, and degradation of aquatic habitat due to water
developments and impoundments, and scouring and erosion; changes in
plant communities that result in dense growth and the prevalence of
vegetation; introduced predators; climate change; and stochastic
events. The presence of chytrid fungus in relict leopard frogs at Lower
Blue Point Spring is a concern and warrants further evaluation of the
threat of disease to the relict leopard frog. The size of natural and
translocated populations is small, and, therefore, these populations
are vulnerable to stochastic events, such as floods and wildfire.
Climate change that results in reduced spring flow, habitat loss, and
increased prevalence of wildfire would adversely affect relict leopard
frog populations. In 2005, the National Park Service, in cooperation
with the Fish and Wildlife Service and other Federal, State, and local
partners, developed a conservation agreement and strategy intended to
improve the status of the species through prescribed management actions
and protection. Conservation actions identified in the agreement and
strategy include captive rearing of tadpoles for translocation and
refugium populations, habitat and natural history studies, habitat
enhancement, population and habitat monitoring, and translocation. New
sites within the historical range of the species have been successfully
established with captive-reared frogs. Conservation is proceeding under
the agreement and strategy; however, additional time is needed to
determine whether or not the agreement and strategy will be effective
in eliminating or reducing the threats to the point that the relict
leopard frog can be removed from candidate status. In consideration of
these conservation efforts and the overall threat level to the species,
we determined the magnitude of existing threats is moderate to low.
Potential water development and other habitat effects, presence of
introduced predators, chytrid fungus, limited distribution, small
population size, and climate change are ongoing and, therefore,
imminent threats. Therefore, we assigned a listing priority number of 8
to this species.
Striped newt (Notophthalmus perstriatus)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. The striped newt is a
small salamander that inhabits ephemeral ponds surrounded by upland
habitats of high pine, scrubby flatwoods, and scrub. Longleaf pine-
turkey oak stands with intact ground cover containing wiregrass are the
preferred upland habitat for striped newts, followed by scrub, then
flatwoods. Life-history stages of the striped newt are complex, and
include the use of both aquatic and terrestrial habitats throughout
their life cycle. Striped newts are opportunistic feeders that prey on
frog eggs, worms, snails, fairy shrimp, spiders, and insects (adult and
larvae) that are of appropriate size. They occur in appropriate
habitats from the Atlantic Coastal Plain of southeastern Georgia to the
north-central peninsula of Florida and through the Florida panhandle
into portions of southwest Georgia. There is a 125-km (78-mi)
separation between the western and eastern portions of the striped
newt's range.
The historical range of the striped newt was likely similar to the
current range. However, loss of native longleaf habitat, fire
suppression, and the natural patchy distribution of upland habitats
used by striped newts have resulted in fragmentation of existing
populations. Other threats to the species include disease, drought, and
inadequate regulatory mechanisms. The magnitude of threats from habitat
loss, fire suppression, and disease are moderate, as most of the known
striped newt metapopulations are on conservation lands, and, although
disease has been found in similar species, no known metapopulations of
striped newts have shown any evidence of disease. For drought, the
magnitude is high because nearly all populations are affected, and
[[Page 70020]]
this factor may lead to possible extirpation. Also, throughout the
entire range of the striped newt, droughts are predicted to be more
severe and longer in the coming years, which could have a detrimental
effect on the species' long-term survival. In sum, because we find that
most of the threats are of a moderate magnitude, we find the overall
threats that the striped newt is facing to be moderate in magnitude.
The threats are ongoing and, therefore, imminent. Thus, we assigned a
listing priority number of 8 to the newt.
Berry Cave salamander (Gyrinophilus gulolineatus)--The following
summary is based on information in our files. The Berry Cave salamander
is recorded from Berry Cave in Roane County, from Mud Flats, Aycock
Spring, Christian, Meades Quarry, Meades River, and Fifth caves in Knox
County; from Blythe Ferry Cave in Meigs County; and from an unknown
cave in Athens, McMinn County, Tennessee. In May of 2012, the species
was also discovered in an additional cave, The Lost Puddle Cave, in
Knox County. These cave systems are all located within the Upper
Tennessee River and Clinch River drainages. A total of 113 caves in
Middle and East Tennessee were surveyed from the time period of April
2004 through June 2007, resulting in observations of 63 Berry Cave
salamanders. These surveys concluded that Berry Cave salamander
populations are robust at Berry and Mudflats caves where population
declines had been previously reported and documented two new
populations of Berry Cave salamanders at Aycock Spring and Christian
caves. Three Berry Cave salamanders were spotted during the May, 2012,
survey in The Lost Puddle and additional surveys are planned. Ongoing
threats to this species are in the form of lye leaching in the Meades
Quarry Cave as a result of past quarrying activities, a proposed
roadway with potential to impact the recharge area for the Meades
Quarry Cave system, urban development in Knox County, water quality
impacts despite existing State and Federal laws, and hybridization
between spring salamanders and Berry Cave salamanders in Meades Quarry
Cave. These threats, coupled with confined distribution of the species
and apparent low population densities, are all factors that leave the
Berry Cave salamander vulnerable to extirpation. Although these threats
are ongoing, the population levels are robust at two caves, and three
new populations have been found at three additional caves. Therefore,
we have determined that the Berry Cave salamander faces imminent
threats of moderate magnitude. Based on moderate-magnitude, imminent
threats, we assigned this species a listing priority number of 8.
Yosemite toad (Anaxyrus canorus)--We continue to find that listing
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk
to the species.
Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Fishes
Headwater chub (Gila nigra)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files since 2006 and in the 12-month
finding published in the Federal Register on May 3, 2006 (71 FR 26007).
The headwater chub is a moderate-sized cyprinid fish. The range of the
headwater chub has been reduced by approximately 60 percent. Twenty-
three streams (125 mi (200 km) of stream) are thought to be occupied
out of 26 streams (312 mi (500 km) of stream) formerly occupied in the
Gila River Basin in Arizona and New Mexico. All remaining populations
are fragmented and isolated, and threatened by a combination of
factors.
Headwater chubs are threatened by introduced, nonnative fish that
prey on them and compete with them for food. Habitat destruction and
modification have occurred and continue to occur as a result of
dewatering, impoundment, channelization, and channel changes caused by
alteration of riparian vegetation and watershed degradation from
mining, grazing, roads, water pollution, urban and suburban
development, groundwater pumping, and other human actions. Existing
regulatory mechanisms do not appear to be adequate for addressing the
impact of nonnative fish and also have not removed or eliminated the
threats that continue to be posed through habitat degradation. The
fragmented nature and rarity of existing populations makes them
vulnerable to other natural or manmade factors, such as drought and
wildfire. Climate change is predicted to worsen these threats through
increased aridity of the region, thus reducing stream flows and warming
aquatic habitats, which makes the habitat more suitable to nonnative
species.
The Arizona Game and Fish Department's Arizona Statewide
Conservation Agreement for Roundtail Chub (G. robusta), Headwater Chub,
Flannelmouth Sucker (Catostomus latipinnis), Little Colorado River
Sucker (Catostomus spp.), Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus), and Zuni
Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus yarrowi) was finalized in 2006. The New
Mexico Department of Game and Fish has listed the headwater chub as
endangered and in 2006 finalized a recovery plan for the species:
Colorado River Basin Chubs (Roundtail Chub, Gila Chub (G. intermedia),
and Headwater Chub) Recovery Plan. Arizona's agreement and New Mexico's
recovery plan both recommend preservation and enhancement of extant
populations and restoration of historical headwater-chub populations.
The recovery and conservation actions prescribed by Arizona's and New
Mexico's plans, which we predict will reduce and remove threats to this
species, will require further discussions and authorizations as they
are being implemented. The recently completed Arizona Game and Fish
Department Sportfish Stocking Program's Conservation and Mitigation
Program contains significant conservation actions for the headwater
chub that will be implemented over the next 10 years.
Existing information indicates that existing populations are stable
and persisting in the long-term; 9 of the 23 extant stream populations
are currently considered stable based on abundance and evidence of
recruitment. Therefore, although threats are ongoing, the threats are
moderate in magnitude. We have retained an LPN of 8 for this species at
this time.
Least chub (Iotichthys phlegethontis)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and in the petition
received on June 25, 2007. The least chub is a small, colorful fish
species in Utah that follows thermal patterns for habitat use. Least
chub use flooded, warmer, vegetated marsh areas to spawn in the spring,
and retreat to spring heads to overwinter as the water recedes in the
late summer and fall. Historically, many least chub occurrences were
reported across the State of Utah, but the current distribution of the
species is highly reduced from its historical range. Currently, only
six known wild populations remain, but one of these is considered
functionally extirpated. Least chub also currently exist at several
genetic refuge sites. The species faces
[[Page 70021]]
threats from the effects of livestock grazing, which affects most least
chub sites despite efforts to protect least chub habitat with grazing
exclosures and management plans. Least chub habitat also is affected by
current and proposed future groundwater withdrawals, especially when
combined with the threat of drought. These threats also act
cumulatively with climate change to put the least chub at further risk.
Existing regulatory mechanisms are currently inadequate to regulate
groundwater withdrawals and ameliorate their effects on least chub
habitat. Nonnative species, particularly mosquitofish, also are a
continuing threat to least chub. There is no known means of controlling
mosquitofish, and they have already caused the functional extirpation
of one wild least chub population.
In 1998, several State and Federal agencies, including the Service
and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, developed a Least Chub
Conservation Agreement and Strategy and formed the Least Chub
Conservation Team. Their objectives are to eliminate or significantly
reduce threats to the least chub and its habitat, and to ensure the
continued existence of the species by restoring and maintaining a
minimum number of least chub populations throughout its historical
range. Recent State-led least chub conservation actions have included
restoration of habitat affected by grazing, reintroduction and range
expansion, nonnative removal, population monitoring, and working
cooperatively with landowners to conserve water and aquatic habitat.
This group also has recently begun a structured decision-making
modeling process that will provide additional guidance for conservation
activities.
Overall, grazing, groundwater withdrawal, and predation by
nonnative species are moderate magnitude threats; some populations are
more negatively affected by these threats but in others the threats are
not decreasing the populations or the threats are not present. The
threats are imminent because the species is currently facing them in
many portions of its range. Therefore, we have assigned the least chub
an LPN of 7.
Roundtail chub (Gila robusta), Lower Colorado River DPS--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and
the 12-month finding published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2009
(74 FR 32352). The roundtail chub is a moderate to large cyprinid fish.
The range of the roundtail chub has been reduced by approximately 68 to
82 percent. Thirty-two streams are currently occupied, representing
approximately 18 to 32 percent of the species' former range, or 800 km
(500 mi) to 1,350 km (840 mi) of 3,050 km (1,895 mi) of formerly
occupied streams in the Gila River Basin in Arizona and New Mexico.
Most of the remaining populations are fragmented and isolated, and all
are threatened by a combination of factors.
Roundtail chub are threatened by introduced, nonnative fish that
prey on them and compete with them for food. Habitat destruction and
modification have occurred and continue to occur as a result of
dewatering, impoundment, channelization, and channel changes caused by
alteration of riparian vegetation and watershed degradation from
mining, grazing, roads, water pollution, urban and suburban
development, groundwater pumping, and other human actions. Existing
regulatory mechanisms do not appear to be adequate for addressing the
impact of nonnative fish and also have not removed or eliminated the
threats that continue to be posed through habitat destruction or
modification. The fragmented nature and rarity of existing populations
make roundtail chub vulnerable to other natural or manmade factors,
such as drought and wildfire. Climate change is predicted to worsen
these threats through increased aridity of the region, thus reducing
stream flows and warming aquatic habitats, which makes the habitat more
suitable to nonnative species.
The Arizona Game and Fish Department's Arizona Statewide
Conservation Agreement for Roundtail Chub, Headwater Chub (G. nigra),
Flannelmouth Sucker (Catostomus latipinnis), Little Colorado River
Sucker (Catostomus spp.), Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus), and Zuni
Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus yarrowi) was finalized in 2006. The New
Mexico Department of Game and Fish lists the roundtail chub as
endangered and in 2006 finalized a recovery plan for the species:
Colorado River Basin Chubs (Roundtail Chub, Gila Chub (G. intermedia),
and Headwater Chub) Recovery Plan. Both the Arizona Agreement and the
New Mexico Recovery Plan recommend preservation and enhancement of
extant populations and restoration of historical roundtail chub
populations. The recovery and conservation actions prescribed by the
Arizona and New Mexico plans, which we predict will reduce and remove
threats to this species, will require further discussions and
authorizations as they are being implemented. The recently completed
Arizona Game and Fish Department Sportfish Stocking Program's
Conservation and Mitigation Program contains significant conservation
actions for the roundtail chub that will be implemented over the next
10 years.
Although threats are ongoing, existing information indicates long-
term persistence and stability of existing populations. Currently, 7 of
the 32 extant stream populations are considered stable, based on
abundance and evidence of recruitment. One new conservation population
was initially stocked in 2012, raising the number of extant populations
to 33. Based on our assessment, threats (primarily nonnative species
and habitat loss from land uses) remain imminent, because they are
ongoing, and are of moderate magnitude because there is evidence of
long-term persistence and stability of the existing popualtions. Thus,
we have retained an LPN of 9 for this distinct population segment.
Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This fish species
occurs in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. The
species is found most often in sand- or pebble-bottomed pools of small,
spring-fed streams and marshes, with cool water and broadleaved aquatic
vegetation. Its current distribution is indicative of a species that
once was widely dispersed throughout its range, but has been relegated
to isolated areas surrounded by unsuitable habitat that prevents
dispersal.
Factors influencing the current distribution include: Surface and
groundwater irrigation resulting in decreased flows or stream
dewatering; the dewatering of long reaches of riverine habitat
necessary for species movement when surface flows do occur; conversion
of prairie to cropland, which influences groundwater recharge and
spring flows; water quality degradation from a variety of sources; and
the construction of dams, which act as barriers preventing emigration
upstream and downstream through the reservoir pool. The magnitude of
threats facing this species is moderate to low, given the number of
different locations where the species occurs and the fact that no
single threat or combination of threats affects more than a portion of
the widespread population occurrences. Overall, the threats are
nonimminent as groundwater pumping is declining and development,
spills, and runoff are not currently affecting the species rangewide.
Thus, we are retaining an LPN of 11 for the Arkansas darter.
Pearl darter (Percina aurora)--The following summary is based on
[[Page 70022]]
information contained in our files. Little is known about the specific
habitat requirements or natural history of the Pearl darter. Pearl
darters have been collected from a variety of river/stream attributes,
mainly over gravel bottom substrate. This species is historically known
only from localized sites within the Pascagoula and Pearl River
drainages in Mississippi and Louisiana. Currently, the Pearl darter is
considered extirpated from the Pearl River drainage and rare in the
Pascagoula River drainage. Since 1983, the range of the Pearl darter
has decreased by 55 percent.
The Pearl darter is threatened by non-point source pollution caused
by urbanization and other land use activities; gravel mining and
resultant changes in river geomorphology, especially head cutting; and
the possibility of water quantity decline from the proposed Department
of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve project and a proposed dam on the
Bouie River. Additional threats are posed by the apparent lack of
adequate State and Federal water quality regulations due to the
continuing degradation of water quality within the species' habitat.
The Pearl darter's localized distribution and apparent low population
numbers may indicate a species with lower genetic diversity, which
would also make this species more vulnerable to catastrophic events.
Threats affecting the Pearl darter are localized in nature, affecting
only portions of the population within the drainage; thus, a threat
magnitude of moderate to low is assigned for this species. In addition,
the threats are considered imminent, as the identified threats are
currently affecting this species in some portions of its range.
Therefore, we have assigned a listing priority number of 8 for this
species.
Arctic grayling, Upper Missouri River DPS (Thymallus arcticus)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. This
fish species has a broad, nearly circumpolar distribution, occurring in
a variety of cold-water habitats including small streams, large rivers,
lakes, and even bogs. We determined in our September 8, 2010, status
review (75 FR 54708) that the upper Missouri River population of arctic
grayling in Montana and Wyoming represents a DPS because it is discrete
due to geographic separation and genetic differences, and it is
significant to the taxon as a whole. The historical range of Arctic
grayling in the upper Missouri River basin has declined dramatically in
the past century. The five remaining indigenous populations are
isolated from one another by dams or other factors.
All populations face potential threats from competition with and
predation by nonnative trout, and most populations face threats
resulting from the alteration of their habitats, such as habitat
fragmentation from dams or irrigation diversion structures, stream
dewatering, high summer water temperatures, loss of riparian habitats,
and entrainment in irrigation ditches. Severe drought likely also
affects all populations by reducing water availability and reducing the
extent of thermally suitable habitat. Projected climate changes will
likely influence the severity and scope of these threats in the future.
As applied, existing regulatory mechanisms do not appear to be adequate
to address the primary threats to arctic grayling. In addition, four of
five populations are at risk from random environmental fluctuations and
genetic drift due to their low abundance and isolation. The magnitude
of these threats is high because one or more of these threats occurs in
each known population in the Missouri River basin. The threats are
imminent because they are currently occurring and are expected to
continue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, we have assigned the
upper Missouri River DPS of arctic grayling an LPN of 3.
Sicklefin redhorse (Moxostoma sp.)--We continue to find that
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Sharpnose shiner (Notropis oxyrhynchus)--We continue to find that
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Smalleye shiner (Notropis buccula)--We continue to find that
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Zuni bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus yarrowi)--We continue
to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Rio Grande cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and
our status review published on May 14, 2008 (73 FR 27900). Rio Grande
cutthroat trout is one of 14 subspecies of cutthroat trout found in the
western United States. Populations of this subspecies are in New Mexico
and Colorado in drainages of the Rio Grande, Pecos, and Canadian
rivers. Although once widely distributed in connected stream networks,
Rio Grande cutthroat trout populations now occupy about 10 percent of
historical habitat, and the populations are fragmented and isolated
from one another. The majority of populations occur in high-elevation
streams.
Major threats include the loss of suitable habitat that has
occurred and is likely to continue occurring due to water diversions,
dams, stream drying, habitat quality degradation, and changes in
hydrology; introduction of nonnative trout and ensuing competition,
predation, and hybridization; and whirling disease. In addition,
average air temperatures in the Southwest have increased about 1 [deg]C
(2.5 [deg]F) in the past 30 years, and they are projected to increase
by another 1.2 to 2.8 [deg]C (3 to 7 [deg]F) by 2050. Because trout
require cold water, and water temperatures depend in large part on air
temperature, there is concern that the habitat of Rio Grande cutthroat
trout will further decrease in response to warmer water temperatures
caused by climate change. Wildfire and
[[Page 70023]]
drought (stream drying) are additional threats to Rio Grande cutthroat
trout populations that are likely to increase in magnitude in response
to climate change. Research is occurring to assess the effects of
climate change on this subspecies, and agencies are working to restore
historically occupied streams and develop a conservation plan to direct
conservation. The threats are of moderate magnitude because there is
good distribution and a comparatively large number of populations
across the landscape, some populations have few threats present, and in
other areas management actions are being taken to help control the
threat of nonnative trout. Overall, the threats are ongoing and,
therefore, imminent. Based on imminent threats of moderate magnitude,
we retain an LPN of 9 for this subspecies.
Clams
Texas fatmucket (Lampsilis bracteata)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. The Texas fatmucket is a
large, elongated freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas.
Its shell can be moderately thick, smooth, and rhomboidal to oval in
shape. Its external coloration varies from tan to brown with continuous
dark brown, green-brown, or black rays, and internally it is pearly
white, with some having a light salmon tint. This species historically
occurred throughout the Colorado and Guadalupe-San Antonio River basins
but is now known to occur only in nine streams within these basins in
very limited numbers. All existing populations are represented by only
one or two individuals and are not likely to be stable or recruiting.
The Texas fatmucket is primarily threatened by habitat destruction
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby
removing mussel habitat; decrease water quality; modify stream flows;
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels.
This species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the Texas fatmucket and its
habitat are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species
and its lack of mobility, these threats are likely to result in the
extinction of the Texas fatmucket in the foreseeable future.
The threats are such that the Texas fatmucket warrants listing; the
threats are high in magnitude because habitat loss and degradation from
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas fatmucket
and profoundly affect its survival and recruitment. These threats are
exacerbated by climate change, which will increase the frequency and
magnitude of droughts. Remaining populations are small, isolated, and
highly vulnerable to stochastic events, which could lead to extirpation
or extinction. We consider these threats to be imminent because they
are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future. Habitat loss
and degradation have already occurred and will continue as the human
population continues to grow in central Texas. Texas fatmucket
populations may already be below the minimum viable population
requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of populations and
an increase in the species' vulnerability to extinction. Based on
imminent, high-magnitude threats, we assigned the Texas fatmucket an
LPN of 2.
Texas fawnsfoot (Truncilla macrodon)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. The Texas fawnsfoot is a
small, relatively thin-shelled freshwater mussel that is endemic to
central Texas. Its shell is long and oval, generally free of external
sculpturing, with external coloration that varies from yellowish- or
orangish-tan, brown, reddish-brown, to smoky-green with a pattern of
broken rays or irregular blotches. The internal color is bluish-white
or white and iridescent posteriorly. This species historically occurred
throughout the Colorado and Brazos River basins and is now known from
only five locations. The Texas fawnsfoot has been extirpated from
nearly all of the Colorado River basin and from much of the Brazos
River basin. Of the populations that remain, only three are likely to
be stable and recruiting; the remaining populations are disjunct and
restricted to short stream reaches.
The Texas fawnsfoot is primarily threatened by habitat destruction
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows,
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels,
as well as by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and gravel mining, and
chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats may be exacerbated
by the current and projected effects of climate change, population
fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated threat of nonnative
species. Threats to the Texas fawnsfoot and its habitat are not being
adequately addressed through existing regulatory mechanisms. Because of
the limited distribution of this endemic species and its lack of
mobility, these threats are likely to result in the extinction of the
Texas fawnsfoot in the foreseeable future.
The threats are such that the Texas fawnsfoot warrants listing; the
threats are high in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation from
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas fawnsfoot
and profoundly affect its habitat. These threats are exacerbated by
climate change, which will increase the frequency and magnitude of
droughts. Remaining populations are small, isolated, and highly
vulnerable to stochastic events. These threats are imminent because
they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future. Habitat
loss and degradation has already occurred and will continue as the
human population continues to grow in central Texas. The Texas
fawnsfoot populations may already be below the minimum viable
population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of
populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to
extinction. Based on imminent, high-magnitude threats we assigned the
Texas fawnsfoot an LPN of 2.
Texas hornshell (Popenaias popei)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files and information provided by the
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department. The Texas hornshell is a freshwater mussel found in the
Black River in New Mexico, and in the Rio Grande and the Devils River
in Texas. Until March 2008, the only known extant populations were in
New Mexico's Black River and one locality in the Rio Grande near
Laredo, Texas. In March 2008, two new localities were confirmed in
Texas: one in the Devils River, and one in the mainstem Rio Grande in
the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River segment downstream of Big Bend
National Park. In 2011, the Rio Grande population near Laredo was
resurveyed and found to be large and robust.
The primary threats to this species are habitat alterations such as
streambank channelization, impoundments, and diversions for agriculture
and flood control (including a proposed low-water
[[Page 70024]]
diversion dam just downstream of the Rio Grande population near
Laredo); contamination of water by oil and gas activity; alterations in
the natural riverine hydrology; and increased sedimentation and flood
pulses from prolonged overgrazing and loss of native vegetation.
Although riverine habitats throughout the species' known occupied range
are under constant threat from these ongoing or potential activities,
numerous conservation actions to benefit the species are under way in
New Mexico, including the completion of a State recovery plan for the
species, and are beginning in Texas on the Big Bend reach of the Rio
Grande. Due to these ongoing conservation efforts, and because at least
one of the populations appears to be robust, the magnitude of the
threats is moderate. However, the threats to the species are ongoing
and remain imminent. Thus, we maintained an LPN of 8 for this species.
Golden orb (Quadrula aurea)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. The golden orb is a small, round-
shaped freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. Its shell is
smooth and unsculptured, except for concentric growth rings, and the
external coloration varies from yellow-brown, gold, or orangish-brown
to dark brown or black with some individuals having faint green rays.
The internal color is bluish-white. This species historically occurred
throughout the Nueces-Frio and Guadalupe-San Antonio River basins and
is now known from only nine locations in four rivers. The golden orb
has been eliminated from nearly the entire Nueces-Frio River basin.
Four of these populations appear to be stable and reproducing, and the
remaining five populations are small and isolated and show no evidence
of recruitment. It appears that the populations in the middle Guadalupe
and lower San Marcos Rivers are likely connected. The remaining extant
populations are highly fragmented and restricted to short reaches.
The golden orb is primarily threatened by habitat destruction and
modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows,
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels.
The species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the golden orb and its habitat
are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species
and its lack of mobility, these threats may be likely to result in the
extinction of the golden orb in the foreseeable future.
The threats are such that the golden orb warrants listing; the
threats are moderate in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation from
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the golden orb, but
several large populations remain, including one that was recently
discovered, suggesting that the threats are not high in magnitude.
These threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will increase
the frequency and magnitude of droughts. These threats are imminent
because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future.
Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will continue as
the human population continues to grow in central Texas. Several golden
orb populations may already be below the minimum viable population
requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of populations and
an increase in the species' vulnerability to extinction. Based on
imminent, moderate threats, we assigned the golden orb an LPN of 8.
Smooth pimpleback (Quadrula houstonensis)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. The smooth pimpleback is a
small, round-shaped freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas.
Its shell is moderately thick and inflated, and the external coloration
varies from tan to light brown, dark brown, and black with little to no
sculpturing. The internal color is silvery white. This species
historically occurred throughout the Colorado and Brazos River basins
and is now known from only nine locations. The smooth pimpleback has
been eliminated from nearly the entire Colorado River and all but one
of its tributaries, and has been limited to the central and lower
Brazos River drainage. Five of the populations are represented by no
more than a few individuals while six of the existing populations
appear to be relatively stable and recruiting, while the remaining
populations are small, isolated, and represented by only a few
individuals.
The smooth pimpleback is primarily threatened by habitat
destruction and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds,
thereby removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream
flows, and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater
mussels. The species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering,
sand and gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these
threats may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of
climate change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the
anticipated threat of nonnative species. Threats to the smooth
pimpleback and its habitat are not being adequately addressed through
existing regulatory mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of
this endemic species and its lack of mobility, these threats may be
likely to result in the extinction of the smooth pimpleback in the
foreseeable future.
The threats are such that the smooth pimpleback warrants listing;
the threats are moderate in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation
from impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the smooth
pimpleback, but several large populations remain, including one that
was recently discovered, suggesting that the threats are not high in
magnitude. These threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will
increase the frequency and magnitude of droughts. These threats are
imminent because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable
future. Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will
continue as the human population continues to grow in central Texas.
Several smooth pimpleback populations may already be below the minimum
viable population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number
of populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to
extinction. Based on imminent, moderate threats, we assigned the smooth
pimpleback an LPN of 8.
Texas pimpleback (Quadrula petrina)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. The Texas pimpleback is a large,
freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. Its shell is
generally smooth with the exception of growth lines and moderately
thick and inflated. The external coloration ranges from yellowish-tan
to dark brown with some individuals mottled or with dark green rays,
and, internally, the nacre is white and iridescent posteriorly. This
species historically occurred throughout the Colorado and Guadalupe-San
Antonio River basins, but is now known to only occur in four streams
within these basins. Only two populations appear large enough to be
stable, but evidence of recruitment is limited in the Concho River
population and is present in the
[[Page 70025]]
San Saba River population, which may be the only remaining recruiting
populations of Texas pimpleback. The remaining two populations are
represented by one or two individuals and are highly disjunct.
The Texas pimpleback is primarily threatened by habitat destruction
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows,
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels.
This species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the Texas pimpleback and its
habitat are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species
and its lack of mobility, these threats may be likely to result in the
extinction of the Texas pimpleback in the foreseeable future.
The threats are such that the Texas pimpleback warrants listing;
the threats are high in magnitude because habitat loss and degradation
from impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas
pimpleback and profoundly affect its survival and recruitment.
Remaining populations are small, isolated, and highly vulnerable to
stochastic events, which could lead to extirpation or extinction. These
threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will increase the
frequency and magnitude of droughts. We consider these threats to be
imminent because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable
future. Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will
continue as the human population continues to grow in central Texas.
Texas pimpleback populations may already be below the minimum viable
population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of
populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to
extinction. Based on imminent, high-magnitude threats, we assigned the
Texas pimpleback an LPN of 2.
Snails
Black mudalia (Elimia melanoides)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided
in the petition we received on April 20, 2010. The black mudalia is a
small snail that is found clinging to clean gravel, cobble, boulders,
and logs in flowing water on shoals and riffles. The historical
distribution of the black mudalia encompassed over 250 mi of stream
channel in the upper Black Warrior River drainage in Alabama. The
species has been extirpated from more than 80 percent of that range by
the construction of two major dams on the main stem Black Warrior River
and another dam on the lower Sipsey Fork. Other historical causes of
range curtailment in the un-dammed river and stream channels of the
upper Black Warrior River drainage include coal mine drainage,
industrial and municipal pollution events, and agricultural runoff. The
black mudalia is currently known from 10 shoal populations in five
streams.
Water quality and habitat degradation are the biggest threats to
the continued existence of the black mudalia. Sources of point and
nonpoint pollution in the Black Warrior River Basin have been numerous
and widespread. Pollution is generated from inadequately treated
effluent from industrial plants, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment
plants, poultry operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface mining
represents another threat to the biological integrity of stream
habitats. Runoff from old, abandoned coal mines generates pollution
through acidification, increased mineralization, and sediment loading.
Most of the stream segments draining into black mudalia habitat
currently support their water quality classification standards;
however, the reach of the Locust Fork where the species is found is
identified on the Alabama 303(d) List (a list of water bodies failing
to meet their designated water-use classifications) as impaired by
siltation, nutrients, and/or other habitat alterations. Overall the
magnitude of threats is moderate. While all known populations are
currently negatively affected by point or nonpoint source pollution,
the discovery of surviving populations in shoals of five streams in the
upper Black Warrior River reduces the magnitude of stochastic threats.
Additional surveys that are currently underway will clarify the extent
and status of black mudalia populations. The threats are ongoing, and
therefore imminent. We assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
Magnificent ramshorn (Planorbella magnifica)--Planorbella
magnifica, or magnificent ramshorn, is the largest North American air-
breathing freshwater snail in the family Planorbidae. The magnificent
ramshorn is believed to be a southeastern North Carolina endemic,
though the complete historical range of the species is unknown. The
species is known from only four sites in the lower Cape Fear River
Basin in North Carolina. Salinity and pH are major factors limiting the
distribution of the magnificent ramshorn, as the snail prefers
freshwater bodies with pH within the range of 6.8 to 7.5.
While several factors have likely contributed to the possible
extirpation of the magnificent ramshorn in the wild, the primary
factors include loss of habitat associated with the extirpation of
beavers (and their impoundments) in the early 20th century, increased
salinity and alteration of flow patterns, and increased input of
nutrients and other pollutants. While efforts have been made to restore
habitat for the magnificent ramshorn at one of the sites known to have
previously supported the species, all of the sites continue to be
affected or threatened by the same factors believed to have resulted in
extirpation of the species from the wild. Currently, only two captive
populations exist: a single robust captive population of the species
comprised of approximately 100 adults, and a second small population of
35 individuals. Although the robust captive population of the species
has been maintained since 1993, a single catastrophic event, such as a
severe storm, disease, or predator infestation, affecting this captive
population could result in the near extinction of the species. Thus,
the threats are high in magnitude and imminent, and we assigned this
species an LPN of 2.
Sisi snail (Ostodes strigatus)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The sisi snail is a ground-
dwelling species in the Potaridae family, and is endemic to American
Samoa. The species is now known from a single population on the island
of Tutuila, American Samoa.
This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails. The
decline of the sisi snail in American Samoa has resulted, in part, from
loss of habitat to forestry and agriculture and loss of forest
structure to hurricanes and nonnative weeds that establish after these
storms. All live sisi snails have been found in the leaf litter beneath
remaining intact forest canopy. No snails were found in areas bordering
agricultural plots or in forested areas that were severely damaged by
three hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). Under natural historical
conditions, loss
[[Page 70026]]
of forest canopy to storms did not pose a great threat to the long-term
survival of these snails; enough intact forest with healthy populations
of snails would support dispersal back into newly regrown forest
canopy. However, the presence of nonnative weeds such as mile-a-minute
vine (Mikania micrantha) may reduce the likelihood that native forests
will re-establish in areas damaged by the hurricanes. This loss of
habitat to storms is greatly exacerbated by expanding agriculture.
Agricultural plots on Tutuila have spread from low elevation up to
middle and some high elevations, greatly reducing the forested area and
thus reducing the resilience of native forests and populations of
native snails. These reductions also increase the likelihood that
future storms will lead to the extinction of populations or species
that rely on the remaining forest canopy. In an effort to eradicate the
giant African snail (Achatina fulica), the nonnative rosy carnivore
snail (Euglandina rosea) was introduced in 1980. The rosy carnivore
snail has spread throughout the main island of Tutuila. Numerous
studies show that the rosy carnivore snail feeds on endemic island
snails including the sisi, and is a major agent in their declines and
extirpations. At present, the major threat to long-term survival of the
native snail fauna in American Samoa is predation by nonnative
predatory snails. These threats are ongoing and are therefore imminent.
As the threats occur throughout the entire range of the species and
have a severe effect on the survival of the snails, they are of a high
magnitude. Therefore we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Rosemont talussnail (Sonorella rosemontensis)--We continue to find
that listing these species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Fragile tree snail (Samoana fragilis)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling
species, the fragile tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of
snails, and is endemic to the islands of Guam and Rota (Mariana
Islands). Requiring cool and shaded native forest habitat, the species
is now known from one population on Guam and from one population on
Rota.
The fragile tree snail is currently threatened by habitat loss and
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails and
flatworms. Large numbers of Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus) (Guam
and Rota), pigs (Sus scrofa) (Guam), water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)
(Guam), and cattle (Bos taurus) (Rota) directly alter the understory
plant community and overall forest microclimate, making it unsuitable
for tree snails. Predation by the nonnative rosy carnivore snail
(Euglandina rosea) and the Manokwar flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is
a serious threat to the survival of the fragile tree snail. Field
observations have established that the rosy carnivore snail and the
Manokwar flatworm will readily feed on native Pacific island tree
snails, including the Partulidae, such as those of the Mariana Islands.
The rosy carnivore snail has caused the extirpation of many populations
and species of native snails throughout the Pacific islands. The
Manokwar flatworm has also contributed to the decline of native tree
snails, in part due to its ability to ascend into trees and bushes that
support native snails. Areas with populations of the flatworm usually
lack partulid tree snails or have declining numbers of snails. Because
all of the threats occur rangewide and have a significant effect on the
survival of the fragile tree snail, they are high in magnitude, and the
species has a relatively high likelihood of extinction. The threats are
also ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species
an LPN of 2.
Guam tree snail (Partula radiolata)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling species,
the Guam tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails and
is endemic to the island of Guam. Requiring cool and shaded native
forest habitat, the species is now known from 22 populations on Guam.
This species is primarily threatened by predation from nonnative
predatory snails, flatworms, and rats. In addition, the species is also
threatened by habitat loss and degradation. Predation by the nonnative
rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea) and the nonnative Manokwar
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is a serious threat to the survival of
the Guam tree snail (see summary for the fragile tree snail, above). In
addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious and ongoing
threat to the Guam tree snail. On Guam, open agricultural fields and
other areas prone to erosion were seeded with tangantangan (Leucaena
leucocephala) by the U.S. Military. Tangantangan grows as a single
species stand with no substantial understory. The microclimatic
condition is dry with little accumulation of leaf litter humus and is
unsuitable as Guam tree snail habitat. In addition, native forests
cannot reestablish and grow where this nonnative weed has become
established. Because all of the threats occur rangewide and have a
significant effect on the survival of this snail species, they are high
in magnitude, and the species has a relatively high likelihood of
extinction. The threats are also ongoing and thus are imminent.
Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Humped tree snail (Partula gibba)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling species,
the humped tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails,
and was originally known from the island of Guam and the Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands (islands of Rota, Aguiguan, Tinian,
Saipan, Anatahan, Sarigan, Alamagan, and Pagan). Until recently, the
species was known from a total of 14 populations on the islands of
Guam, Rota, Aguiguan, Sarigan, Saipan, Alamagan, and Pagan. However,
new (2011) information indicates that P. gibba may be found only on the
islands of Guam, Saipan, Sarigan, and Pagan. This information also
suggests that the individuals identified as P. gibba on Rota may be a
different species. Although still the most widely distributed tree
snail endemic in the Mariana Islands, remaining population sizes are
often small.
This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails, flat
worms, and rats. Throughout the Mariana Islands, feral ungulates (pigs
(Sus scrofa), Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus), cattle (Bos taurus),
water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), and goats (Capra hircus)) have caused
severe damage to native forest vegetation by browsing directly on
plants, causing erosion, and retarding forest growth and regeneration.
This in turn reduces the quantity and quality of forested habitat for
the humped tree snail. Currently, populations of feral ungulates are
found on the islands of Guam (deer, pigs, and water buffalo), Rota
(deer and cattle), Aguiguan (goats), Saipan (deer, pigs, and cattle),
Alamagan (goats, pigs, and
[[Page 70027]]
cattle), and Pagan (cattle, goats, and pigs). Goats were eradicated
from Sarigan in 1998, and the humped tree snail has increased in
abundance on that island, likely in response to the removal of all the
goats. However, the population of humped tree snails on Anatahan is
likely extirpated due to the massive volcanic explosions of the island
beginning in 2003 and still continuing, and the resulting loss of up to
95 percent of the vegetation on the island. Predation by the nonnative
rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea), and the nonnative Manokwar
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is a serious threat to the survival of
the humped tree snail (see summary for the fragile tree snail, above).
In addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious and ongoing
threat to the humped tree snail. The magnitude of threats is high
because these nonnative predators cause significant population declines
to the humped tree snail rangewide. These threats are ongoing and thus
are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Langford's tree snail (Partula langfordi)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling
species, Langford's tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of
snails, and is known from one population on the island of Aguiguan.
This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails. In the
1930s, the island of Aguiguan was mostly cleared of native forests to
support sugar cane and pineapple production. The abandoned fields and
airstrip are now overgrown with nonnative weeds. The remaining native
forest understory has greatly suffered from large and uncontrolled
populations of alien goats and the invasion of weeds. Goats (Capra
hircus) have caused severe damage to native forest vegetation by
browsing directly on plants, causing erosion, and retarding forest
growth and regeneration. This, in turn, reduces the quantity and
quality of forested habitat for Langford's tree snail. Predation by the
nonnative rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea) and by the Manokwar
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) (see summary for the fragile tree
snail, above) is also a serious threat to the survival of Langford's
tree snail. In addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious
and ongoing threat to Langford's tree snail. All of the threats are
occurring rangewide, and no efforts to control or eradicate the
nonnative predatory snail species or rats, or to reduce habitat loss,
are being undertaken. The magnitude of threats is high because they
result in direct mortality and significant population declines to
Langford's tree snail rangewide. A survey of Aguiguan in November 2006
failed to find any live Langford's tree snails. These threats are also
ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species an
LPN of 2.
Tutuila tree snail (Eua zebrina)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling species, the
Tutuila tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails, and
is endemic to American Samoa. The species is known from 32 populations
on the islands of Tutuila, Nuusetoga, and Ofu.
This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails and rats.
All live Tutuila tree snails were found on understory vegetation
beneath remaining intact forest canopy. No snails were found in areas
bordering agricultural plots or in forested areas that were severely
damaged by three hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). (See summary for
the sisi snail, above, regarding impacts of nonnative weeds and of the
rosy carnivore snail.) Rats (Rattus spp.) have also been shown to
devastate snail populations, and rat-chewed snail shells have been
found at sites where the Tutuila snail occurs. At present, the major
threat to the long-term survival of the native snail fauna in American
Samoa is predation by nonnative predatory snails and rats. The
magnitude of threats is high because they result in direct mortality
and significant population declines to the Tutuila tree snail
rangewide. The threats are also ongoing and thus are imminent.
Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Huachuca springsnail (Pyrgulopsis thompsoni)--The following is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Huachuca
springsnail inhabits approximately 19 springs in southeastern Arizona
and two springs in Sonora, Mexico. The springsnail is typically found
in shallow water habitats, often in rocky seeps at the spring source.
Potential threats include habitat modification and destruction through
catastrophic wildfire and unmanaged grazing at the landscape scale.
Overall, the threats are low in magnitude because threats are not
occurring throughout the range of the species uniformly and not all
populations would likely be affected simultaneously by the known
threats. We have no site-specific information indicating that grazing
is currently ongoing in or adjacent to occupied habitats and
catastrophic wildfire is not known to be an imminent threat.
Accordingly, threats are nonimminent. Therefore, we retain an LPN of 11
for this species.
Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--See above in ``Listing
Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based on
information contained in our files.
Insects
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus anthracinus)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the
petition that we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus
anthracinus is a species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family
Colletidae) found in certain coastal areas and dry lowland forests
containing native plant communities on the islands of Hawaii,
Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. Hylaeus anthracinus is
currently known from 13 populations comprised of an unknown number of
individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and
modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants,
wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus anthracinus is directly
threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several species of
nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species include the
limited number of and small size of populations, competition from
European honey bees, the possibility of habitat destruction from
stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms
affording protection to the species.
Some Hylaeus anthracinus populations occur in areas that are
managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no
population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation
on the species is not currently managed at any population site. We
consider the threats to H. anthracinus to be high in magnitude because
their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. anthracinus
are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned
this species an LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus assimulans)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the
petition that we received
[[Page 70028]]
for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus assimulans is a species of
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in certain coastal
areas and dry lowland forests containing native plant communities on
the islands of Hawaii, Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu.
Hylaeus assimulans is currently known from 13 populations comprised of
an unknown number of individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing
habitat loss and modification due to the effects of feral ungulates,
nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus assimulans is
directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several
species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species
include the limited number of and small size of populations,
competition from European honey bees, the possibility of habitat
destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of
regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
Some Hylaeus assimulans populations occur in areas that are managed
for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no population
is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the
species is not currently managed at any population site. We consider
the threats to H. assimulans to be high in magnitude because their
severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of extinction
throughout its entire range. The threats to H. assimulans are imminent,
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this species an
LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus facilis)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus facilis is a
species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) with a wide
historical range of native plant community habitat including coastal
areas, lowland dry and wet forests, and montane mesic forests on the
islands of Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. Now extirpated from the
islands of Lanai and Maui, H. facilis is currently known from two
populations comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This species
is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to the
effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate
change. Hylaeus facilis is directly threatened by predation from
yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional
indirect threats to the species include the limited number of and small
size of populations, competition from European honey bees, the
possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic
events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the
species.
Both of the Hylaeus facilis populations occur in areas that are
managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no
population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation
upon the species is not currently managed within any population site.
We consider the threats to H. facilis to be high in magnitude because
their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. facilis are
imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this
species an LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus hilaris)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus hilaris is a
cleptoparasitic species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family
Colletidae) with a historical range in coastal habitat on the islands
of Lanai, Maui, and Molokai. Now extirpated from the islands of Lanai
and Maui, H. hilaris is currently known from a single population on
Molokai comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This species is
threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to the effects
of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change.
Hylaeus hilaris is directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket
wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect
threats to the species include the limited number of and small size of
its population, competition from European honey bees, the possibility
of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a
lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
The Hylaeus hilaris population occurs within a private preserve
that is managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat;
however the population is not entirely protected from impacts to
habitat, and predation upon the species is not currently managed at
all. We consider the threats to H. hilaris to be high in magnitude
because their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. hilaris are
imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this
species an LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus kuakea)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus kuakea is a
species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in
lowland mesic forests on the island of Oahu. Hylaeus kuakea is
currently known from two populations comprised of an unknown number of
individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and
modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants,
wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus kuakea is directly threatened by
predation from yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative
ants. Additional indirect threats to the species include the limited
number of and small size of populations, competition from European
honey bees, the possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and
catastrophic events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording
protection to the species.
Both Hylaeus kuakea populations occur in areas that are managed for
one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no population is
entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the
species is not currently managed within either population site. We
consider the threats to H. kuakea to be high in magnitude because their
severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of extinction
throughout its entire range. The threats to H. kuakea are imminent,
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this species an
LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus longiceps)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the
petition that we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus
longiceps is a species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae)
found in certain coastal areas and dry lowland forest containing native
plant communities on the islands of Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu.
Hylaeus longiceps is currently known from six populations comprised of
an unknown number of individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing
habitat loss and modification due to the effects of feral ungulates,
nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus longiceps is
directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several
species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species
include the limited number of and small size of populations,
competition from European honey bees, the possibility of habitat
destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of
regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
Some Hylaeus longiceps populations occur in areas that are managed
for one or more of the threats affecting habitat;
[[Page 70029]]
however no population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat,
and predation on the species is not currently managed within any
population site. We consider the threats to H. longiceps to be high in
magnitude because their severity endangers the species with a high
likelihood of extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H.
longiceps are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have
assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus mana)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and in the petition that we
received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus mana is a species
of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in lowland mesic
forests on the island of Oahu. Hylaeus mana is currently known from a
single population comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This
species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to
the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate
change. Hylaeus mana is directly threatened by predation from
yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional
indirect threats to the species include the limited number of and small
size of populations, competition from European honey bees, the
possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic
events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the
species.
The Hylaeus mana population occurs in an area that is managed for
one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however the population is
not entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the
species is not currently managed at all. We consider the threats to H.
mana to be high in magnitude because their severity endangers the
species with a high likelihood of extinction throughout its entire
range. The threats to H. mana are imminent, because they are ongoing.
Therefore, we have assigned this species an LPN of 2.
Hermes copper butterfly (Hermelycaena [Lycaena] hermes)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files.
Hermes copper butterfly primarily occurs in San Diego County,
California, and a few records of the species have been documented in
Baja California, Mexico. The species inhabits coastal sage scrub and
southern mixed chaparral and is dependent on its larval host plant,
Rhamnus crocea (spiny redberry), to complete its lifecycle. Adult
Hermes copper butterflies lay single eggs on spiny redberry stems where
they hatch and feed until pupation occurs at the base of the plant.
Hermes copper butterflies have one flight period occurring in mid-May
to early-July, depending on weather conditions and elevation. We
estimate there were at least 57 known separate historical populations
throughout the species' range since the species was first described. Of
the 57 known Hermes copper butterfly populations, 17 are extant, 28 are
believed to have been extirpated, and 12 are of unknown status.
Primary threats to the Hermes copper butterfly are megafires (large
wildfires), and small and isolated populations. Secondary threats
include increased wildfire frequency that results in habitat loss, and
combined impacts of existing development, possible future (limited)
development, existing dispersal barriers, and megafires that result in
fragmentation of habitat. The Hermes copper butterfly occupies
scattered areas of sage scrub and chaparral habitat in an arid region
susceptible to wildfires of increasing frequency and size. The
likelihood that individuals of the species will be burned as a result
of catastrophic wildfires, combined with the isolation and small size
of extant populations makes the Hermes copper butterfly particularly
vulnerable to population extirpation rangewide. Overall, the threats
that the Hermes copper butterfly faces are high in magnitude because
the major threats (particularly mortality due to wildfire and increased
wildfire frequency) occur throughout all of the species' range and are
likely to result in adverse impacts to the species. The threats are
nonimminent overall because the presence of wildfire in the Hermes
copper butterfly habitat occurs on a sporadic basis and we do not have
the ability to predict when wildfires will occur. This species faces
high-magnitude nonimminent threats; therefore, we assigned this species
an LPN of 5.
Mariana eight spot butterfly (Hypolimnas octucula mariannensis)--
The following summary is based on information contained in our files.
No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The Mariana eight spot butterfly is a nymphalid butterfly species
that feeds upon two host plants, Procris pedunculata and Elatostema
calcareum. Endemic to the islands of Guam and Saipan, the species is
now only known from 10 populations on Guam. This species is currently
threatened by predation and parasitism. The Mariana eight spot
butterfly has extremely high mortality of eggs and larvae due to
predation by nonnative ants and wasps. Because the threat of parasitism
and predation by nonnative insects occurs rangewide and can cause
significant population declines to this species, they are high in
magnitude. The threats are imminent because they are ongoing.
Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 3 for this subspecies.
Mariana wandering butterfly (Vagrans egistina)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
The Mariana wandering butterfly is a nymphalid butterfly species that
feeds upon a single host plant species, Maytenus thompsonii. Originally
known from and endemic to the islands of Guam and Rota, the species is
now known from one population on Rota. This species is currently
threatened by nonnative predation and parasitism. The Mariana wandering
butterfly is likely predated by nonnative ants and parasitized by
native and nonnative parasitoids. Because the threats of parasitism and
predation by nonnative insects occur rangewide and can cause
significant population declines to this species, leading to a
relatively high likelihood of extinction, they are high in magnitude.
These threats are imminent because they are ongoing. Therefore, we
assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.
Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly (Atlantea tulita)--The following
summary is based on information in our files and in the petition we
received on Feburary 29, 2009. The Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly is
endemic to Puerto Rico, and one of the four species endemic to the
Greater Antilles within the genus Atlantea. This species occurs within
the subtropical moist forest life zone in the northern karst region
(i.e., municipality of Quebradillas) of Puerto Rico, and in the
subtropical wet forest (i.e., Maricao Commonwealth Forest, municipality
of Maricao). The Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly has only been found
utilizing Oplonia spinosa (prickly bush) as its host plant (i.e., plant
used for laying the eggs, also serves as a food source for development
of the larvae).
The primary threats to the Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly are
development, habitat fragmentation, and other natural or manmade
factors such as human-induced fires, use of herbicides and pesticides,
vegetation management, and climate change. These factors would
substantially affect the distribution and abundance of the species, as
well as its habitat. In addition, the lack of effective enforcement
makes the existing policies and regulations inadequate for the
protection of the species' habitat. These threats are high in magnitude
and
[[Page 70030]]
imminent because known populations occur in areas that are subject to
development, increased traffic, and increased road maintenance and
construction. Such threats directly affect populations during all life
stages. We expect these threats to continue and potentially increase in
the foreseeable future. Therefore, we assigned a LPN of 2 to this
species.
Sequatchie caddisfly (Glyphopsyche sequatchie)--The following
summary is based on information in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The Sequatchie
caddisfly is known from two spring runs that emerge from caves in
Marion County, Tennessee--Owen Spring Branch (the type locality) and
Martin Spring run in the Battle Creek system. In 1998, biologists
estimated population sizes at 500 to 5,000 individuals for Owen Spring
Branch and 2 to 10 times higher at Martin Spring, due to the greater
amount of apparently suitable habitat. In spite of greater amounts of
suitable habitat at the Martin Spring run, Sequatchie caddisflies are
more difficult to find at this site, and in 2001 (the most recent
survey), the Sequatchie caddisfly was ``abundant'' at the Owen Spring
Branch location, while only two individuals were observed at the Martin
Spring.
Threats to the Sequatchie caddisfly include siltation, point and
nonpoint discharges from municipal and industrial activities, and
introduction of toxicants during episodic events. These threats,
coupled with the extremely limited distribution of the species, its
apparent small population size, the limited amount of occupied habitat,
ease of accessibility, and the annual life cycle of the species, are
all factors that leave the Sequatchie caddisfly vulnerable to
extirpation. Therefore, the magnitude of the threat is high. These
threats are gradual and not imminent. Based on high-magnitude and
nonimminent threats, we assigned this species an LPN of 5.
Clifton Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus caecus)--The following
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Clifton Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory
insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is cave dependent,
and is not found outside the cave environment. Clifton Cave beetle is
only known from two privately owned Kentucky caves. Soon after the
species was first collected in 1963 in one cave, the cave entrance was
enclosed due to road construction. We do not know whether the species
still occurs at the original location or if it has been extirpated from
the site by the closure of the cave entrance. Other caves in the
vicinity of this cave were surveyed for the species during 1995 and
1996, and only one additional site was found to support the Clifton
Cave beetle. The limestone caves in which the Clifton Cave beetle is
found provide a unique and fragile environment that supports a variety
of species that have evolved to survive and reproduce under the
demanding conditions found in cave ecosystems. The limited distribution
of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that would only
have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. Events such as
toxic chemical spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water,
or indirect impacts from off-site construction activities, closure of
entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances,
could have serious adverse impacts on this species. Therefore, the
magnitude of threat is high for this species. The threats are
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an
LPN of 5 to this species.
Coleman cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus colemanensis)--The following
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on April 20, 2010.
The Coleman cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory
insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is cave dependent
and is not found outside the cave environment. It is only known from
three Tennessee caves. The limestone caves in which this species is
found provide a unique and fragile environment that support a variety
of species that have evolved to survive and reproduce under the
demanding conditions found in cave ecosystems. Caves and the species
that are completely dependent upon them receive the energy that forms
the basis of the cave food chain from outside the cave. This energy can
be in the form of bat guano deposited by cave-dependent bats, large or
small woody debris washed or blown into the cave, or tiny bits of
organic matter that are carried into the cave by water through small
cracks in the rocks overlaying the cave.
The Coleman cave beetle was originally known only from privately
owned Coleman Cave in Montgomery County. This cave formerly supported a
colony of endangered gray bats (Myotis grisescens). The bats have
abandoned this cave because of air flow changes in the cave caused by
closure of an upper entrance to the cave. Although the cave is
protected by a cooperative management agreement with the landowner, the
upper entrance has not been restored, and the bats have not returned to
the cave. A new location for the species was discovered during a
biological inventory of Foster Cave (also known as Darnell Cave). One
specimen of the species was found during that survey. Foster Cave is on
a preserve owned and managed by the Tennessee Department of
Conservation. In 2006, specimens of this species were discovered in
Bellamy Cave and in Darnell Spring Cave (part of the same cave complex
as Foster Cave). All of these sites are in close proximity to each
other. Bellamy Cave is owned and managed by the Tennessee Wildlife
Resources Agency (TWRA). Both Foster Cave and Bellamy Cave were first
acquired and protected by The Nature Conservancy and later transferred
to the State for long-term protection and management. The threats are
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would
affect the species in the next few years. Because the species occurs at
four locations and receives some protection under a cooperative
management agreement and protective ownership, the magnitude of threats
is moderate to low. Thus, we have assigned an LPN of 11 to this
species.
Icebox Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus frigidus)--The following
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Icebox Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory insect
that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is not found outside the
cave environment and is only known from one privately owned Kentucky
cave.
The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found
in cave ecosystems. The species has not been observed since it was
originally collected, but species experts believe that it may still
exist in the cave in low numbers. The limited distribution of the
species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a
minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. Events such as toxic
chemical spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water, or
indirect impacts from off-site construction activities, closure of
entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances,
could have serious adverse impacts on this species.
[[Page 70031]]
Therefore, the magnitude of threat is high for this species because it
is limited in distribution and the threats would result in a high level
of mortality or reduced reproductive capacity. The threats are
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an
LPN of 5 to this species.
Inquirer Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus inquisitor)--The following
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
The Inquirer Cave beetle is a fairly small, eyeless, reddish-brown,
predatory insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is not
found outside the cave environment and is only known from one privately
owned Tennessee cave.
The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found
in cave ecosystems. The species was last observed in 2006. The limited
distribution of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that
would only have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. The area
around the only known site for the species is in a rapidly expanding
urban area. The entrance to the cave is protected by the landowner
through a cooperative management agreement with the Service, The Nature
Conservancy and Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency; however, a
sinkhole that drains into the cave system is located away from the
protected entrance and is near a highway. Events such as toxic chemical
spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water or indirect
impacts from off-site construction activities could adversely affect
the species and the cave habitat. The magnitude of threat is high for
this species because it is limited in distribution and the threats
would have severe negative impacts on its continued existence. The
threats are nonimminent because there are no known projects planned
that would affect the species in the near future and it receives some
protection under a cooperative management agreement. We therefore have
assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
Louisville Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus troglodytes)--The
following summary is based upon information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The Louisville Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown,
predatory insect that feeds upon cave invertebrates. It is not found
outside the cave environment and is only known from two privately owned
Kentucky caves.
The limestone caves in which this species is found provide a unique
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found
in cave ecosystems. The limited distribution of the species makes it
vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a minimal effect on
more wide-ranging insects. Events such as toxic chemical spills or
discharges of large amounts of polluted water, or indirect impacts from
off-site construction activities, closure of entrances, alteration of
entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have serious adverse
impacts on this species. The magnitude of threat is high for this
species, because it is limited in distribution and the threats would
have severe negative impacts on the species. The threats are
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an
LPN of 5 to this species.
Tatum Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus parvus)--The following summary
is based upon information contained in our files. No new information
was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Tatum Cave
beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory insect that feeds
upon cave invertebrates. It is not found outside the cave environment
and is only known from one privately owned Kentucky cave.
The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found
in cave ecosystems. The species has not been observed since 1965, but
species experts believe that it still exists in low numbers. The
limited distribution of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated
events that would only have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging
insects. Events such as toxic chemical spills or discharges of large
amounts of polluted water, or indirect impacts from off-site
construction activities, closure of entrances, alteration of entrances,
or the creation of new entrances, could have serious adverse impacts on
this species. The magnitude of threat is high for this species, because
its limited numbers mean that any threats could severely affect its
continued existence. The threats are nonimminent because there are no
known projects planned that would affect the species in the near
future. We therefore have assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
Orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly (Megalagrion xanthomelas)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly is a stream-dwelling species
endemic to the Hawaiian Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, Lanai,
and Hawaii. The species no longer is found on Kauai, and is now
restricted to 16 populations on the islands of Oahu, Maui, Molokai,
Lanai, and Hawaii. This species is threatened by predation from
nonnative aquatic species such as fish and predacious insects, and by
habitat loss through dewatering of streams and invasion by nonnative
plants. Nonnative fish and insects prey on the naiads of the damselfly,
and loss of water reduces the amount of suitable naiad habitat.
Invasive plants (e.g., California grass (Brachiaria mutica)) also
contribute to loss of habitat by forming dense, monotypic stands that
completely eliminate open water. Nonnative fish and plants are found in
all the streams where orangeblack Hawaiian damselflies occur, except at
the Oahu location, where there are no nonnative fish. Predation and
habitat loss are ongoing and therefore imminent; they are of moderate
magnitude, because they affect the survival of the species to varying
degrees throughout the species' range. We therefore assign an LPN of 8
to this species.
Stephan's riffle beetle (Heterelmis stephani)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae)--We continue to find that listing
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk
to the species.
Meltwater lednian stonefly (Lednia tumana)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition we
received on July 30, 2007. This species is an aquatic insect in the
order Plecoptera (stoneflies). Stoneflies are primarily
[[Page 70032]]
associated with clean, cool streams and rivers. Eggs and nymphs
(juveniles) of the meltwater lednian stonefly are found in high-
elevation, alpine, and subalpine streams, most typically in locations
closely linked to glacial runoff. The species is generally restricted
to streams with mean summer water temperature less than 10 [deg]C (50
[deg]F). Adults emerge from the nymph stage and mate in streamside
vegetation. The only known meltwater lednian stonefly occurrences are
within Glacier National Park (NP), Montana.
Climate change, and the associated effects of glacier loss (with
glaciers predicted to be gone by 2030)--including reduced streamflows,
and increased water temperatures--are expected to significantly reduce
the occurrence of populations and extent of suitable habitat for the
species in Glacier NP. In addition, the existing regulatory mechanisms
do not address environmental changes due to global climate change. We
announced candidate status for the meltwater lednian stonefly in a
warranted-but precluded 12-month petition finding published on April 5,
2011 (76 FR 18684). We have assigned the species an LPN of 5 based on
three criteria: (1) The high magnitude of threat, which is projected to
substantially reduce the amount of suitable habitat relative to the
species' current range; (2) the low imminence of the threat based on
the lack of documented evidence that climate change is affecting
stonefly habitat; and (3) the taxonomic status of the species, which is
a full species.
Highlands tiger beetle (Cicindela highlandensis)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
The Highlands tiger beetle is narrowly distributed and restricted to
areas of bare sand within scrub and sandhill on ancient sand dunes of
the Lake Wales Ridge in Polk and Highlands Counties, Florida. Adult
tiger beetles have been most recently found at 40 sites at the core of
the Lake Wales Ridge. In 2004-2005 surveys, a total of 1,574 adults
were found at 40 sites, compared with 643 adults at 31 sites in 1996,
928 adults at 31 sites in 1995, and 742 adults at 21 sites in 1993. Of
the 40 sites in the 2004-2005 surveys with one or more adults, results
ranged from 3 sites with large populations of over 100 adults, to 13
sites with fewer than 10 adults. Results from a limited removal study
at four sites and similar studies suggested that the actual population
size at some survey sites can be as much as two times as high as
indicated by the visual index counts. If assumptions are correct and
unsurveyed habitat is included, then the total number of adults at all
survey sites might be 3,000 to 4,000.
Habitat loss and fragmentation and lack of fire and disturbances to
create open habitat conditions are serious threats; remaining patches
of suitable habitat are disjunct and isolated. Populations occupy
relatively small patches of habitat and are small and isolated;
individuals have difficulty dispersing between suitable habitats. These
factors pose serious threats to the species. Although significant
progress in implementing prescribed fire has occurred over the last 10
years through collaborative partnerships and the Lake Wales Ridge
Prescribed Fire Team, a backlog of long-unburned habitat within
conservation areas remains. Overcollection and pesticide use are
additional concerns. Because this species is narrowly distributed with
specific habitat requirements and small populations, any of the threats
could have a significant impact on the survival of the species, leading
to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, the magnitude
of threats is high. Although the majority of its historical range has
been lost, degraded, and fragmented, numerous sites are protected, and
land managers are implementing prescribed fire at some sites; these
actions are expected to restore habitat and help reduce threats and
have already helped stabilize and improve the populations. Habitat
management at some sites may be forestalling the threat of vegetation
encroaching into bare sand areas needed by the beetle. While the
species is inherently vulnerable to extinction due to its low
population sizes, restricted range, small and isolated habitat patches,
and difficulty in dispersal between suitable habitats, the immediacy of
these threats is unknown. Thus, overall, the threats are nonimminent.
Therefore, we assigned the Highlands tiger beetle an LPN of 5.
Arachnids
Warton's cave meshweaver (Cicurina wartoni)--The Warton's Cave
meshweaver is an eyeless, cave-dwelling, unpigmented, 0.23-inch-long
invertebrate known only from female specimens. This meshweaver is known
to occur in only one cave (Pickle Pit) in Travis County, Texas. Primary
threats to the species and its habitat are predation and competition
from red-imported fire ants, surface and subsurface effects from
polluted runoff from an adjacent subdivision, unauthorized entry into
the area surrounding the cave, and trash dumping that may include toxic
materials near the feature. The magnitude of threats is now considered
low to moderate based on observations made during field visits to
Pickle Pit in November 2011 and March 2012. For example, Pickle Pit is
receiving some protection because it is in a mitigation preserve for
the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia). While adequate
fencing has not been completed, we did not see trails or other signs of
recent human use in the immediate vicinity of the cave. Also, despite
the fact that this preserve is not receiving red-imported fire ant
treatment, we did not see many red-imported fire ants in the immediate
area. Because fire ants have been found and fencing to eliminate human
use has not been completed, the threats are ongoing (imminent). Thus,
we assigned this species a LPN of 8.
Crustaceans
Anchialine pool shrimp (Metabetaeus lohena)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Metabetaeus
lohena is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to
the family Alpheidae. This species was originally thought to be endemic
to the Hawaiian Islands with populations on the islands of Oahu, Maui,
and Hawaii. Recent information indicates this species may also occur in
Rapa Nui, a special territory of Chile. The current status of this
species in Rapa Nui and the primary threats there are unknown at this
time.
The primary threats to this species in Hawaii are predation by fish
(which do not naturally occur in the pools inhabited by this species)
and habitat loss from degradation (primarily from illegal trash
dumping). The pools where this species occurs on the islands of Maui
and Hawaii are located within State Natural Area Reserves (NAR) and in
a National Park. Both the State NARs and the National Park prohibit the
collection of the species and the disturbance of the pools. However,
enforcement of collection and disturbance prohibitions is difficult,
and the negative effects from the introduction of fish are extensive
and happen quickly. On Oahu, four pools are located in a National
Wildlife Refuge and are protected from collection and disturbance to
the pool; however, on State-owned land where the species occurs, there
is no protection from collection or disturbance of the pools. Because
of the limited number of sites where this species occurs, collection or
disturbance of the species, particularly
[[Page 70033]]
on State-owned lands, could have a significant adverse effect on the
survival of the species, leading to a relatively high likelihood of
extinction, and are of a high magnitude. However, the primary threats
of predation from fish and loss of habitat due to degradation are
nonimminent overall, because on the islands of Maui and Hawaii no fish
were observed in any of the pools where this species occurs and there
has been no documented trash dumping in these pools. Only one site on
Oahu had a trash dumping instance, and in that case the trash was
cleaned up immediately, and the species was subsequently observed. No
additional dumping events are known to have occurred. We have assigned
this species an LPN of 5. The Service is currently seeking any
additional information on the status of, and the threats to, the
population(s) of Metabetaeus lohena in any location outside of the
United States. The Service may consider removing this species as a
candidate for listing depending upon our review of new information
regarding the status and distribution of this species outside the
United States.
Anchialine pool shrimp (Palaemonella burnsi)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Palaemonella
burnsi is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to
the family Palaemonidae. This species was originally thought to be
endemic to the Hawaiian Islands with populations on the islands of Maui
at three sites and Hawaii in several pools at one site. Recent
information indicates this species may also occur in the Ryukyu
Islands, Japan. The current status of this species in the Ryukyu
Islands and the primary threats there are unknown at this time.
The primary threats to this species are predation by nonnative fish
(which do not naturally occur in the pools inhabited by this species)
and habitat loss due to degradation (primarily from illegal trash
dumping). The pools where this species occurs on Maui are located
within a State Natural Area Reserve (NAR). Hawaii's State statutes
prohibit the collection of the species and the disturbance of the pools
in State NARs. On the island of Hawaii, the species occurs within a
State NAR and a National Park, where collection and disturbance are
also prohibited. However, enforcement of these prohibitions is
difficult, and the negative effects from the introduction of fish are
extensive and happen quickly, in part because the pools are very small.
Therefore, threats to this species could have a significant adverse
effect on the survival of the species, leading to a relatively high
likelihood of extinction, and are of a high magnitude. However, the
threats are nonimminent, because surveys in 2004 and 2007 did not find
fish in the pools where these shrimp occur on Maui or the island of
Hawaii. Also, there was no evidence of recent habitat degradation at
those pools. We assigned this species an LPN of 5. The Service is
currently seeking any additional information on the status of, and the
threats to, the population(s) of Palaemonella burnsi in any location
outside of the United States. The Service may consider removing this
species as a candidate for listing depending upon our review of new
information regarding the status and distribution of this species
outside the United States.
Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris hawaiana)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Procaris hawaiana
is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to the
family Procarididae. This species is endemic to the Hawaiian Islands,
and is currently known from 2 pools on the island of Maui and 13 pools
on the island of Hawaii. The primary threats to this species are
predation from fish (which do not naturally occur in the pools
inhabited by this species) and habitat loss due to degradation
(primarily from illegal trash dumping). The pools where this species
occurs on Maui are located within a State Natural Area Reserve (NAR).
Hawaii's State statutes prohibit the collection of the species and the
disturbance of the pools in State NARs. Twelve of the pools on the
island of Hawaii are also located within a State NAR. However,
enforcement of these prohibitions is difficult, and the negative
effects from the introduction of fish are extensive and happen quickly.
In addition, there are no prohibitions for either removal of the
species or disturbance to the pool for the one pool located outside a
NAR on the island of Hawaii. Therefore, threats to this species could
have a significant adverse effect on the survival of the species,
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction, and thus remain
at a high magnitude. However, the threats to the species are
nonimminent because, during 2004 and 2007 surveys, no fish were
observed in the pools where these shrimp occur on Maui, and no fish
were observed in the one pool on the island of Hawaii that was surveyed
in 2005. In addition, there were no signs of trash dumping or fill in
any of the pools where the species occurs. Therefore, we assigned this
species an LPN of 5.
Flowering Plants
Abronia alpina (Ramshaw Meadows sand-verbena)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Abronia alpina is a small perennial herb in the Nyctaginaceae (four o-
clock) family, 2.5 to 15.2 cm (1 to 6 in) across, forming compact mats
of lavender-pink, trumpet-shaped, and generally fragrant flowers.
Abronia alpina is known from one main population center at Ramshaw
Meadow and a smaller population at the adjacent Templeton Meadow. The
meadows are located on the Kern River Plateau in the Sierra Nevada, on
lands administered by the Inyo National Forest, in Tulare County,
California. The total estimated area occupied is approximately 6 ha (15
ac). The population fluctuates from year to year without any clear
trends. Population estimates for the years from 1985 through 2009 range
from a high of approximately 130,000 plants in 1997, to a low of
approximately 40,000 plants in 2003. In 2009, when the population was
last monitored, the estimated total population increased again to just
over 120,000 plants. The factors currently threatening Abronia alpina
include natural and human habitat alteration, lowering of the water
table due to erosion within the meadow system, and recreational use
within meadow habitats. Lodgepole pines are encroaching upon meadow
habitat with trees germinating within A. alpina habitat, occupying up
to 20 percent of two A. alpina subpopulations. Lodgepole pine
encroachment may alter soil characteristics by increasing organic
matter levels, decreasing porosity, and moderating diurnal temperature
fluctuations, thus reducing the competitive ability of A. alpina to
persist in an environment more hospitable to other plant species.
The habitat occupied by Abronia alpina directly borders the meadow
system, which is supported by the South Fork of the Kern River. The
river flows through the meadow, at times coming within 15 m (50 ft) of
Abronia alpina habitat, particularly in the vicinity of five
subpopulations. Livestock trampling, along with the removal of bank
stabilizing vegetation by grazing livestock, has contributed to
downcutting of the river channel through the meadow, leaving the meadow
subject to potential alteration by lowering of the water table. In
2001,
[[Page 70034]]
the U.S. Forest Service began resting the grazing allotment for 10
years, eliminating cattle use up through the present time. The U.S.
Forest Service is currently assessing the data collected on the rested
allotment and, if the data indicate that sufficient watershed recovery
has occurred, may conduct an environmental analysis to consider
resumption of grazing.
Established hiker, packstock, and cattle trails pass through A.
alpina subpopulations. Two main hiker trails pass through Ramshaw
Meadow, but in 1988 and 1997, they were rerouted out of A. alpina
subpopulations where feasible. Occasional incidental use by horses and
hikers sometimes occurs on the remnants of cattle trails that pass
through subpopulations in several places The Service has funded studies
to determine appropriate conservation measures for the species, and is
working with the U.S. Forest Service on developing a conservation
strategy for the species. The remaining threat affects individuals in
the population and has not appeared to have population-level effects.
Therefore, the threats are low in magnitude. In addition, because the
grazing activities have been eliminated for the time being and the
hiking trails have been rerouted, the threats are nonimminent. The LPN
for A. alpina remains an 11 due to the presence of moderate to low
threats, and the determination that the threats are nonimminent at this
point in time.
Agave eggersiana (no common name)--Agave eggersiana, is an herb of
the family Agavaceae endemic to the island of St. Croix in the U.S.
Virgin Islands. Approximately 450 individuals in 10 localities are
known to exist around this island. The species currently occurs in six
areas that appear to be remnants of wild populations. The other four
populations are introduced individuals planted for conservation. The
primary threats to Agave eggersiana are from habitat modification and
from natural or manmade factors. The species occurs in areas either
threatened by development pressure, or currently affected by landscape
practices and competition with exotic species, resulting in detrimental
effects to its reproduction and recruitment. In addition, threats such
as commercial interest (e.g. use as an ornamental plant), possible
predation by insects or arthropod larvae, and the possibility of feral
animals predating the species, makes Agave eggersiana vulnerable. The
magnitude of the current threats is moderate because at least 450
adults and 260 bulbils are known to occur, with half of the populations
showing evidence of recruitment in the wild. In addition, three
populations are located in areas managed for conservation and public
outreach. The immediacy of the threats to the species as a whole is
imminent because the threats are occurring now within each population
on St. Croix. Additionally, we do not anticipate any changes that would
appreciably reduce these threats in the foreseeable future. Therefore
we have assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
Arabis georgiana (Georgia rockcress)--We continue to find that
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's silverbush)--The following
summary is based on information in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Blodgett's
silverbush occurs in Florida and is found in open, sunny areas in pine
rockland; at the edges of rockland hammock; at the edges of coastal
berm; and sometimes in disturbed areas at the edges of natural areas.
Plants can be found growing from crevices on limestone, or sand. The
pine-rockland habitat where the species occurs in Miami-Dade County and
the Florida Keys requires periodic fires to maintain habitat with a
minimum amount of hardwoods. There are approximately 22 extant
occurrences, 12 in Monroe County and 10 in Miami-Dade County; many
occurrences are on conservation lands. However, 4 to 5 sites are
recently thought to be extirpated. The estimated population size of
Blodgett's silverbush in the Florida Keys, excluding Big Pine Key, is
roughly 11,000; the estimated population in Miami-Dade County is 375 to
13,650 plants.
Blodgett's silverbush is threatened by habitat loss, which is
exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the
difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and threats
from exotic plants. Remaining habitats are fragmented. Threats such as
road maintenance and enhancement, infrastructure, and illegal dumping
threaten some occurrences. Blodgett's silverbush is vulnerable to
natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm
surges. Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term
threats that are expected to continue to affect pine rocklands and
ultimately substantially reduce the extent of available habitat,
especially in the Keys. Overall, the magnitude of threats is moderate
because a number of occurrences remain with relatively high population
levels, and not all of the occurrences are affected by the threats. In
addition, land managers are aware of the threats from exotic plants and
lack of fire, and are, to some extent, working to reduce these threats
where possible. While a number of threats are occurring in some areas,
the more significant threat from development is nonimminent because
most occurrences are on public land, and sea-level rise is not
currently affecting this species. Overall, the threats are nonimminent.
Thus, we assigned an LPN of 11 to this species.
Artemisia borealis var. wormskioldii (Northern wormwood)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. Historically known from eight sites, northern wormwood is
currently known from two populations, one in Klickitat County and one
in Grant County, Washington. This plant is restricted to exposed
basalt, cobbly-sandy terraces, and sand habitat along the shore of, and
on islands in, the Columbia River. The two populations are separated by
186 river miles (300 km) and three reservoirs (formed behind large
hydroelectric dams). Annual monitoring indicates both populations are
declining and both remain vulnerable to environmental variability.
Surveys have not detected any additional plants.
Threats to northern wormwood include direct loss of habitat through
regulation of water levels in the Columbia River and placement of
riprap along the river bank; human trampling of plants from recreation;
competition with nonnative, invasive species; burial by wind- and
water-borne sediments; small population sizes; susceptibility to
genetic drift and inbreeding; and the potential for hybridization with
two other species of Artemisia. Ongoing conservation actions have
reduced trampling, but have not eliminated or reduced the other threats
at the Grant County site. Active conservation measures are not
currently in place at the Miller Island site in Klickitat County. The
magnitude of threat is high for this subspecies. Although the two
remaining populations are demographically isolated, loss of habitat
through regulation of water levels, competition with invasive species,
burial by wind- and water-borne
[[Page 70035]]
sediments, and hybridization could eliminate one or both populations
with a single disturbance. The threats are imminent because
recreational use is ongoing; invasive, nonnative species occur at both
sites; erosion of the substrate is ongoing at the Klickitat County
site; and high water flows are random, naturally occurring events that
may occur unpredictably in any year. Therefore, we have retained an LPN
of 3 for this subspecies.
Astragalus anserinus (Goose Creek milkvetch)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Astragalus microcymbus (Skiff milkvetch)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and in the petition we
received on July 30, 2007. Skiff milkvetch is a perennial forb that
dies back to the ground every year. It has a very limited range and a
spotty distribution within Gunnison and Saguache Counties in Colorado,
where it is found in open, park-like landscapes in the sagebrush steppe
ecosystem on rocky or cobbly, moderate to steep slopes of hills and
draws. The most significant threats to skiff milkvetch are recreation,
roads, trails, the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms, and habitat fragmentation and degradation. Recreational
impacts are likely to increase given the close proximity of skiff
milkvetch to the town of Gunnison and the increasing popularity of
mountain biking, motorcycling, and all- terrain vehicles. Furthermore,
the Hartman Rocks Recreation Area draws users and contains over 40
percent of the skiff milkvetch units. Other threats to the species
include residential and urban development; livestock, deer, and elk
use; climate change; and increasing periodic drought, nonnative
invasive cheatgrass; and wildfire. We consider the threats to skiff
milkvetch to be moderate in magnitude because while serious and
occurring rangewide, they do not collectively result in population
declines on a short time scale. The threats are imminent because the
species is currently facing them in many portions of its range.
Therefore, we have assigned skiff milkvetch an LPN of 8.
Astragalus schmolliae (Schmoll milkvetch)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and in the petition we
received on July 30, 2007. Schmoll milkvetch is a narrow endemic
perennial plant that grows in the mature pinyon-juniper woodland of
mesa tops in the Mesa Verde National Park area and in the Ute Mountain
Ute Tribal Park in Colorado. The most significant threats to the
species are degradation of habitat by fire, followed by invasion by
nonnative cheatgrass and subsequent increase in fire frequency. These
threats currently affect about 40 percent of the species' entire known
range. Cheatgrass is likely to increase given its rapid spread and
persistence in habitat disturbed by wildfires, fire and fuels
management, development of infrastructure, and the inability of land
managers to control it on a landscape scale. Other threats to Schmoll
milkvetch include fires, fire break clearings, drought, and inadequate
regulatory mechanisms. We consider the threats to the species overall
to be imminent and moderate in magnitude, because the species is
currently facing them in many portions of its range, but the threats do
not collectively result in population declines on a short time scale.
Therefore, we have assigned Schmoll milkvetch an LPN of 8.
Astragalus tortipes (Sleeping Ute milkvetch)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Sleeping Ute
milkvetch is a perennial plant that grows only on the Smokey Hills
layer of the Mancos Shale Formation on the Ute Mountain Ute Indian
Reservation in Montezuma County, Colorado. In 2000, 3,744 plants were
recorded at 24 locations covering 500 ac within an overall range of
6,400 ac. Available information from 2000 indicates that the species
remains stable. Threats from borrow pit excavation, off-highway
vehicles, irrigation canal construction, and a prairie dog colony have
had minor impacts that reduced the range and number of plants by small
amounts. Off-road-vehicle use of the habitat has reportedly been
controlled by fencing. Oil and gas development is active in the general
area, but the Service has received no information to indicate that
there is development within plant habitat. The Tribe reported that the
status of the species remains unchanged, the population is healthy, and
a management plan for the species is currently in draft form. Despite
these positive indications, we have no documentation concerning the
current status of the plants, condition of habitat, or terms of the
species management plan being drafted by the Tribe. Thus, at this time,
we cannot accurately assess whether populations are being adequately
protected from previously existing threats. The threats are moderate in
magnitude, as their effects on the species have been minor and the
species appears to be stable. Based on information we have, the
population appears to be stable. Until the management plan is completed
and made available, there are no regulatory mechanisms in place to
protect the species. Overall, we conclude that threats are nonimminent
because the more significant threats are not currently occurring; off-
road-vehicle use has been controlled by fencing, and there are no plans
for oil and gas development within the plant's habitat. Therefore, we
assigned an LPN of 11 to this species.
Boechera pusilla (Fremont County rockcress)--The following summary
is based on information in our files and in the petition received on
July 24, 2007. Boechera pusilla is a perennial herb that occupies
sparsely vegetated, coarse granite soil pockets in exposed granite-
pegmatite outcrops, with slopes generally less than 10 degrees, at an
elevation between 2,438 to 2,469 m (8,000 to 8,100 ft). The only known
population of B. pusilla is located in Wyoming on lands administered by
the Bureau of Land Management's, Rock Springs Field Office in the
southern foothills of the Wind River Range. B. pusilla is likely
restricted in distribution by the limited occurrence of pegmatite in
the area. The specialized habitat requirements of B. pusilla have
allowed the plant to persist without competition from other herbaceous
plants or sagebrush-grassland species that are present in the
surrounding landscape.
Boechera pusilla has a threat that is not identified, but that is
indicated by the small and declining population size. The population
size may be declining from a variety of unknown causes, with drought or
disease possibly contributing to the trend. The trend may have been
reversed somewhat recently, but without improved population numbers,
the species may reach a population level at which other stressors
become threats. We are unable to determine how climate change may
affect the species in the future. To the extent that we understand the
species, other potential habitat-related threats have been removed
through the implementation of Federal regulatory mechanisms and
associated actions. Overutilization, predation, and the inadequacy of
regulatory mechanisms are not viewed as threats to the species. We
consider the threats that B. pusilla faces to be moderate in magnitude
primarily because the population decline has been somewhat reversed.
Although the threat is not fully understood, we know it exists as
indicated by the declining population, but we have not detected the
source or nature of the threat. The threat to B. pusilla is imminent
because, although not fully identified, we have evidence
[[Page 70036]]
that the species is currently facing a threat indicated by reduced
population size. The threat appears to be ongoing, although we are
unsure of the extent and timing of its effects on the species. Thus, we
have assigned B. pusilla an LPN of 8.
Brickellia mosieri (Florida brickell-bush)--The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is
restricted to pine rocklands of Miami-Dade County, Florida. This
habitat requires periodic prescribed fires to maintain the low
understory and prevent encroachment by native tropical hardwoods and
exotic plants, such as Brazilian pepper. Only one large occurrence is
known to exist; 15 other occurrences contain fewer than 100
individuals. Eleven occurrences are on conservation lands, while the
rest of the extant populations are on private land and are currently
vulnerable to habitat loss and degradation.
Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term threats
that will reduce the extent of habitat. This species is threatened by
habitat loss, which is exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire
suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine
rocklands, and threats from exotic plants. Remaining habitats are
fragmented. The species is vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as
hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges. Due to its restricted
range and the small sizes of most isolated occurrences, this species is
vulnerable to environmental (catastrophic hurricanes), demographic
(potential episodes of poor reproduction), and genetic (potential
inbreeding depression) threats. Ongoing conservation efforts include
projects aimed at facilitating restoration and management of public and
private lands in Miami-Dade County and projects to reintroduce and
establish new populations at suitable sites within the species'
historical range. The Service is also pursuing additional habitat
restoration projects, which could help further improve the status of
the species. Because of these efforts, the overall magnitude of threats
is moderate. The threats are ongoing and thus imminent. We assigned
this species an LPN of 8.
Calamagrostis expansa (Maui reedgrass)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Calamagrostis
expansa is a perennial grass found in wet forests and bogs, and in bog
margins, on the islands of Maui and Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is
known from 13 populations totaling fewer than 750 individuals.
Calamagrostis expansa is threatened by habitat degradation and loss
by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), and by competition with nonnative plants.
Herbivory by feral pigs is a potential threat to this species. All of
the known populations of C. expansa on Maui occur in managed areas. Pig
exclusion fences have been constructed, and control of nonnative plants
is ongoing within the exclosures but still pose a significant threat.
On the island of Hawaii, the population in the Upper Waiakea Forest
Reserve has been fenced entirely. This species is not represented in an
ex situ collection. Threats to this species from feral pigs and
nonnative plants are ongoing, or imminent, and of high magnitude
because they significantly affect the species throughout its range,
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Calochortus persistens (Siskiyou mariposa lily)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine partridge pea)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. This pea is endemic to the lower Florida Keys, and restricted to
pine rocklands, hardwood hammock edges, and roadsides and firebreaks
within these ecosystems. Historically, it was known from Big Pine,
Cudjoe, No Name, Ramrod, and Little Pine Keys (Monroe County, Florida).
In 2005, a small population was detected on lower Sugarloaf Key, but
this population was not located after Hurricane Wilma; plants were
likely killed by the tidal surge from this storm. It presently occurs
on Big Pine Key, with a very small population on Cudjoe Key. It is
fairly well distributed in Big Pine Key pine rocklands, which encompass
approximately 580 ha (1,433 ac), approximately 360 ha (890 ac) of which
are within the Service's National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR). Over 80
percent of the population probably exists on NKDR, with the remainder
distributed among State, County, and private properties. Hurricane
Wilma (October 2005) resulted in a storm surge that covered most of Big
Pine Key with sea water. The surge reduced the population by as much as
95 percent in some areas.
Pine rockland communities are maintained by relatively frequent
fires. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine
rockland, and this subspecies is eventually shaded out. NKDR has a
prescribed fire program, although with many constraints on
implementation. Habitat loss due to development was historically the
greatest threat to the pea. Much of the remaining habitat is now
protected on public lands. Absence of fire now appears to be the
greatest of the deterministic threats. Given the recent increase in
hurricane activity, storm surges are the greatest of the stochastic
threats. The small range and patchy distribution of the variety
increase risk from stochastic events. Climatic changes, including sea-
level rise, are serious long-term threats. Models indicate that even
under the best of circumstances, a significant proportion of upland
habitat will be lost on Big Pine Key by 2100. Additional threats
include restricted range, invasive nonnative plants, roadside dumping,
loss of pollinators, seed predators, and development.
We maintain the previous assessment that hurricanes, storm surges,
lack of fire, and limited distribution result in a moderate magnitude
of threat because a large part of the range is on conservation lands
wherein threats are being addressed, although fire management is at
much slower rate than is required. The immediacy of hurricane threats
is difficult to characterize, but imminence is considered high given
that hurricanes (and storm surges) of various magnitudes are frequent
and recurrent events in the area. Sea-level rise remains uncontrolled
but, overall, is nonimminent. Overall, the threats from limited
distribution and inadequate fire management are imminent because they
are ongoing. In addition, the most consequential threats (hurricanes,
storm surges) are frequent, recurrent, and imminent. Therefore, we
retained an LPN of 9 for Big Pine partridge pea.
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (Pineland sandmat)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. The pineland sandmat is only known from Miami-Dade County,
Florida. The largest occurrence, estimated at more than 10,000 plants,
is located on Long Pine Key within Everglades National Park. All other
occurrences are smaller and are in isolated pine rockland fragments in
heavily urbanized Miami-Dade County.
Occurrences on private (non-conservation) lands and on one County-
owned parcel are at risk from development and habitat degradation and
fragmentation. Conditions related to
[[Page 70037]]
climate change, particularly sea-level rise, will be a factor over the
long term. All occurrences of the species are threatened by habitat
loss and degradation due to fire suppression, the difficulty of
applying prescribed fire, and exotic plants. These threats are severe
within small and unmanaged fragments in urban areas. However, the
threats of fire suppression and exotics are reduced on lands managed by
the National Park Service. Hydrologic changes are considered to be
another threat. Hydrology has been altered within Long Pine Key due to
artificial drainage, which lowered ground water, and by the
construction of roads, which either impounded or diverted water.
Regional water management intended to restore the Everglades could
negatively affect the pinelands of Long Pine Key in the future. At this
time, we do not know whether the proposed restoration and associated
hydrological modifications will have a positive or negative effect on
pineland sandmat. This narrow endemic may be vulnerable to catastrophic
events and natural disturbances, such as hurricanes. Overall, the
magnitude of threats to this species is moderate; by applying regular
prescribed fire, the National Park Service has kept Long Pine Key's
pineland vegetation intact and relatively free of exotic plants, and
partnerships are in place to help address the continuing threat of
exotics on other pine rockland fragments. Overall, the threats are
nonimminent because fire management at the largest occurrence is
regularly conducted and sea-level rise and hurricanes are longer-term
threats and because regional water management actions are only
proposed, so they will not be implemented in the immediate future.
Therefore, we assigned a LPN of 12 to this subspecies.
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (Wedge spurge)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Systematic surveys of publicly owned pine rockland throughout this
plant's range were conducted during 2005-2006 and 2007-2008 to
determine population size and distribution. Wedge spurge is a small
prostrate herb. It was historically, and remains, restricted to pine
rocklands on Big Pine Key in Monroe County, Florida. Pine rocklands
encompass approximately 580 ha (1,433 ac) on Big Pine Key,
approximately 360 ha (890 ac) of which are within the Service's
National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR). Most of the species' range falls
within the NKDR, with the remainder on State, County, and private
properties. It is not widely dispersed within the limited range.
Occurrences are sparser in the southern portion of Big Pine Key, which
contains smaller areas of NKDR lands than does the northern portion.
Wedge spurge inhabits sites with low woody cover (e.g., low palm and
hardwood densities) and usually, exposed rock or gravel.
Pine rockland communities are maintained by relatively frequent
fires. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine
rockland, and the subspecies is eventually shaded out. NKDR has a
prescribed fire program, although with many constraints on
implementation. Habitat loss due to development was historically the
greatest threat to the wedge spurge. Much of the remaining habitat is
now protected on public lands. Absence of fire now appears to be the
greatest of the deterministic threats. Given the recent increase in
hurricane activity, storm surges are the greatest of the stochastic
threats. The small range and patchy distribution of the subspecies
increases risk from stochastic events. Climatic changes, including sea-
level rise, are serious long-term threats. Models indicate that even
under the best of circumstances, a significant proportion of upland
habitat will be lost on Big Pine Key by 2100. Additional threats
include restricted range, invasive nonnative plants, roadside dumping,
loss of pollinators, seed predators, and development.
We maintain the previous assessment that low fire-return intervals
plus hurricane-related storm surges, in combination with a limited,
fragmented distribution and threats from sea-level rise, result in a
moderate magnitude of threat, in part, because a large part of the
range is on conservation lands, where some threats can be substantially
controlled. The immediacy of hurricane threats is difficult to
categorize, but in this case threats are imminent given that hurricanes
(and storm surges) of various magnitudes are frequent and recurrent
events in the area. Sea-level rise remains uncontrolled, but over much
of the range is nonimminent compared to other prominent threats.
Threats resulting from limited fire occurrences are imminent. As major
threats are ongoing, overall, the threats are imminent. Therefore, we
retained an LPN of 9 for this subspecies.
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando Valley
spineflower)--The following summary is based on information contained
in our files and the petition we received on December 14, 1999.
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina is a low-growing, herbaceous, annual
plant in the buckwheat family. Germination occurs following the onset
of late-fall and winter rains and typically represents different
cohorts from the seed bank. Flowering occurs in the spring, generally
between April and June. Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina grows up to
30 cn in height and 5 to 40 cn across. The plant currently is known
from two disjunct localities: One in the southeastern portion of
Ventura County, California, on a site within the Upper Las Virgenes
Canyon Open Space Preserve, formerly known as Ahmanson Ranch, and the
other in an area of southwestern Los Angeles County known as Newhall
Ranch. Investigations of historical locations and seemingly suitable
habitat within the range of the species have not revealed any other
occurrences.
The threats facing Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina include
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and other natural
or manmade factors. The threats to Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina
from habitat destruction or modification are slightly less than they
were 7 years ago. One of the two populations (Upper Las Virgenes Canyon
Open Space Preserve) is in permanent, public ownership and is being
managed by an agency that is working to conserve the plant; however,
the use of adjacent habitat for Hollywood film productions was brought
to our attention in 2007, and the potential impacts to Chorizanthe
parryi var. fernandina have not yet been evaluated. During a site visit
in April 2012, we noted an abundance of nonnative species that, if not
managed, could degrade the quality of the habitat for C. parryi var.
fernandina over time. It is not clear whether this presents an imminent
threat at this time. We will be working with the landowners to manage
the site for the benefit of Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina. The
other population (Newhall Ranch) is under the threat of development;
however, a Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) is being developed
with the landowner, and it is possible that the remaining plants can
also be conserved. Until such an agreement is finalized, the threat of
development and the potential damage to the Newhall Ranch population
still exists, as shown by the destruction of some plants during
installation of an agave farm. Furthermore, cattle grazing on Newhall
Ranch may be a threat but we lack information to determine if it is
currently occurring at a level that would threaten this species. Cattle
grazing may
[[Page 70038]]
harm Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina by trampling and soil
compaction. Grazing activity could also alter the nutrient (e.g.,
elevated organic material levels) content of the soils for Chorizanthe
parryi var. fernandina habitat through fecal inputs, which in turn may
favor the growth of other plant species that would otherwise not grow
so readily on the mineral-based soils. Over time, changes in species
composition may render the sites less favorable for the persistence of
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina. Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina
may be threatened by invasive nonnative plants, including grasses,
which could potentially displace it from available habitat; compete for
light, water, and nutrients; and reduce survival and establishment.
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina is particularly vulnerable to
extinction due to its concentration in two isolated areas. The
existence of only two areas of occurrence, and a relatively small
range, makes the variety highly susceptible to extinction or
extirpation from a significant portion of its range due to random
events such as fire, drought, and erosion as these threats would result
in a high level of mortality. We retained an LPN of 6 for Chorizanthe
parryi var. fernandina due to high-magnitude, nonimminent threats.
Cirsium wrightii (Wright's marsh thistle)--The following summary is
based on information from the 12-month warranted but precluded finding
published November 4, 2010 (75 FR 67925). There are eight general
confirmed locations of Wright's marsh thistle in New Mexico: Santa
Rosa, Guadalupe County; Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Chaves
County; Blue Spring, Eddy County; La Luz Canyon, Karr Canyon, Silver
Springs, and Tularosa Creek, Otero County; and Alamosa Creek, Socorro
County. The Wright's marsh thistle has been extirpated from all
previously known locations in Arizona, and was misidentified and likely
not ever present in Texas. The status of the species in Mexico is
uncertain, with few verified collections.
The Wright's marsh thistle faces threats primarily from natural and
human-caused modifications of its habitat due to ground and surface
water depletion, drought, invasion of Phragmites australis, and from
the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. The species occupies
relatively small areas of seeps, springs, and wetland habitat in an
arid region plagued by drought and ongoing and future water
withdrawals. The species' highly specific requirements of saturated
soils with surface or subsurface water flow make it particularly
vulnerable.
We consider the threats that the Wright's marsh thistle faces to be
moderate in magnitude because the major threats (habitat loss and
degradation due to alteration of the hydrology of its rare wetland
habitat), while serious and occurring rangewide, do not collectively
result in serious population declines on a short time scale. Still,
long-term drought, in combination with ground and surface water
withdrawal, pose a current and future threat to Wright's marsh thistle
and its habitat. All of the threats are ongoing and therefore imminent.
In addition to their current existence, we expect these threats to
likely intensify in the foreseeable future. Thus, we continue to assign
an LPN of 8 to this species.
Cordia rupicola (no common name)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Cordia rupicola is a small
shrub that has been described from southwestern Puerto Rico, Vieques
Island, and Anegada Island (British Virgin Islands). All these sites
lay within the subtropical dry forest life zone overlying a limestone
substrate. Cordia rupicola has a restricted distribution. Currently,
approximately 227 individuals are known from 4 locations:
Pe[ntilde]uelas, Yauco, Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forests, and
Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. Additionally, the species is reported
as common in Anegada.
This species is threatened by maintenance of trails and power line
right-of-way in the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, and residential
and commercial development in Pe[ntilde]uelas, Yauco, and Anegada
Island. Cordia rupicola is also vulnerable to natural (e.g.,
hurricanes) or manmade (e.g., human-induced fires) threats.
Furthermore, the population on Anegada Island, which is considered the
healthiest population, is expected to be affected by sea level rise as
most of the suitable habitat for the species is below 3 m above sea
level. Therefore, even a small rise in sea level could devastate the
healthiest population, and lead to a significantly greater likelihood
of extinction. For these reasons, the magnitude of the current threats
is high. Although the threats faced by this species are expected to
increase in the future if conservation measures are not implemented and
long-term impacts are not averted, we conclude that the threats are
nonimminent. About 60 percent of known adult plants are located in
protected lands managed for conservation by the Puerto Rico Department
of Natural and Environmental Resources or the Service. The staff from
the Royal Botanical Garden (Kew) has developed germination and
cultivation protocols for the species and is planning to conduct
studies to determine the genetic variation of the populations. We
therefore have assigned to Cordia rupicola an LPN of 5 for threats that
on the whole are high in magnitude and nonimminent.
Dalea carthagenensis ssp. floridana (Florida prairie-clover)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana occurs in Big Cypress
National Preserve (BCNP) in Monroe and Collier Counties and at six
locations within Miami-Dade County, Florida, albeit mostly in limited
numbers. There are a total of nine extant occurrences, seven of which
are on conservation lands. In addition, 25 plants were reintroduced to
a park in Miami-Dade County in 2006, but only 4 remained after 8
months.
Existing occurrences are extremely small and may not be viable,
especially some of the occurrences in Miami-Dade County. Remaining
habitats are fragmented. Climatic changes, including sea-level rise,
are long-term threats that are expected to reduce the extent of
habitat. This plant is threatened by habitat loss and degradation due
to fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine
rocklands, and threats from exotic plants. Damage to plants by off-road
vehicles is a serious threat within the BCNP; damage attributed to
illegal mountain biking at the R. Hardy Matheson Preserve has been
reduced. One location within BCNP is threatened by changes in mowing
practices; this threat is low in magnitude. This species is being
parasitized by the introduced insect lobate lac scale (Paratachardina
pseudolobata) at some localities (e.g., R. Hardy Matheson Preserve),
but we do not know the extent of this threat. This plant is vulnerable
to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm
surges. Due to its restricted range and the small sizes of most
isolated occurrences, this species is vulnerable to environmental
(catastrophic hurricanes), demographic (potential episodes of poor
reproduction), and genetic (potential inbreeding depression) threats.
The magnitude of threats is high because of the extremely limited
number of occurrences, the small number of
[[Page 70039]]
individual plants at each occurrence, and poor reproduction. The
threats are imminent; even though many sites are on conservation lands,
these plants still face significant ongoing threats. Therefore, we have
assigned an LPN of 3 to Florida prairie-clover.
Dichanthelium hirstii (Hirst Brothers' panic grass)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Dichanthelium hirstii is a perennial grass that produces erect, leafy,
flowering stems from May to October. The species occurs in coastal
plain intermittent ponds, usually in wet savanna or pine barren
habitats, and is known to occur at only three sites in New Jersey, one
site in Delaware, and two sites in North Carolina. While all six extant
D. hirstii populations are located on public land or privately owned
conservation lands, threats to the species from encroachment of woody
and herbaceous vegetation, competition from rhizomatous perennials,
fluctuations in hydrology, and threats associated with small population
number and size are significant. Given the naturally fluctuating number
of plants found at each site and the isolated nature of the wetlands
(limiting dispersal opportunities), even small changes in the species'
habitat could result in local extirpation. Loss of any known sites
would constitute a significant contraction of the species' range.
Therefore, we consider the threats to be high in magnitude. Because
most of the potential threats to D. hirstii evolve over a period of
years before they rise to the level of becoming imminent threats, and,
in some cases, are being managed to some extent, we consider the
threats to be nonimminent. Based on nonimminent threats of a high
magnitude, we retain an LPN of 5 for this species.
Digitaria pauciflora (Florida pineland crabgrass)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
This perennial grass was historically found in central to southern
Miami-Dade County, Florida, most commonly in habitat along the border
between pine rockland and marl prairie. Pine rocklands in Miami-Dade
County have largely been destroyed by residential, commercial, and
urban development and by agriculture. With most remaining habitat
having been negatively altered, this species has been extirpated from
much of its historical range, including extirpation from all areas
outside of National Parks. Two large occurrences remain within
Everglades National Park and Big Cypress National Preserve; plants on
Federal lands are protected from the threat of habitat loss due to
development. However, any unknown plants, indefinite occurrences, and
suitable habitat remaining on private or non-conservation land are
threatened by development. Continued development of suitable habitat
diminishes the potential for reintroduction into its historical range.
Extant occurrences are in low-lying areas and will be affected by
climatic changes, including rising sea level.
Fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to
pine rocklands, and threats from nonnative plants are ongoing threats.
As the only known remaining occurrences are on lands managed by the
National Park Service, the threats of fire suppression and exotics are
somewhat reduced. The presence of the exotic Old World climbing fern is
of particular concern due to its ability to spread rapidly and reduce
the populations of this species. In Big Cypress National Preserve,
plants are threatened by off-road-vehicle use. Changes to hydrology are
a potential threat. Hydrology has been altered within Long Pine Key due
to artificial drainage, which lowered ground water, and construction of
roads, which either impounded or diverted water. Regional water
management intended to restore the Everglades has the potential to
affect the pinelands of Long Pine Key, where a large population occurs.
At this time, it is not known whether Everglades restoration will have
a positive or negative effect. This narrow endemic may be vulnerable to
catastrophic events and natural disturbances, such as hurricanes.
Overall, the magnitude of threats is high. Only two known occurrences
remain, and the likelihood of establishing a sizable population on
other lands is diminished due to continuing habitat loss. Impacts from
climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are currently low, but
expected to be severe in the future. The majority of threats are
nonimminent as they are long-term in nature (water management,
hurricanes, and sea-level rise). Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 5 to
this species.
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii (Las Vegas buckwheat)--We
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency
posing a significant risk to the species.
Eriogonum kelloggii (Red Mountain buckwheat)--We continue to find
that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Eriogonum soredium (Frisco buckwheat)--The following summary is
based on information in our files and the petition we received on July
30, 2007. Frisco buckwheat is a low, mound-forming, perennial plant
with oval leaves covered by short, white, woolly hairs. Flowers are
pink or white and grow in tight clusters that resemble drumsticks.
Frisco buckwheat is a narrow endemic restricted to soils derived from
Ordovician limestone outcrops. The range of the species is less than 5
mi\2\ (13 km\2\) with only four known populations. All four populations
occur exclusively on private lands in Beaver County, Utah, and each
population occupies a very small area with large, localized densities
of plants. Available population estimates are highly variable and
inaccurate due to the limited access for surveys associated with
private lands.
The primary threat to Frisco buckwheat is habitat destruction from
precious metal and gravel mining. Mining for precious metals
historically occurred within the vicinity of all four populations.
Three of the populations are currently in the immediate vicinity of
active limestone quarries. Ongoing mining in the species' habitat has
the potential to extirpate one population in the near future and
extirpate all populations in the foreseeable future. Ongoing
exploration for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining will
continue, resulting in the loss and fragmentation of Frisco buckwheat
populations. Other threats to species include nonnative species,
vulnerability associated with small population size, climate change,
and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. We
consider threats that Frisco buckwheat faces to be moderate in
magnitude, because while serious and occurring rangewide, the threats
do
[[Page 70040]]
not significantly reduce populations on a short time scale. The threats
are imminent because three of the populations are currently in the
immediate vicinity of active limestone quarries. Therefore, we have
assigned Frisco buckwheat an LPN of 8.
Festuca hawaiiensis (no common name)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is a
cespitose (growing in dense, low tufts) annual found in dry forests on
the island of Hawaii, Hawaii. Festuca hawaiiensis is known from 4
populations totaling approximately 1,000 individuals in and around the
Pohakuloa Training Area. Historically, this species was also found on
Hualalai and Puu Huluhulu, but it no longer occurs at these sites. In
addition, Festuca hawaiiensis possibly occurred on Maui. This species
is threatened by pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), mouflon (Ovis
musimon), and feral sheep (O. aries) that degrade and destroy habitat;
fire; military training activities; and nonnative plants that
outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs, goats, mouflon, and feral sheep
have been fenced out of a portion of the populations of F. hawaiiensis,
and nonnative plants have been reduced in the fenced area, but the
majority of the populations are still affected by threats from
ungulates. The threats are imminent because they are not controlled and
are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced populations. Firebreaks have
been established at two populations, but fire is an imminent threat to
the remaining populations that have no firebreaks. There are no ex situ
collections. The threats are of a high magnitude because they could
adversely affect the majority of F. hawaiiensis populations, resulting
in a high level of direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity.
Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Festuca ligulata (Guadalupe fescue)--The following summary is based
on information obtained from the original species petition, received in
1975, and from our files, on-line herbarium databases, and scientific
publications. Six small populations of Guadalupe fescue, a member of
the Poaceae (grass family), have been documented in mountains of the
Chihuahuan desert in Texas and in Coahuila, Mexico. Only two extant
populations have been confirmed in the last 5 years: one in the Chisos
Mountains, Big Bend National Park, Texas, and one in the privately
owned Area de Protecci[oacute]n de Flora y Fauna (Protected Area for
Flora and Fauna--APFF) Maderas del Carmen in northern Coahuila. Despite
intensive searches, a population known from Guadalupe Mountains
National Park, Texas, has not been found since 1952, and is presumed
extirpated. In 2009, botanists confirmed Guadalupe fescue at one site
in APFF Maderas del Carmen, but could not find the species at the
original site, known as Sierra El Jard[iacute]n, which was first
reported in 1973. Two additional Mexican populations, near Fraile in
southern Coahuila, and the Sierra de la Madera in central Coahuila,
have not been monitored since 1941 and 1977, respectively. A great
amount of potentially suitable habitat in Coahuila and adjacent Mexican
states has never been surveyed. An historically unprecedented period of
exceptional drought and high temperatures prevailed throughout the
species' range from October 2010 until November 2011. We will not know
what impacts this unusual weather had on Guadalupe fescue populations
until monitoring is completed during the September 2012 flowering
season.
The potential threats to Guadalupe fescue include changes in the
wildfire cycle and vegetation structure, trampling from humans and pack
animals, possible grazing, trail runoff, fungal infection of seeds,
small sizes and isolation of populations, and limited genetic
diversity. The Service and the National Park Service established a
candidate conservation agreement (CCA) in 2008, to provide additional
protection for the Chisos Mountains population, and to promote
cooperative conservation efforts with U.S. and Mexican partners. The
threats to Guadalupe fescue are of moderate magnitude and are not
imminent due to the provisions of the CCA and other conservation
efforts which address threats from trampling, grazing, trail runoff,
and genetic diversity, as well as the likelihood that other populations
exist in mountains of Coahuila and adjacent Mexican states that have
not been surveyed. Thus, we maintained an LPN of 11 for this species.
Gardenia remyi (Nanu)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Gardenia remyi is a tree
found in mesic to wet forests on the islands of Kauai, Molokai, Maui,
and Hawaii, Hawaii. Gardenia remyi is known from 19 populations
totaling between 85 and 87 individuals. This species is threatened by
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and deer (Axis axis and
Odocoileus hemionus) that degrade and destroy habitat and possibly
forage upon the species, and by nonnative plants that outcompete and
displace it. Gardenia remyi is also threatened by landslides and
reduced reproductive vigor on the island of Hawaii. This species is
represented in ex situ collections. On Kauai, G. remyi individuals have
been outplanted within ungulate-proof exclosures in two locations.
Feral pigs have been fenced out of the west Maui populations of G.
remyi, and nonnative plants have been reduced in those areas. However,
these threats are not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining,
unfenced populations, and are, therefore, imminent. In addition, the
threat from goats and deer is ongoing and imminent throughout the range
of the species, because no goat or deer control measures have been
undertaken for any of the populations of G. remyi. All of the threats
are of a high magnitude because habitat destruction, predation, and
landslides could significantly affect the entire species, resulting in
direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity, leading to a
relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN
of 2 for this species.
Gonocalyx concolor (no common name)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Gonocalyx concolor is a
small evergreen epiphytic or terrestrial shrub. This species in
currently known from two populations: one at Cerro La Santa and the
other at Charco Azul, both in the Carite Commonwealth Forest. This
forest is located in the Sierra de Cayey and extends through the
municipalities of Guayama, Cayey, Caguas, San Lorenzo, and Patillas in
southeastern Puerto Rico. A population previously reported in the
Caribbean National Forest apparently no longer exists. In 1996,
approximately 172 plants were reported at Cerro La Santa. However, in
2006, only 25 individuals were reported at this site, and 4 were
located in Charco Azul. At Cerro La Santa, the species is found growing
on trees located close to communication towers, roads, plantations, and
trails.
The Gonocalyx concolor population found at Cerro La Santa is
threatened by habitat destruction and modification caused by vegetation
clearing around telecommunication towers. Although the species is
located within a Commonwealth forest and protected by Law No. 133
(``Ley de Bosques de Puerto Rico'' or The Puerto Rico Forest Law),
unauthorized maintenance of existing communication facilities results
in loss of individuals. Gonocalyx concolor is not currently listed in
the Commonwealth Regulation No. 6766
[[Page 70041]]
(``Reglamento para Regir las Especies Vulnerables y en Peligro de
Extinci[oacute]n en el Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico''), which
provides protection for threatened and endangered species. However, the
Natural Heritage Program of the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and
Environmental Resources recognizes Gonocalyx concolor as a critical
element. In addition, the Carite Commonwealth Forest is designated as a
Critical Wildlife Area by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Despite
these conservation efforts, damage to the species still occurs due to
its location near telecommunication facilities. In addition, due to its
restricted distribution, the species is vulnerable to the effects of
natural events (e.g., hurricanes, landslides). Existing laws and
regulations have not been effectively enforced to protect these
populations. Because of small population size and limited distribution,
any loss of individuals due to maintenance of communication facilities
or natural events could significantly affect the entire species,
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, the
threats to Gonocalyx concolor are high in magnitude. Overall the
threats are nonimminent because the damage to the species from clearing
of land near telecommunication facilities and the threats from natural
events occur only periodically. Therefore, we have assigned an LPN of 5
to Gonocalyx concolor.
Hazardia orcuttii (Orcutt's hazardia)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and the petition we
received on March 8, 2001. Hazardia orcuttii is an evergreen shrubby
species in the Asteraceae (sunflower family). The erect shrubs are 50-
100 cm (20-40 in) high. The only known extant native occurrence of this
species in the United States covers an area of 2 ha (5 ac) in the
Manchester Conservation Area in northwestern San Diego County,
California. This site is managed by Center for Natural Lands Management
(CNLM). Using material derived from the native population, the CNLM
facilitated the establishment of test populations at four additional
sites in northwest San Diego County, California, including sites in the
Manchester Conservation Area, Kelly Ranch Habitat Conservation Area,
Rancho La Costa Habitat Conservation Area, and San Elijo Lagoon.
Hazardia orcuttii also occurs at a few coastal sites in Mexico, where
it recently became listed as endangered under Mexican environmental
law. The total number of plants at the only native site in the United
States is approximately 669 adults, and it is unknown if reproduction
is occurring. The five additional test populations collectively support
approximately 483 adults, 17 juveniles, and 322 seedlings, and
reproduction is occurring in three test populations. The population in
Mexico is estimated to be 1,100 plants.
The occurrences in Mexico are threatened by coastal development
from Tijuana to Ensenada. The native population in the United States is
within an area that receives public use; however, management at this
site has minimized impacts associated with habitat degradation. This
species has a very low reproductive output, although the causes are as
yet unknown. Competition from invasive, nonnative plants may pose a
threat to the reproductive potential of this species. In one limited
study, 95 percent of the flowers examined were damaged by insects or
fungal agents or aborted prematurely, and insects or fungal agents
damaged 50 percent of the seeds produced. All of the populations in the
United States are small, and one test population is declining. Small
populations are considered subject to random events and reductions in
fitness due to low genetic variability. Threats associated with small
population size are further exacerbated by the limited range and low
reproductive output of this species. However, if low seed production is
because of ecosystem disruptions, such as loss of effective
pollinators, there could be additional threats that need to be
addressed. Due to low abundance and a very small area of occupancy, any
regional fire would be a rangewide threat. Furthermore, because the
soil seed bank is poor and seed viability is low, recovery from a fire
may be especially challenging. The response mechanism of this species
to fire is unknown. Overall, the threats to H. orcuttii are of a high
magnitude because they have the potential to significantly reduce the
reproductive potential of this species. The threats are nonimminent
overall because invasive, nonnative plants and low reproductive output
are long-term in nature, and it is not clear that they have risen to
the level of becoming imminent threats. This species faces high-
magnitude nonimminent threats; therefore, we assigned this species an
LPN of 5.
Hedyotis fluviatilis (Kamapuaa)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Hedyotis fluviatilis is a
scandent (climbing) shrub found in mixed shrubland to wet lowland
forests on the islands of Oahu and Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known
from 11 populations totaling between 400 and 900 individuals. Hedyotis
fluviatilis is threatened by pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra hircus)
that degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that
outcompete and displace it. Landslides and hurricanes are a potential
threat to populations on Kauai. Herbivory by pigs and goats is a likely
threat. This species is not represented in an ex situ collection. We
retained an LPN of 2 because the severity of the threats to the species
is high given the low number of individuals and the potential for whole
populations to be eliminated, and the threats are ongoing and,
therefore, imminent.
Helianthus verticillatus (Whorled sunflower)--See above in
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based
on information contained in our files.
Ivesia webberi (Webber ivesia)--We continue to find that listing
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk
to the species.
Joinvillea ascendens ssp. ascendens (Ohe)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Joinvillea
ascendens ssp. ascendens is an erect herb found in wet to mesic
Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa (ohia-koa) lowland and montane
forests on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii,
Hawaii. This subspecies is known from 44 widely scattered populations
totaling approximately 200 individuals. Plants are typically found as
only one or two individuals, with miles between populations. This
subspecies is threatened by destruction or modification of habitat by
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and deer (Axis axis and
Odocoileus hemionus), and by nonnative plants that outcompete and
displace native plants. Herbivory by pigs, goats, deer, and rats
(Rattus exulans, R. norvegicus, and R. rattus) is a likely threat to
this species. Landslides are a potential threat to populations on Kauai
and Molokai.
[[Page 70042]]
Seedlings have rarely been observed in the wild. Seeds germinate in
cultivation, but most die soon thereafter. It is uncertain if this
rarity of reproduction is typical of this subspecies, or if it is
related to habitat disturbance. Feral pigs have been fenced out of a
few of the populations of this subspecies, and nonnative plants have
been reduced in those populations that are fenced. However, these
threats are not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced
populations. This species is represented in ex situ collections. The
threats are of high magnitude because habitat degradation, nonnative
plants, and predation result in mortality or severely affect the
reproductive capacity of the majority of populations of this species,
leading to a relatively high probability of extinction. The threats are
ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 3 for
this subspecies.
Leavenworthia crassa (Gladecress)--The following information is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species of
gladecress is a component of glade flora, occurring in association with
limestone outcroppings. Leavenworthia crassa is endemic to a 13-mile
radius area in north central Alabama in Lawrence and Morgan Counties,
where only six populations of this species are documented. Glade
habitats today have been reduced to remnants fragmented by agriculture
and development. Populations of this species are now located in glade-
like areas exhibiting various degrees of disturbance including
pastureland, roadside rights-of-way, and cultivated or plowed fields.
The most vigorous populations of this species are located in areas
which receive full, or near full, sunlight with limited herbaceous
competition. The magnitude of threat is high for this species, because
with the limited number of populations, the threats could result in
direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity of the species. This
species appears to be able to adjust to periodic disturbances, and
although competition, exotics, and herbicide use are potential threats,
there is no evidence that they are ongoing, and they therefore are
considered nonimminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
Lepidium ostleri (Ostler's peppergrass)--The following summary is
based on information in our files and the petition we received on July
30, 2007. Ostler's peppergrass is a long-lived perennial herb in the
mustard family that grows in dense, cushion-like tufts. The leaves are
hairy and grayish-green and the flowering stalks have 5 to 35 white or
purple-tinted flowers. Ostler's peppergrass is a narrow endemic
restricted to soils derived from Ordovician limestone outcrops. The
range of the species is less than 5 mi\2\(13 km\2\) with only four
known populations. All four populations occur exclusively on private
lands in the southern San Francisco Mountains of Beaver County, Utah.
Available population estimates are highly variable and inaccurate due
largely to the limited access for surveys associated with private
lands.
The primary threat to Ostler's peppergrass is habitat destruction
from precious metal and gravel mining. Mining for precious metals
historically occurred within the vicinity of all four populations.
Three of the populations are currently in the immediate vicinity of
active limestone quarries, but mining is only currently occurring in
the area of one population. Ongoing mining in the species' habitat has
the potential to extirpate one population in the near future. Ongoing
exploration for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining will
continue, resulting in the loss and fragmentation of Ostler's
peppergrass populations. Other threats to species include nonnative
species, vulnerability associated with small population size, climate
change, and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
We consider threats that Ostler's peppergrass faces to be moderate in
magnitude, because while serious and occurring rangewide, the threats
do not collectively result in significant population declines on a
short time scale. The threats are imminent because the species is
currently facing them across its entire range. Therefore, we have
assigned Ostler's peppergrass an LPN of 8.
Linum arenicola (Sand flax)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Sand flax is found in pine
rockland and marl prairie habitats, which require periodic wildfires in
order to maintain an open, shrub-free subcanopy and reduce leaf-litter
levels. Based upon available data, there are 12 extant occurrences of
sand flax; 11 others have been extirpated or destroyed. For the most
part, only small and isolated occurrences remain in low-lying areas in
a restricted range of southern Florida and the Florida Keys. In
general, viability is uncertain for 10 of 12 occurrences.
Sand flax is threatened by habitat loss and degradation due to
development; climatic changes, including sea-level rise, which
ultimately are likely to substantially reduce the extent of available
habitat; fire suppression and difficulty in applying prescribed fire;
road maintenance activities; exotic species; illegal dumping; natural
disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges;
and the small and fragmented nature of the current population. Reduced
pollinator activity and suppression of pollinator populations from
pesticides used in mosquito control and decreased seed production due
to increased seed predation in a fragmented wildland urban interface
may also affect sand flax; however, not enough information is known on
this species' reproductive biology or life history to assess these
potential threats. Some of the threats to the species--including fire
suppression, difficulty in applying prescribed fire, road maintenance
activities, exotic species, and illegal dumping--threaten nearly all
remaining populations. However, some efforts are under way to use
prescribed fire to control exotics on conservation lands where this
species occurs.
There are some circumstances that may mitigate the impacts of the
threats upon the species. For example, a survey conducted in 2009
showed approximately 74,000 plants on a non-conservation, public site
in Miami-Dade County; this is far more plants than was previously
known. Although a portion of the plants will be affected by
development, approximately 60,000 are anticipated to be protected and
managed. Still, this project will need to be carefully monitored
because impacts would affect the largest known occurrence of the
species. In addition, much of the pine rockland on Big Pine Key, the
location of the largest occurrence in the Keys, is protected from
development.
Nevertheless, due to the small and fragmented nature of the current
population, stochastic events, disease, or genetic bottlenecks may
strongly affect this species in the Keys. One example is Hurricane
Wilma, which inundated most of the species' habitat on Big Pine Key in
2005, and plants were not found 8 to 9 weeks post-storm; the density of
sand flax declined to zero in all management units at The Nature
Conservancy's preserve in 2006. In a 2007 post-hurricane assessment,
sand flax was found in northern plots, but not in any of the southern
plots on Big Pine Key. More current data are not available.
Overall, the magnitude of threats is high, because the threats
affect all 12 known occurrences of the species and can result in a
precipitous decline to the population levels, particularly when
combined with the potential impacts
[[Page 70043]]
from hurricanes or other natural disasters. Because development is not
immediate for the majority of the largest population in Miami-Dade
County and another population in the Keys is also largely protected
from development because much of it is within public and private
conservation lands, the threat of habitat loss remains nonimminent. In
addition, sea-level rise is a long-term threat because we do not have
evidence that it is present in any population of sand flax. Therefore,
we retained an LPN of 5 for this species.
Linum carteri var. carteri (Carter's small-flowered flax)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files. No
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. This plant occupies open and disturbed sites in pinelands of
Miami-Dade County, Florida. Currently, there are nine known
occurrences. Occurrences with fewer than 100 individuals are located on
three county-owned preserves. A site with more than 100 plants is owned
by the U.S. government, but the site is not managed for conservation.
Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term threats
that will likely reduce the extent of habitat. The nine existing
occurrences are small and vulnerable to habitat loss, which is
exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the
difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and threats
from nonnative plants. Remaining habitats are fragmented. Incompatible
management practices are also a threat at most protected sites; several
sites are mowed during the flowering and fruiting season. In the
absence of fire, periodic mowing can, in some cases, help maintain
open, shrub-free understory and provide benefits to this plant.
However, mowing can also eliminate reproduction entirely in very young
plants, delay reproductive maturation, and kill adult plants. With
flexibility in timing and proper management, threats from mowing
practices can be reduced or negated. Carter's small-flowered flax is
vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical
storms, and storm surges. This species exists in such small numbers at
so few sites that it may be difficult to develop and maintain viable
occurrences on the available conservation lands. Although no population
viability analysis has been conducted for this plant, indications are
that existing occurrences are at best marginal, and it is possible that
none are truly viable. As a result, the magnitude of threats is high.
The threats are ongoing, and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned
an LPN of 3 to this plant variety.
Myrsine fosbergii (Kolea)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Myrsine fosbergii is a
branched shrub or small tree found in lowland mesic and wet forests, on
watercourses or stream banks, on the islands of Kauai and Oahu, Hawaii.
This species is currently known from 14 populations totaling a little
more than 100 individuals. Myrsine fosbergii is threatened by feral
pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra hircus) that degrade and destroy
habitat and may forage upon the plant, and by nonnative plants that
compete for light and nutrients. This species is represented in an ex
situ collection. Although there are plans to fence and remove ungulates
from the Helemano area of Oahu, which may benefit this species, no
conservation measures have yet been taken to protect this species from
nonnative herbivores. Feral pigs and goats are found throughout the
known range of M. fosbergii, as are nonnative plants. The threats from
feral pigs, goats, and nonnative plants are of a high magnitude because
they pose a severe threat throughout the limited range of this species,
and they are ongoing and therefore imminent. We retained an LPN of 2
for this species.
Nothocestrum latifolium (`Aiea)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Nothocestrum latifolium is a
small tree found in dry to mesic forests on the islands of Kauai, Oahu,
Maui, Molokai, and Lanai, Hawaii. Nothocestrum latifolium is known from
17 declining populations totaling fewer than 1,200 individuals. This
species is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus),
and deer (Axis axis and Odocoileus hemionus) that degrade and destroy
habitat and may forage upon it; by nonnative plants that compete for
light and nutrients; and by the loss of pollinators that negatively
affect the reproductive viability of the species. This species is
represented in an ex situ collection. Ungulates have been fenced out of
four areas where N. latifolium currently occurs, hundreds of N.
latifolium individuals have been outplanted in fenced areas, and
nonnative plants have been reduced in some populations that are fenced.
However, these ongoing conservation efforts for this species benefit
only a few of the known populations. The threats are not controlled and
are ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations. In addition, little
regeneration is observed in this species. The threats are of a high
magnitude, as they are severe enough to affect the continued existence
of the species, leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction.
The threats are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Ochrosia haleakalae (Holei)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Ochrosia haleakalae is a tree
found in dry to mesic forests, often on lava, on the islands of Hawaii
and Maui. This species is currently known from 8 populations totaling
between 64 and 76 individuals. Ochrosia haleakalae is threatened by
fire; by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and cattle (Bos
taurus) that degrade and destroy habitat and may directly forage upon
it; and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. This
species is represented in ex situ collections. Feral pigs, goats, and
cattle have been fenced out of one wild and one outplanted population
on private lands on the island of Maui and out of one outplanted
population in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park on the island of Hawaii.
Nonnative plants have been reduced in the fenced areas. The threat from
fire is of a high magnitude and imminent because no control measures
have been undertaken to address this threat that could adversely affect
O. haleakalae as a whole. The threats from feral pigs, goats, and
cattle are ongoing to the unfenced populations of O. haleakalae. The
threat from nonnative plants is ongoing, imminent, and of a high
magnitude to the wild populations on both islands as this threat
adversely affects the survival and reproductive capacity of the
majority of the individuals of this species, leading to a relatively
high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for
this species.
Penstemon scariosus var. albifluvis (White River beardtongue)--The
following summary is based on information contained in our files and
the petition we received on October 27, 1983. This species is
restricted to calcareous soils derived from oil shale barrens of the
Green River Formation in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah and
adjacent Colorado. There are 20 occurrences known in Utah and 1 in
Colorado. Most of the occupied habitat of the White River beardtongue
is within developed and expanding oil and gas fields. The location of
the species' habitat exposes it to destruction from road, pipeline, and
well site
[[Page 70044]]
construction in connection with oil and gas development. Grazing by
wildlife and livestock is an additional threat. A future threat (and
potentially the greatest threat) to the species is oil shale
development. Traditional oil and gas energy development is currently
occurring and expected to increase within habitat areas for this
species, and therefore the threat is imminent. However, the BLM has
adopted a Special Status Species policy and has included in its current
Resource Management Plan actions to protect this species. These
protections lessen the extent of traditional oil and gas development
impacts to this species, so that although oil and gas development will
continue to increase within this species' range, the threat is of
moderate magnitude. The threats are ongoing and therefore imminent.
Thus, we assigned an LPN of 9 to this plant variety.
Physaria globosa (Desvaux) O'Kane & Al-Shehbaz (Short's
bladderpod)--The following summary is based on information contained in
our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received
on May 11, 2004. Short's bladderpod is a perennial member of the
mustard family that occurs in Indiana (1 location), Kentucky (6
locations), and Tennessee (22 locations). It grows on steep, rocky,
wooded slopes; on talus areas; along cliff tops and bases; and on cliff
ledges. It is usually associated with south- to west-facing calcareous
outcrops adjacent to rivers or streams. Road construction and road
maintenance have played a significant role in the decline of P.
globosa. Specific activities that have affected the species in the past
and may continue to threaten it include bank stabilization, herbicide
use, mowing during the growing season, grading of road shoulders, and
road widening or repaving. Sediment deposition during road maintenance
or from other activities also potentially threatens the species.
Because the natural processes that maintained habitat suitability and
competition from invasive, nonnative vegetation have been interrupted
at many locations, active habitat management is necessary at those
sites. Threats associated with roadside maintenance activities and
habitat alterations by invasive plant encroachment are imminent because
they are ongoing. These threats are of moderate magnitude as they are
not affecting all locations of this species at this time, the viability
of 10 of the 22 occurrences observed in Tennessee were rated as fair or
better, and efforts undertaken to restore suitable habitat conditions
at the Indiana site apparently have shown early signs of success.
Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
Pinus albicaulis (Whitebark pine)--The following summary is based
on information in our files and in the petition received on December 9,
2008. Pinus albicaulis is a hardy conifer found at alpine tree line and
subalpine elevations in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Idaho,
Montana, and Wyoming, and in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada. In
the United States, approximately 96 percent of land where the species
occurs is federally owned or managed, primarily by the U.S. Forest
Service. Pinus albicaulis is a slow-growing, long-lived tree with a
life span of up to 500 years and sometimes more than 1,000 years. It is
considered a keystone, or foundation, species in western North America,
where it increases biodiversity and contributes to critical ecosystem
functions.
The primary threat to the species is from disease in the form of
the nonnative white pine blister rust and its interaction with other
threats. Pinus albicaulis also is currently experiencing significant
mortality from predation by the native mountain pine beetle. We also
anticipate that continuing environmental effects resulting from climate
change will result in direct habitat loss for P. albicaulis.
Bioclimatic models predict that suitable habitat for P. albicaulis will
decline precipitously within the next 100 years. Past and ongoing fire
suppression is also negatively affecting populations of P. albicaulis
through direct habitat loss. Additionally, environmental changes
resulting from changing climatic conditions are acting alone and in
combination with the effects of fire suppression to increase the
frequency and severity of wildfires. Lastly, the existing regulatory
mechanisms are inadequate to address the threats presented above. The
threats that face P. albicaulis are high in magnitude because the major
threats occur throughout all of the species' range and are having a
major population-level effect on the species. The threats are imminent
because rangewide disease, predation, fire and fire suppression, and
environmental effects of climate change are affecting P. albicaulis
currently and are expected to continue and likely intensify in the
foreseeable future. Thus, we have assigned P. albicaulis an LPN of 2.
Platanthera integrilabia (Correll) Leur (White fringeless orchid)--
The following summary is based on information contained in our files.
No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11,
2004. Platanthera integrilabia is a perennial herb that grows in
partially, but not fully, shaded, wet, boggy areas at the head of
streams and on seepage slopes in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky,
Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Historically, there were at
least 90 populations of P. integrilabia. It is presumed extirpated from
North Carolina and Virginia. Currently there are about 60 extant sites
supporting the species.
Several populations have been destroyed due to road, residential,
and commercial construction, and to projects that altered soil and site
hydrology such that suitability for the species was reduced. Several of
the known populations are in or adjacent to powerline rights-of-way.
Mechanical clearing of these areas may benefit the species by
maintaining adequate light levels, but can promote development of
dense, shrubby vegetation due to extensive suckering of woody species;
however, the indiscriminant use of herbicides in these areas could pose
a significant threat to the species. All-terrain vehicles have damaged
several sites and pose a threat at most sites. Some of the known sites
for the species occur in areas that are managed specifically for timber
production. Timber management is not necessarily incompatible with the
protection and management of the species, but care must be taken during
timber management to ensure that the hydrology of bogs supporting the
species is not altered. Natural succession can result in decreased
light levels. Because of the species' dependence upon moderate-to-high
light levels, some type of active management to prevent complete canopy
closure is required at most locations. Collecting for commercial and
other purposes is a potential threat. Herbivory (primarily deer)
threatens the species at several sites. Due to the alteration of
habitat and changes in natural conditions, protection and recovery of
this species is dependent upon active management rather than just
preservation of habitat. Invasive, nonnative plants such as Japanese
honeysuckle and kudzu also threaten several sites. The threats are
widespread; however, the impact of those threats on the species'
survival is moderate in magnitude. Several of the sites are protected
to some degree from the threats by being within State parks, national
forests, wildlife management areas, or other protected land and the
species is spread out over sites in several States. The threats,
however, are imminent because they are ongoing, and
[[Page 70045]]
we have therefore assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
Potentilla basaltica (Soldier Meadow cinquefoil or basalt
cinquefoil)--We continue to find that listing this species is warranted
but precluded as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we
are working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior
to making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the
course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to
monitor new information about this species' status so that we can make
prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an
emergency posing a significant risk to the species.
Pseudognaphalium (= Gnaphalium) sandwicensium var. molokaiense
(Enaena)--The following summary is based on information contained in
our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received
on May 11, 2004. Pseudognaphalium sandwicensium var. molokaiense is a
perennial herb found in strand vegetation in dry consolidated dunes on
the islands of Molokai and Maui. Historically, this variety was also
found on Oahu and Lanai. This variety is known from 5 populations
totaling approximately 200 to 20,000 individuals (depending upon
rainfall) in the Moomomi area on the island of Molokai, and from 2
populations of a few individuals at Waiehu dunes and at Puu Kahulianapa
on west Maui. Pseudognaphalium sandwicensium var. molokaiense is
threatened by feral goats (Capra hircus) and axis deer (Axis axis) that
degrade and destroy habitat and possibly prey upon it, and by nonnative
plants that compete for light and nutrients. Potential threats also
include collection for lei-making and off-road vehicles that directly
damage plants and degrade habitat. Weed control is conducted for one
population on Molokai; however, no conservation efforts have been
initiated to date for the other populations on Molokai or for the
individuals on Maui. This species is represented in an ex situ
collection. The ongoing threats from feral goats, axis deer, nonnative
plants, collection, and off-road vehicles are of a high magnitude
because no control measures have been undertaken for the Maui
population or for four of the five Molokai populations, and the threats
result in direct mortality for a plant that already has very low
population numbers, or significantly reduce reproductive capacity for
the majority of the populations, leading to a relatively high
likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 3 for this
plant variety.
Ranunculus hawaiensis (Makou)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Ranunculus hawaiensis is an
erect or ascending perennial herb found in mesic to wet forests
dominated by Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) and Acacia koa (koa) with
scree substrate (loose stones or rocky debris on a slope) on the
islands of Maui and Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is currently known
from 14 individuals in 6 populations on the island of Hawaii. This does
not include one population on Maui (Kukui Planeze) that was not
relocated on a survey conducted in 2006 or one wild population at
Waikamoi (also on Maui) has not been observed since 1995. Ranunculus
hawaiensis is threatened by direct predation by slugs (Limax maximus,
Vaginulus plebeius, and Milax gagates), feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats
(Capra hircus), cattle (Bos taurus), mouflon (Ovis musimon), and feral
sheep (O. aries); by pigs, goats, cattle, mouflon, and feral sheep that
degrade and destroy habitat; and by nonnative plants that compete for
light and nutrients. This species is represented in ex situ
collections, and three populations have been outplanted into protected
exclosures; however, feral ungulates and nonnative plants are not
controlled in the remaining, unfenced populations. In addition, the
threat from introduced slugs is of a high magnitude because slugs occur
throughout the limited range of this species and no effective measures
have been undertaken to control them or prevent them from causing
significant adverse impacts to this species which currently is only
known to have a small number of individuals. Overall, the threats from
pigs, goats, cattle, mouflon, feral sheep, slugs, and nonnative plants
are of a high magnitude and are ongoing (imminent) for R. hawaiensis.
We retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Ranunculus mauiensis (Makou)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Ranunculus mauiensis is an
erect to weakly ascending perennial herb found in open sites in mesic
to wet forests and along streams on the islands of Maui, Kauai, and
Molokai, Hawaii. This species is currently known from 14 populations
totaling 198 individuals. Ranunculus mauiensis is threatened by feral
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), mule deer (Odocoileus
hemionus), axis deer (Axis axis), and slugs (Limax maximus, Vaginulus
plebeius, and Milax gagates) that consume it; by habitat degradation
and destruction by feral pigs, goats, and deer; and by nonnative plants
that compete for light and nutrients. This species is represented in an
ex situ collection. Feral pigs have been fenced out of one Maui
population of R. mauiensis, and nonnative plants have been reduced in
the fenced area. One individual occurs in the Kamakou Preserve on
Molokai, managed by The Nature Conservancy. However, ongoing
conservation efforts benefit only two populations. The threats are of
high magnitude because the threats result in direct mortality for a
plant that already has low population numbers, or significantly reduce
reproductive capacity for the majority of the populations, leading to a
relatively high likelihood of extinction. They are imminent because
they are ongoing in the Kauai and the majority of the Maui populations.
Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Rorippa subumbellata (Tahoe yellow cress)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files and the petition we
received on December 27, 2000. Rorippa subumbellata is a small,
branching, perennial herb with umbel-like inflorescences and yellow
flowers. Rorippa subumbellata is known only from the shores of Lake
Tahoe in California and Nevada. Data collected over the last 25 years
generally indicate that species occurrence fluctuates yearly as a
function of both lake level and the amount of exposed habitat. Records
kept since 1900 show a preponderance of years with high lake levels
that would isolate and reduce R. subumbellata occurrences at higher
beach elevations. From the standpoint of the species, less favorable
peak years have occurred almost twice as often as more favorable low-
level years. Annual surveys are conducted to determine population
numbers, site occupancy, and general disturbance regime. During the
2003 and 2004 annual survey periods, the lake level was approximately
6,224 ft (1,897.08m); 2004 was the fourth consecutive year of low
water. Rorippa subumbellata was present at 46 of the 60 sites surveyed,
up from 31 occupied sites in 2001, when the lake level was higher at
6,225 ft (1,897.38 m). Approximately 25,200 stems were present in 2003,
whereas during the 2001 annual survey, the estimated number of stems
was 6,136. Lake levels rose again in 2006, and less habitat was
available. Lake levels dropped again in 2008 through 2010, leading to
an
[[Page 70046]]
increase in both occupied sites and estimated stem counts. During very
low lake levels in 2009, an estimated 27,522 stems were observed at 46
sites, equal to the highest number of occupied sites previously
recorded. In 2011, the lake level was 6,228.4 ft (1,898.4 m), 3.8 ft
(1.2 m) higher than in 2010, and an estimated 6,494 stems were observed
at 25 sites.
Many Rorippa subumbellata sites are intensively used for commercial
and public purposes and are subject to various activities such as
erosion control, marina developments, pier construction, and
recreation. The U.S. Forest Service, California Tahoe Conservancy, and
California Department of Parks and Recreation have management programs
for R. subumbellata that include monitoring, fenced enclosures, and
transplanting efforts when funds and staff are available. Public
agencies (including the Service), private landowners, and environmental
groups collaborated to develop a Conservation Strategy coupled with a
Memorandum of Understanding-Conservation Agreement. The Conservation
Strategy, completed in 2003, lays out goals and objectives for recovery
and survival, contains a research and monitoring agenda, and serves as
the foundation for an adaptive management program. Because of the
continued commitments to conservation demonstrated by regulatory and
land management agencies participating in the conservation strategy, we
have determined the threats to R. subumbellata from various land uses
have been reduced to a moderate magnitude. In high lake level years
such as 2011, however, recreational use is concentrated within R.
subumbellata habitat, and we consider this threat in particular to be
ongoing and imminent. Therefore, we are maintaining an LPN of 8 for
this species.
Schiedea pubescens (Maolioli)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Schiedea pubescens is a
reclining or weakly climbing vine found in diverse mesic to wet forests
on the islands of Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii, Hawaii. It is presumed
extirpated from Lanai. Currently, this species is known from 8
populations totaling between 30 and 32 individuals on Maui, from 4
populations totaling between 21 and 22 individuals on Molokai, and from
1 population of 4 to 6 individuals on the island of Hawaii. Schiedea
pubescens is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra
hircus) that consume it and degrade and destroy habitat, and by
nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. Feral ungulates
have been fenced out of the population of S. pubescens on the island of
Hawaii. Feral goats have been fenced out of a few of the west Maui
populations of S. pubescens. Nonnative plants have been reduced in the
populations that are fenced on Maui. However, the threats are not
controlled and are ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations on
Maui and the four populations on Molokai. Additional fenced areas are
planned at Pohakuloa Training Area on the island of Hawaii. Nonnative
feral ungulates and nonnative plants will be controlled within these
fenced areas. Fire is a potential threat to the Hawaii Island
population. This species is not represented in an ex situ collection.
Due to the extremely low number of individuals of this species, the
threats from goats and nonnative plants are of a high magnitude. These
threats cause mortality and reduced reproductive capacity for the
majority of the populations, leading to a relatively high likelihood of
extinction. The threats are imminent because they are ongoing with
respect to most of the populations. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2
for this species.
Sedum eastwoodiae (Red Mountain stonecrop)--We continue to find
that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a
significant risk to the species.
Sicyos macrophyllus (`Anunu)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Sicyos macrophyllus is a
perennial vine found in wet Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) forests and
subalpine Sophora chrysophylla-Myoporum sandwicense (mamane-naio)
forests. Sicyos macrophyllus was historically known from Kipahulu
Valley on Maui and was widely distributed on the island of Hawaii.
Currently, this species is known from 10 populations totaling between
24 and 26 individuals in the Kohala and Mauna Kea areas, and in Hawaii
Volcanoes National Park (Puna area) on the island of Hawaii. It appears
that a naturally occurring population at Kipuka Ki in Hawaii Volcanoes
National Park is reproducing by seeds, but seeds have not been
successfully germinated under nursery conditions.
This species is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), cattle (Bos
taurus), and mouflon (Ovis musimon) that degrade and destroy habitat,
and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. This
species is represented in ex situ collections. Feral pigs have been
fenced out of some of the areas where S. macrophyllus currently occurs,
but the fences do not exclude mouflon. Nonnative plants have been
reduced in the populations that are fenced. However, the threats are
not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced populations,
and are, therefore, imminent. Similarly the threat from mouflon is
ongoing and imminent in all populations, because the current fences do
not exclude them. In addition, all of the threats are of a high
magnitude because habitat degradation and competition from nonnative
plants present a risk to the species, resulting in direct mortality for
a species that already has very low population numbers, or
significantly reducing the reproductive capacity. Therefore, we
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
Solanum conocarpum (marron bacora)--The following summary is based
on information in our files and in the petition we received on November
21, 1996. Solanum conocarpum is a dry-forest shrub in the island of St.
John, U.S. Virgin Islands. Its current distribution includes eight
localities in the island of St. John, each ranging from 1 to 144
individuals. The species has been reported to occur on dry, poor soils.
It can be locally abundant in exposed topography on sites disturbed by
erosion, areas that have received moderate grazing, and around
ridgelines as an understory component in diverse woodland communities.
A habitat suitability model suggests that the vast majority of Solanum
conocarpum habitat is found in the lower elevation coastal scrub
forest. Efforts have been conducted to propagate the species to enhance
natural populations, and planting of seedlings has been conducted in
the island of St. John.
Solanum conocarpum is threatened by the lack of natural
recruitment, absence of dispersers, fragmented distribution, lack of
genetic variation, climate change, and habitat destruction or
modification by exotic mammal species. These threats are evidenced by
the reduced number of individuals, low number of populations, and lack
of connectivity between populations. Overall, we determined the
magnitude of the threats to be high as shown by the
[[Page 70047]]
poor quality of the populations. The majority of threats are ongoing
and, therefore, imminent. We assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.
Solanum nelsonii (popolo)--The following summary is based on
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Solanum nelsonii is a
sprawling or trailing shrub found in coral rubble or sand in coastal
sites. This species is known from populations on Molokai (approximately
300 individuals), the island of Hawaii (5 individuals), and the
northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI), Hawaii. The current populations
in the NWHI are found on Kure (unknown number of individuals), Midway
(approximately 260 individuals), Laysan (approximately 490
individuals), Pearl and Hermes (unknown number of individuals), and
Nihoa (8,000 to 15,000 individuals). On Molokai, S. nelsonii is
moderately threatened by ungulates that degrade and destroy habitat,
and may eat S. nelsonii. On Molokai and the NWHI, this species is
threatened by nonnative plants that outcompete and displace it. Solanum
nelsonii is threatened by herbivory by a nonnative grasshopper
(Schistocerca nitens) in the NWHI. On Kure, Midway, Laysan, and Pearl
and Hermes in the NWHI, tsunamis are also a potential threat to S.
nelsonii. This species is represented in ex situ collections. Ungulate
exclusion fences, routine fence monitoring and maintenance, and weed
control protect the population of S. nelsonii on Molokai. Limited weed
control is conducted in the NWHI. These threats are of moderate
magnitude because of the relatively large number of plants, and the
fact that this species is found on more than one island. The threats
are imminent for the majority of the populations because they are
ongoing and are not being controlled. We therefore retained an LPN of 8
for this species.
Solidago plumosa (Yadkin River goldenrod)--The following
information is based on information in our files. No new information
was provided in the petition we received on April 20, 2010. The global
distribution of Solidago plumosa consists of a single population that
occurs in two discrete locations along a 2.5-mile stretch of the Yadkin
River in North Carolina.
The availability of suitable habitat and the fate of the single
known population of this species are primarily determined by the manner
in which two hydroelectric projects (the Yadkin River and Yadkin-Pee
Dee River Hydroelectric Projects) are operated. Any detrimental effects
to S. plumosa resulting from the construction of these reservoirs
occurred decades ago when these projects were built (during the years
of 1917 to 1928), and the Service is not aware of any plans to
construct additional reservoirs within the current range of this
species. However, S. plumosa continues to be subject to threats from
the continued operation of these reservoirs (which has reduced the
frequency and severity of scouring floods that help to prevent the
establishment of other species within the species' limited habitat) and
the encroachment of nonnative, invasive species. Because the species'
global distribution consists of a single population, its entire range
is affected by these threats. However, because scouring floods (prior
to reservoir construction) likely only occurred episodically, and in
light of the relatively slow progression of nonnative species into
areas of occupied habitat and efforts to reduce these nonnative plants,
the magnitude of these threats is moderate to low. However, because
these threats (especially those presented by nonnative, invasive plant
species) are currently occurring, they are imminent. Thus, we assigned
this species an LPN of 8.
Symphyotrichum georgianum (Georgia aster) -- The following summary
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Georgia aster is
a relict species of post oak savanna/prairie communities that existed
in the Southeast prior to widespread fire suppression and extirpation
of large, native, grazing animals. Georgia aster currently occurs in
the States of Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. The
species is presumed extant in 8 counties in Alabama, 22 counties in
Georgia, 9 counties in North Carolina, and 15 counties in South
Carolina. The species appears to have been eliminated from Florida.
Most remaining populations survive adjacent to roads, utility
rights-of-way, and other openings where current land management mimics
natural disturbance regimes. Most populations are small (10 to 100
stems), and because the species' main mode of reproduction is
vegetative, each isolated population may represent only a few
genotypes. Many populations are currently threatened by one or more of
the following factors: woody succession due to fire suppression,
development, highway expansion or improvement, and herbicide
application. However, the species is still relatively widely
distributed, and information indicates that the species is more
abundant than when we initially identified it as a candidate for
listing. Taking into account its distribution and abundance, and the
fact that it is increasing, the magnitude of threats is moderate. The
threats are currently occurring and therefore are imminent. Thus we
assigned an LPN of 8 for this species.
Trifolium friscanum (Frisco clover)--The following summary is based
on information in our files and the petition we received on July 30,
2007. Frisco clover is a dwarf mat-forming or tufted perennial herb
with a woody stem, silver hairy leaves, and reddish-purple flowers. The
species is a narrow endemic found only in Utah, with five known
populations restricted to sparsely vegetated, pinion-juniper-sagebrush
communities and shallow, gravel soils derived from volcanic gravels,
Ordovician limestone, and dolomite outcrops. The majority (68 percent)
of Frisco clover plants occur on private lands, with the remaining
plants found on Federal and State lands.
On the private and State lands, the most significant threat to
Frisco clover is habitat destruction from mining for precious metals
and gravel. Active mining claims, recent prospecting, and an increasing
demand for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining in Frisco
clover habitats will increase in the foreseeable future, likely
resulting in the loss of large numbers of plants. Other threats to
Frisco clover include nonnative, invasive species; vulnerability
associated with small population size; drought associated with climate
change; and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
We consider the threats to Frisco clover to be moderate in magnitude
because, while serious and occurring rangewide, they are not acting
independently or cumulatively to have a highly significant negative
impact on its survival or reproductive capacity. The threats are
imminent because the species is currently facing them across its entire
range. Therefore, we have assigned Frisco clover an LPN of 8.
Ferns and Allies
Cyclosorus boydiae (no common name)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is a small-
to medium-sized fern found in mesic to wet forests along stream banks
on the islands of Oahu and Maui, Hawaii. Historically, this species was
also found on the island of Hawaii, but it has been extirpated there.
Currently, this species is known from 7 populations totaling
[[Page 70048]]
approximately 400 individuals. This species is threatened by feral pigs
(Sus scrofa) that degrade and destroy habitat and may eat this plant,
and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. Feral
pigs have been fenced out of two populations, including the largest
population, on Maui, and nonnative plants are being controlled in the
fenced areas at these sites. No conservation efforts are under way to
alleviate threats to the other populations on Maui, or the two
populations on Oahu. This species is represented in an ex situ
collection. The magnitude of the threats acting upon the currently
extant populations is moderate because two of the seven populations,
including the largest population that contains 40 percent of the total
population for the species, are protected from pigs, and nonnative
plants are being controlled in these areas. The threats are ongoing and
therefore imminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 8 for this
species.
Huperzia stemmermanniae (Waewaeiole)--The following summary is
based on information contained in our files. No new information was
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is
an epiphytic pendant clubmoss found in mesic-to-wet Metrosideros
polymorpha-Acacia koa (ohia-koa) forests on the islands of Maui and
Hawaii, Hawaii. Only 3 populations are known, totaling approximately 20
individuals. The Maui population has not been observed since 1995.
Huperzia stemmermanniae is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats
(Capra hircus), cattle (Bos taurus), and axis deer (Axis axis) that
degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that compete for
light, space, and nutrients. Huperzia stemmermanniae is also threatened
by randomly occurring natural events due to its small population size.
One individual at Waikamoi Preserve may benefit from fencing for axis
deer and pigs. This species is represented in ex situ collections. The
threats from pigs, goats, cattle, axis deer, and nonnative plants are
of a high magnitude because they are sufficiently severe to adversely
affect the species throughout its limited range, resulting in direct
mortality for a species that already has very low population numbers,
or significantly reducing reproductive capacity and leading to a
relatively high likelihood of extinction. The threats are imminent
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this
species.
Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis (Palapalai)--The following
summary is based on information contained in our files. No new
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004.
Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis is a terrestrial fern found in
mesic-to-wet forests. It is currently found in Hawaii on the islands of
Maui, Oahu, and Hawaii, from at least 9 populations totaling at least
50 individuals. There is a possibility that the range of this plant
variety could be larger and include the other main Hawaiian Islands.
Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis is threatened by feral pigs (Sus
scrofa) that degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that
compete for light and nutrients. Pigs have been fenced out of some
areas on east and west Maui, Oahu, and on Hawaii, where M. strigosa
var. mauiensis currently occurs, and nonnative plants have been reduced
in the fenced areas. However, the threats are not controlled and are
ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations on Maui, Oahu, and
Hawaii. Therefore, the threats from feral pigs and nonnative plants are
imminent. The threats are of a high magnitude because they are
sufficiently severe to adversely affect the species throughout its
range, resulting in direct mortality for a species that already has
very low population numbers, or significantly reducing reproductive
capacity and leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. We
therefore retained an LPN of 3 for M. strigosa var. mauiensis.
Petitions To Reclassify Species Already Listed or To Add to the Listed
Range
We previously made warranted-but-precluded findings on five
petitions seeking to reclassify threatened species to endangered
status. The taxa involved in the reclassification petitions are three
populations of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), delta smelt
(Hypomesus transpacificus), and Sclerocactus brevispinus (Pariette
cactus). Because these species are already listed under the ESA, they
are not candidates for listing and are not included in Table 1.
However, this notice and associated species assessment forms or 5-year
review documents also constitute the resubmitted petition findings for
these species. For the three grizzly bear populations, our recently
completed 5-year review serves as our assessment. For delta smelt and
Sclerocactus brevispinus, our updated assessments are provided below.
We find that reclassification to endangered status for the three
grizzly bear populations, delta smelt, and Sclerocactus brevispinus are
all currently warranted but precluded by work identified above (see
``Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species''). One of the primary
reasons that the work identified above is considered to have higher
priority is that the grizzly bear populations, delta smelt, and
Sclerocactus brevispinus are currently listed as threatened, and
therefore already receive certain protections under the ESA. We
promulgated regulations extending take prohibitions for wildlife and
plants under section 9 to threatened species (50 CFR 17.31 and 50 CFR
17.71, respectively). Prohibited actions under section 9 for wildlife
include, but are not limited to, take (i.e., to harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to
engage in such activity). For plants, prohibited actions under section
9 include removing or reducing to possession any listed plant from an
area under Federal jurisdiction (50 CFR 17.61). Other protections that
apply to these threatened species even before we complete proposed and
final reclassification rules include those under section 7(a)(2) of the
ESA whereby Federal agencies must insure that any action they
authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or threatened species.
Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) North Cascades ecosystem,
Cabinet-Yaak, and Selkirk populations (Region 6)--Between 1986 and
2007, we have received and reviewed 10 petitions requesting a change in
status for individual grizzly bear populations (51 FR 16363, May 2,
1986; 55 FR 32103, August 7, 1990; 56 FR 33892, July 24, 1991; 57 FR
14372, April 20, 1992; 58 FR 8250, February 12, 1993; 58 FR 38552, July
19, 1993; 58 FR 43856, August 18, 1993; 58 FR 43857, August 18, 1993;
59 FR 46611, September 9, 1994; 64 FR 26725, May 17, 1999; 72 FR 14866,
March 29, 2007). Through this process, we determined that the Cabinet-
Yaak, Selkirk, and North Cascade ecosystems warrant endangered status.
On April 18, 2007, the Service initiated a 5-year review to evaluate
the current status of grizzly bears in the lower 48 States (72 FR
19549-19551). This status review, completed on August 29, 2011, and
available online at: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A001 spcode=A001, recommended that reclassifying as
endangered the Cabinet-Yaak, Selkirk, and North Cascades Ecosystems
remain warranted but precluded.
Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) (Region 8) (see 75 FR 17667,
April 7, 2010, for additional information on why reclassification to
endangered is warranted but precluded)--The following summary is based
on information contained in our files. In April 2010, we completed a
12-
[[Page 70049]]
month finding for delta smelt in which we determined a change in status
from threatened to endangered was warranted, although precluded by
other high-priority listings. The primary evidence is the continuing
downward trend in delta smelt abundance indices since the significant
decline that occurred in 2002. A 2005 population viability analysis
calculated a 50-percent likelihood that the species could reach
effective extinction (8,000 individuals) within 20 years.
The primary threats to the delta smelt are direct entrainments by
State and Federal water export facilities, summer and fall increases in
salinity and water clarity resulting from decreases in freshwater flow
into the estuary, and effects from introduced species. Ammonia in the
form of ammonium may also be a significant threat to the survival of
the delta smelt. Additional potential threats are predation by striped
and largemouth bass and inland silversides, entrainment into power
plants, contaminants, and small population size. Existing regulatory
mechanisms have not proven adequate to halt the decline of delta smelt
since the time of listing as a threatened species.
As a result of our analysis of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we have retained the recommendation of
uplisting the delta smelt to an endangered species with a LPN of 2,
based on high magnitude and imminent threats. The magnitude of the
threats is high, because the threats occur rangewide and result in
direct mortality for a species that already has low population numbers,
or significantly reduce the reproductive capacity of the species.
Threats are imminent because they are ongoing and, in some cases (e.g.,
nonnative species), considered irreversible.
Sclerocactus brevispinus (Pariette cactus) (Region 6) (see 72 FR
53211, September 18, 2007, and the species assessment form (see
ADDRESSES) for additional information on why reclassification to
endangered is warranted but precluded)--Sclerocactus brevispinus is
restricted to clay badlands of the Wagon Hound member of the Uinta
Formation in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah. The species is
restricted to one population with an overall range of approximately 10
miles by 5 miles in extent. The species' entire population is within a
developed and expanding oil and gas field. The location of the species'
habitat exposes it to destruction from road, pipeline, and well-site
construction in connection with oil and gas development. The species
may be collected as a specimen plant for horticultural use.
Recreational off-road vehicle use and livestock trampling are
additional potential threats. The species is currently federally listed
as threatened by its previous inclusion within the species Sclerocactus
glaucus. The threats are of a high magnitude because any one of the
threats has the potential to severely affect this species, a narrow
endemic with a highly limited range and distribution. Threats are
ongoing and, therefore, are imminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 2 to
this species for uplisting.
Current Notice of Review
We gather data on plants and animals native to the United States
that appear to merit consideration for addition to the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists). This notice
identifies those species that we currently regard as candidates for
addition to the Lists. These candidates include species and subspecies
of fish, wildlife, or plants, and DPSes of vertebrate animals. This
compilation relies on information from status surveys conducted for
candidate assessment and on information from State Natural Heritage
Programs, other State and Federal agencies, knowledgeable scientists,
public and private natural resource interests, and comments received in
response to previous notices of review.
Tables 1 and 2 list animals arranged alphabetically by common names
under the major group headings, and list plants alphabetically by names
of genera, species, and relevant subspecies and varieties. Animals are
grouped by class or order. Plants are subdivided into two groups: (1)
Flowering plants and (2) ferns and their allies. Useful synonyms and
subgeneric scientific names appear in parentheses with the synonyms
preceded by an ``equals'' sign. Several species that have not yet been
formally described in the scientific literature are included; such
species are identified by a generic or specific name (in italics),
followed by ``sp.'' or ``ssp.'' We incorporate standardized common
names in these notices as they become available. We sort plants by
scientific name due to the inconsistencies in common names, the
inclusion of vernacular and composite subspecific names, and the fact
that many plants still lack a standardized common name.
Table 1 lists all candidate species, plus species currently
proposed for listing under the ESA. We emphasize that in this notice we
are not proposing to list any of the candidate species; rather, we will
develop and publish proposed listing rules for these species in the
future. We encourage State agencies, other Federal agencies, and other
parties to give consideration to these species in environmental
planning.
In Table 1, the ``category'' column on the left side of the table
identifies the status of each species according to the following codes:
PE--Species proposed for listing as endangered. Proposed species
are those species for which we have published a proposed rule to list
as endangered or threatened in the Federal Register. This category does
not include species for which we have withdrawn or finalized the
proposed rule.
PT--Species proposed for listing as threatened.
PSAT--Species proposed for listing as threatened due to similarity
of appearance.
C--Candidates: Species for which we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support
proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Issuance of
proposed rules for these species is precluded at present by other
higher priority listing actions. This category includes species for
which we made a 12-month warranted-but-precluded finding on a petition
to list. We made new findings on all petitions for which we previously
made ``warranted-but-precluded'' findings. We identify the species for
which we made a continued warranted-but-precluded finding on a
resubmitted petition by the code ``C*'' in the category column (see
``Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species'' section for additional
information).
The ``Priority'' column indicates the LPN for each candidate
species, which we use to determine the most appropriate use of our
available resources. The lowest numbers have the highest priority. We
assign LPNs based on the immediacy and magnitude of threats, as well as
on taxonomic status. We published a complete description of our listing
priority system in the Federal Register (48 FR 43098, September 21,
1983).
The third column, ``Lead Region,'' identifies the Regional Office
to which you should direct information, comments, or questions (see
addresses under Request for Information at the end of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section).
Following the scientific name (fourth column) and the family
designation (fifth column) is the common name (sixth column). The
seventh column provides the known historical range for the species or
vertebrate population (for vertebrate populations, this is the
historical range for the entire species or
[[Page 70050]]
subspecies and not just the historical range for the distinct
population segment), indicated by postal code abbreviations for States
and U.S. territories. Many species no longer occur in all of the areas
listed.
Species in Table 2 of this notice are those we included either as
proposed species or as candidates in the previous CNOR (published
October 26, 2011, at 76 FR 66370) that are no longer proposed species
or candidates for listing. Since October 26, 2011, we listed 41
species, withdrew a proposed rule for one species, and removed 6
species from candidate status for the reason indicated by the code. The
first column indicates the present status of each species, using the
following codes (not all of these codes may have been used in this
CNOR):
E--Species we listed as endangered.
T--Species we listed as threatened.
Rc--Species we removed from the candidate list because currently
available information does not support a proposed listing.
Rp--Species we removed from because we have withdrawn the proposed
listing.
The second column indicates why we no longer regard the species as
a candidate or proposed species using the following codes (not all of
these codes may have been used in this CNOR):
A--Species that are more abundant or widespread than previously
believed and species that are not subject to the degree of threats
sufficient to warrant continuing candidate status, or issuing a
proposed or final listing.
F--Species whose range no longer includes a U.S. territory.
I--Species for which we have insufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to
list.
L--Species we added to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants.
M--Species we mistakenly included as candidates or proposed species
in the last notice of review.
N--Species that are not listable entities based on the ESA's
definition of ``species'' and current taxonomic understanding.
U--Species that are not subject to the degree of threats sufficient
to warrant issuance of a proposed listing or continuance of candidate
status due, in part or totally, to conservation efforts that remove or
reduce the threats to the species.
X--Species we believe to be extinct.
The columns describing lead region, scientific name, family, common
name, and historical range include information as previously described
for Table 1.
Request for Information
We request you submit any further information on the species named
in this notice as soon as possible or whenever it becomes available. We
are particularly interested in any information:
(1) Indicating that we should add a species to the list of
candidate species;
(2) Indicating that we should remove a species from candidate
status;
(3) Recommending areas that we should designate as critical habitat
for a species, or indicating that designation of critical habitat would
not be prudent for a species;
(4) Documenting threats to any of the included species;
(5) Describing the immediacy or magnitude of threats facing
candidate species;
(6) Pointing out taxonomic or nomenclature changes for any of the
species;
(7) Suggesting appropriate common names; and
(8) Noting any mistakes, such as errors in the indicated historical
ranges.
Submit information, materials, or comments regarding a particular
species to the Regional Director of the Region identified as having the
lead responsibility for that species. The regional addresses follow:
Region 1. Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, American Samoa, Guam, and
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Regional Director (TE),
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE. 11th
Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181 (503/231-6158).
Region 2. Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Regional Director
(TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Avenue SW., Room 4012,
Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505/248-6920).
Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio,
and Wisconsin. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437-1458 (612/
713-5334).
Region 4. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico,
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345
(404/679-4156).
Region 5. Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Regional Director (TE),
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA
01035-9589 (413/253-8615).
Region 6. Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO
80225-0486 (303/236-7400).
Region 7. Alaska. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503-6199 (907/786-3505).
Region 8. California and Nevada. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W2606, Sacramento, CA 95825
(916/414-6464).
We will provide information received in response to the previous
CNOR to the Region having lead responsibility for each candidate
species mentioned in the submission. We will likewise consider all
information provided in response to this CNOR in deciding whether to
propose species for listing and when to undertake necessary listing
actions (including whether emergency listing under section 4(b)(7) of
the ESA is appropriate). Information and comments we receive will
become part of the administrative record for the species, which we
maintain at the appropriate Regional Office.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or
other personal identifying information in your submission, be advised
that your entire submission--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. Although you
can ask us in your submission to withhold from public review your
personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Authority
This notice is published under the authority of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 6, 2012.
Rowan W. Gould,
Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[[Page 70051]]
Table 1--Candidate Notice of Review (Animals and Plants)
[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status
----------------------------- Lead region Scientific name Family Common name Historical
Category Priority range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAMMALS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PE........... 2............ R4........... Eumops Molossidae..... Bat, Florida U.S.A. (FL).
floridanus. bonneted.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Emballonura Emballonuridae. Bat, Pacific U.S.A. (GU,
semicaudata sheathtailed CNMI).
rotensis. (Mariana
Islands
subspecies).
C*........... 3............ R1........... Emballonura Emballonuridae. Bat, Pacific U.S.A. (AS),
semicaudata sheath-tailed Fiji,
semicaudata. (American Independent
Samoa DPS). Samoa, Tonga,
Vanuatu.
C*........... 6............ R2........... Tamias minimus Sciuridae...... Chipmunk, U.S.A. (NM).
atristriatus. Pe[ntilde]asco
least.
C*........... 2............ R5........... Sylvilagus Leporidae...... Cottontail, New U.S.A. (CT, MA,
transitionalis. England. ME, NH, NY,
RI, VT).
C*........... 6............ R8........... Martes pennanti. Mustelidae..... Fisher (west U.S.A. (CA, CT,
coast DPS). IA, ID, IL,
IN, KY, MA,
MD, ME, MI,
MN, MT, ND,
NH, NJ, NY,
OH, OR, PA,
RI, TN, UT,
VA, VT, WA,
WI, WV, WY),
Canada.
C*........... 12........... R6........... Lynx canadensis. Felidae........ Lynx, Canada U.S.A. (CO, ID,
(New Mexico ME, MI, MN,
population). MT, NH, NY,
OR, UT, VT,
WA, WI, WY),
Canada.
C*........... 3............ R2........... Zapus hudsonius Zapodidae...... Mouse, New U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
luteus. Mexico meadow NM).
jumping.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
couchi. Shelton.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
douglasii. Brush Prairie.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
glacialis. Roy Prairie.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA)
louiei. Cathlamet.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
melanops. Olympic.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
pugetensis. Olympia.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
tacomensis. Tacoma.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
tumuli. Tenino.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Thomomys mazama Geomyidae...... Pocket gopher, U.S.A. (WA).
yelmensis. Yelm.
C*........... 2............ R6........... Cynomys Sciuridae...... Prairie dog, U.S.A. (CO,
gunnisoni. Gunnison's NM).
(populations
in central and
south-central
Colorado,
north-central
New Mexico).
C*........... 9............ R1........... Spermophilus Sciuridae...... Squirrel, U.S.A. (ID).
brunneus Southern Idaho
endemicus. ground.
C*........... 5............ R1........... Spermophilus Sciuridae...... Squirrel, U.S.A. (WA,
washingtoni. Washington OR).
ground.
C*........... 9............ R1........... Arborimus Cricetidae..... Vole, Red U.S.A. (OR).
longicaudus. (north Oregon
coast DPS).
C*........... 9............ R7........... Odobenus Odobenidae..... Walrus, Pacific U.S.A. (AK),
rosmarus Canada,
divergens. Russia.
C*........... 6............ R6........... Gulo gulo luscus Mustelidae..... Wolverine, U.S.A. (CA, CO,
North American ID, MT, OR,
(Contiguous UT, WA, WY).
U.S. DPS).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIRDS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 3............ R1........... Porzana Rallidae....... Crake, spotless U.S.A. (AS),
tabuensis. (American Australia,
Samoa DPS). Fiji,
Independent
Samoa,
Marquesas,
Philippines,
Society
Islands,
Tonga.
[[Page 70052]]
C*........... 3............ R8........... Coccyzus Cuculidae...... Cuckoo, yellow- U.S.A. (Lower
americanus. billed 48 States),
(Western U.S. Canada,
DPS). Mexico,
Central and
South America.
C*........... 9............ R1........... Gallicolumba Columbidae..... Ground-dove, U.S.A. (AS),
stairi. friendly Independent
(American Samoa.
Samoa DPS).
PT........... 3............ R1........... Eremophila Alaudidae...... Horned lark, U.S.A. (OR,
alpestris streaked. WA), Canada
strigata. (BC).
C*........... 3............ R5........... Calidris canutus Scolopacidae... Knot, red...... U.S.A.
rufa. (Atlantic
coast),
Canada, South
America.
C*........... 8............ R7........... Gavia adamsii... Gaviidae....... Loon, yellow- U.S.A. (AK),
billed. Canada,
Norway,
Russia,
coastal waters
of southern
Pacific and
North Sea.
C*........... 8............ R7........... Brachyramphus Alcidae........ Murrelet, U.S.A. (AK),
brevirostris. Kittlitz's. Russia.
C*........... 5............ R8........... Synthliboramphus Alcidae........ Murrelet, U.S.A. (CA),
hypoleucus. Xantus's. Mexico.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Anthus spragueii Motacillidae... Pipit, U.S.A. (AR, AZ,
Sprague's. CO, KS, LA,
MN, MS, MT,
ND, NE, NM,
OK, SD, TX),
Canada,
Mexico.
C*........... 2............ R2........... Amazona Psittacidae.... Parrot, red- U.S.A. (TX),
viridigenalis. crowned. Mexico.
C*........... 2............ R2........... Tympanuchus Phasianidae.... Prairie- U.S.A. (CO, KA,
pallidicinctus. chicken, NM, OK, TX).
lesser.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Centrocercus Phasianidae.... Sage-grouse, U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
urophasianus. greater. CO, ID, MT,
ND, NE, NV,
OR, SD, UT,
WA, WY),
Canada (AB,
BC, SK).
C*........... 3............ R8........... Centrocercus Phasianidae.... Sage-grouse, U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
urophasianus. greater (Bi- CO, ID, MT,
State DPS). ND, NE, NV,
OR, SD, UT,
WA, WY),
Canada (AB,
BC, SK).
C*........... 6............ R1........... Centrocercus Phasianidae.... Sage-grouse, U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
urophasianus. greater CO, ID, MT,
(Columbia ND, NE, NV,
Basin DPS). OR, SD, UT,
WA, WY),
Canada (AB,
BC, SK).
C*........... 2............ R6........... Centrocercus Phasianidae.... Sage-grouse, U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
minimus. Gunnison. NM, UT).
C*........... 3............ R1........... Oceanodroma Hydrobatidae... Storm-petrel, U.S.A. (HI),
castro. band-rumped Atlantic
(Hawaii DPS). Ocean, Ecuador
(Galapagos
Islands),
Japan.
C*........... 11........... R4........... Dendroica Emberizidae.... Warbler, elfin- U.S.A. (PR).
angelae. woods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPTILES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 3............ R2........... Thamnophis eques Colubridae..... Gartersnake, U.S.A. (AZ, NM,
megalops. northern NV), Mexico.
Mexican.
C*........... 8............ R3........... Sistrurus Viperidae...... Massasauga (= U.S.A. (IA, IL,
catenatus. rattlesnake), IN, MI, MN,
eastern. MO, NY, OH,
PA, WI),
Canada.
C*........... 3............ R4........... Pituophis Colubridae..... Snake, black U.S.A. (AL, LA,
melanoleucus pine. MS).
lodingi.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pituophis Colubridae..... Snake, U.S.A. (LA,
ruthveni. Louisiana pine. TX).
C*........... 3............ R2........... Chionactis Colubridae..... Snake, Tucson U.S.A. (AZ).
occipitalis shovel-nosed.
klauberi.
C*........... 5............ R2........... Gopherus Testudinidae... Tortoise, U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
morafkai. Sonoran desert. NV, UT).
C*........... 8............ R4........... Gopherus Testudinidae... Tortoise, U.S.A. (AL, FL,
polyphemus. gopher GA, LA, MS,
(eastern SC).
population).
C*........... 6............ R2........... Kinosternon Kinosternidae.. Turtle, Sonoyta U.S.A. (AZ),
sonoriense mud. Mexico.
longifemorale.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70053]]
AMPHIBIANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 9............ R8........... Rana Ranidae........ Frog, Columbia U.S.A. (AK, ID,
luteiventris. spotted (Great MT, NV, OR,
Basin DPS). UT, WA, WY),
Canada (BC).
C*........... 3............ R8........... Rana muscosa.... Ranidae........ Frog, mountain U.S.A (CA, NV).
yellow-legged
(Sierra Nevada
DPS).
C*........... 2............ R1........... Rana pretiosa... Ranidae........ Frog, Oregon U.S.A. (CA, OR,
spotted. WA), Canada
(BC).
C*........... 8............ R8........... Lithobates onca. Ranidae........ Frog, relict U.S.A. (AZ, NV,
leopard. UT).
C*........... 8............ R4........... Notophthalmus Salamandridae.. Newt, striped.. U.S.A. (FL,
perstriatus. GA).
PE........... 2............ R2........... Eurycea Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S.A. (TX).
waterlooensis. Austin blind.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Gyrinophilus Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S.A. (TN).
gulolineatus. Berry Cave.
PE........... 8............ R2........... Eurycea Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S.A. (TX).
naufragia. Georgetown.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Plethodon Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S. A. (NM).
neomexicanus. Jemez
Mountains.
PE........... 8............ R2........... Eurycea tonkawae Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S.A. (TX).
Jollyville
Plateau.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Eurycea Plethodontidae. Salamander, U.S.A. (TX).
chisholmensis. Salado.
C*........... 11........... R8........... Anaxyrus canorus Bufonidae...... Toad, Yosemite. U.S.A. (CA).
C............ 3............ R2........... Hyla wrightorum. Hylidae........ Treefrog, U.S.A. (AZ),
Arizona Mexico
(Huachuca/ (Sonora).
Canelo DPS).
C*........... 2............ R4........... Necturus Proteidae...... Waterdog, black U.S.A. (AL).
alabamensis. warrior (=
Sipsey Fork).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FISHES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 8............ R2........... Gila nigra...... Cyprinidae..... Chub, headwater U.S.A. (AZ,
NM).
C*........... 7............ R6........... Iotichthys Cyprinidae..... Chub, least.... U.S.A. (UT).
phlegethontis.
C*........... 9............ R2........... Gila robusta.... Cyprinidae..... Chub, roundtail U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
(Lower NM, UT, WY).
Colorado River
Basin DPS).
C*........... 11........... R6........... Etheostoma Percidae....... Darter, U.S.A. (AR, CO,
cragini. Arkansas. KS, MO, OK).
C............ 9............ R4........... Etheostoma Percidae....... Darter, U.S.A. (KY,
sagitta sagitta. Cumberland TN).
arrow.
PE........... 2............ R5........... Crystallaria Percidae....... Darter, diamond U.S.A. (KY, OH,
cincotta. TN, WV).
C............ 3............ R4........... Etheostoma Percidae....... Darter, U.S.A. (KY).
sagitta Kentucky arrow.
spilotum.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Percina aurora.. Percidae....... Darter, Pearl.. U.S.A. (LA,
MS).
C*........... 3............ R6........... Thymallus Salmonidae..... Grayling, U.S.A. (AK, MI,
arcticus. Arctic (upper MT, WY),
Missouri River Canada,
DPS). northern Asia,
northern
Europe.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Moxostoma sp.... Catostomidae... Redhorse, U.S.A. (GA, NC,
sicklefin. TN).
PE........... 2............ R3........... Cottus sp....... Cottidae....... Sculpin, grotto U.S.A. (MO).
C*........... 5............ R2........... Notropis Cyprinidae..... Shiner, U.S.A. (TX).
oxyrhynchus. sharpnose.
C*........... 5............ R2........... Notropis buccula Cyprinidae..... Shiner, U.S.A. (TX).
smalleye.
C*........... 3............ R8........... Spirinchus Osmeridae...... Smelt, longfin U.S.A. (AK, CA,
thaleichthys. (San Francisco OR, WA),
bay-delta DPS). Canada.
C*........... 3............ R2........... Catostomus Catostomidae... Sucker, Zuni U.S.A. (AZ,
discobolus bluehead. NM).
yarrowi.
PT........... ............. R4........... Elassoma........ Elassomatidae.. Sunfish, spring U.S.A. (AL).
alabamae........ pygmy.
PSAT......... N/A.......... R1........... Salvelinus malma Salmonidae..... Trout, Dolly U.S.A. (AK,
Varden. WA), Canada,
East Asia.
C*........... 9............ R2........... Oncorhynchus Salmonidae..... Trout, Rio U.S.A. (CO,
clarki Grande NM).
virginalis. cutthroat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 2............ R2........... Lampsilis Unionidae...... Fatmucket, U.S.A. (TX).
bracteata. Texas.
C*........... 2............ R2........... Truncilla Unionidae...... Fawnsfoot, U.S.A. (TX).
macrodon. Texas.
[[Page 70054]]
C*........... 8............ R2........... Popenaias popei. Unionidae...... Hornshell, U.S.A. (NM,
Texas. TX), Mexico.
PE........... 2............ R4........... Ptychobranchus Unionidae...... Kidneyshell, U.S.A. (AL, KY,
subtentum. fluted. TN, VA).
PE........... 2............ R4........... Lampsilis Unionidae...... Mucket, Neosho. U.S.A. (AR, KS,
rafinesqueana. MO, OK).
C*........... 8............ R2........... Quadrula aurea.. Unionidae...... Orb, golden.... U.S.A. (TX).
PE........... 2............ R4........... Lexingtonia Unionidae...... Pearlymussel, U.S.A. (AL, KY,
dolabelloides. slabside. TN, VA).
C*........... 8............ R2........... Quadrula Unionidae...... Pimpleback, U.S.A. (TX).
houstonensis. smooth.
C*........... 2............ R2........... Quadrula petrina Unionidae...... Pimpleback, U.S.A. (TX).
Texas.
PT........... 9............ R4........... Quadrula Unionidae...... Rabbitsfoot.... U.S.A. (AL, AR,
cylindrica GA, IN, IL,
cylindrica. KS, KY, LA,
MS, MO, OK,
OH, PA, TN,
WV).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNAILS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 8............ R4........... Elimia Pleuroceridae.. Mudalia, black. U.S.A. (AL).
melanoides.
C*........... 2............ R4........... Planorbella Planorbidae.... Ramshorn, U.S.A. (NC).
magnifica. magnificent.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Ostodes Potaridae...... Sisi snail..... U.S.A. (AS).
strigatus.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Pseudotryonia Hydrobiidae.... Snail, Diamond U.S.A. (TX).
adamantina. Y Spring.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Samoana fragilis Partulidae..... Snail, fragile U.S.A. (GU,
tree. MP).
C*........... 2............ R1........... Partula Partulidae..... Snail, Guam U.S.A. (GU).
radiolata. tree.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Partula gibba... Partulidae..... Snail, Humped U.S.A. (GU,
tree. MP).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Partulina Achatinellidae. Snail, Lanai U.S.A. (HI).
semicarinata. tree.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Partulina Achatinellidae. Snail, Lanai U.S.A. (HI).
variabilis. tree.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Partula Partulidae..... Snail, U.S.A. (MP).
langfordi. Langford's
tree.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Cochliopa texana Hydrobiidae.... Snail, Phantom U.S.A. (TX).
cave.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Newcombia Achatinellidae. Snail, U.S.A. (Hl).
cumingi. Newcomb's tree.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Eua zebrina..... Partulidae..... Snail, Tutuila U.S.A. (AS).
tree.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Tryonia Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (TX).
circumstriata Gonzales.
(=
stocktonensis).
C*........... 11........... R2........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (AZ),
thompsoni. Huachuca. Mexico.
C*........... 11........... R2........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (AZ).
morrisoni. Page.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Tryonia cheatumi Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail (= U.S.A. (TX).
Tryonia),
Phantom.
C*........... 5............ R2........... Sonorella Helminthoglypti Talussnail, U.S.A. (AZ).
rosemontensis. dae. Rosemont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INSECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
anthracinus. yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
assimulans. yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus facilis. Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus hilaris. Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus kuakea.. Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
longiceps. yellow-faced.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hylaeus mana.... Colletidae..... Bee, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
yellow-faced.
PSAT......... ............. R8........... Plebejus lupine Lycaenidae..... Blue, Lupine... U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
texanus. CO, NE, NM,
NV, TX, UT),
Mexico.
PE........... 3............ R8........... Plebejus shasta Lycaenidae..... Blue, Mt. U.S.A. (NV).
charlestonensis. Charleston.
PSAT......... ............. R8........... Echinargus isola Lycaenidae..... Blue, Reakirt's U.S.A. (AR, AZ,
CA, CO, IA,
IL, IN, KS,
LA, MI, MN,
MO, MS, ND,
NE, NM, NV,
OH, OK, SD,
TN, TX, UT,
WA, WI, WY),
Mexico.
PSAT......... ............. R8........... Euphilotes Lycaenidae..... Blue, Spring U.S.A. (NV).
ancilla Mountains dark.
cryptica.
[[Page 70055]]
PSAT......... ............. R8........... Euphilotes Lycaenidae..... Blue, Spring U.S.A. (NV).
ancilla purpura. Mountains dark.
PSAT......... ............. R8........... Plebejus Lycaenidae..... Blue, Spring U.S.A. (NV).
icarioides Mountains
austinorum. icariodes.
C............ 3............ R4........... Strymon acis Lycaenidae..... Butterfly, U.S.A. (FL).
bartrami. Bartram's
hairstreak.
C............ 3............ R4........... Anaea troglodyta Nymphalidae.... Butterfly, U.S.A. (FL).
floridalis. Florida
leafwing.
C*........... 5............ R8........... Hermelycaena Lycaenidae..... Butterfly, U.S.A. (CA).
[Lycaena] Hermes copper.
hermes.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Hypolimnas Nymphalidae.... Butterfly, U.S.A. (GU,
octucula Mariana eight- MP).
mariannensis. spot.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Vagrans egistina Nymphalidae.... Butterfly, U.S.A. (GU,
Mariana MP).
wandering.
C*........... 2............ R4........... Atlantea tulita. Nymphalidae.... Butterfly, U.S.A. (PR).
Puerto Rican
harlequin.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Glyphopsyche Limnephilidae.. Caddisfly, U.S.A. (TN).
sequatchie. Sequatchie.
C............ 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s insularis. Baker Station
(= insular).
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (KY).
s caecus. Clifton.
C*........... 11........... R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s colemanensis. Coleman.
C............ 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s fowlerae. Fowler's.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (KY).
s frigidus. icebox.
C............ 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s tiresias. Indian Grave
Point (=
Soothsayer).
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s inquisitor. inquirer.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (KY).
s troglodytes. Louisville.
C............ 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (TN).
s paulus. Noblett's.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Pseudanophthalmu Carabidae...... Cave beetle, U.S.A. (KY).
s parvus. Tatum.
PE........... 3............ R1........... Euphydryas Nymphalidae.... Checkerspot U.S.A. (OR,
editha taylori. butterfly, WA), Canada
Taylor's (= (BC).
Whulge).
C*........... 8............ R1........... Megalagrion Coenagrionidae. Damselfly, U.S.A. (HI).
xanthomelas. orangeblack
Hawaiian.
C............ 2............ R8........... Ambrysus Naucoridae..... Naucorid bug (= U.S.A. (CA).
funebris. Furnace
Creek),
Nevares Spring.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Drosophila Drosophilidae.. fly, Hawaiian U.S.A. (HI).
digressa. Picture-wing.
C*........... 11........... R2........... Heterelmis Elmidae........ Riffle beetle, U.S.A. (AZ).
stephani. Stephan's.
C*........... 8............ R3........... Hesperia dacotae Hesperiidae.... Skipper, Dakota U.S.A. (MN, IA,
SD, ND, IL),
Canada.
C............ 2............ R3........... Oarisma Hesperiidae.... Skipperling, U.S.A. (IA, IL,
poweshiek. Poweshiek. IN, MI, MN,
ND, SD, WI),
Canada (MB).
C*........... 5............ R6........... Capnia arapahoe. Capniidae...... Snowfly, U.S.A. (CO).
Arapahoe.
C*........... 5............ R6........... Lednia tumana... Nemouridae..... Stonefly, U.S.A. (MT).
meltwater
lednian.
PT........... 2............ R6........... Cicindela Cicindelidae... Tiger beetle, U.S.A. (UT).
albissima. Coral Pink
Sand Dunes.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Cicindela Cicindelidae... Tiger beetle, U.S.A. (FL).
highlandensis. highlands.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARACHNIDS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 8............ R2........... Cicurina wartoni Dictynidae..... Meshweaver, U.S.A. (TX).
Warton's cave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRUSTACEANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PE........... 2............ R2........... Gammarus Gammaridae..... Amphipod, U.S.A. (TX).
hyalleloides. diminutive.
[[Page 70056]]
PE........... ............. R2........... Gammarus pecos.. Gammaridae..... Amphipod, Pecos U.S.A. (TX).
C............ 8............ R5........... Stygobromus Crangonyctidae. Amphipod, U.S.A. (DC).
kenki. Kenk's.
C*........... 5............ R1........... Metabetaeus Alpheidae...... Shrimp, U.S.A. (HI).
lohena. anchialine
pool.
C*........... 5............ R1........... Palaemonella Palaemonidae... Shrimp, U.S.A. (HI).
burnsi. anchialine
pool.
C*........... 5............ R1........... Procaris Procarididae... Shrimp, U.S.A. (HI).
hawaiana. anchialine
pool.
PE........... 4............ R1........... Vetericaris Procaridae..... Shrimp, U.S.A. (HI).
chaceorum. anchialine
pool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLOWERING PLANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 11........... R8........... Abronia alpina.. Nyctaginaceae.. Sand-verbena, U.S.A. (CA).
Ramshaw
Meadows.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Agave eggersiana Agavaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (VI).
C*........... 8............ R4........... Arabis georgiana Brassicaceae... Rockcress, U.S.A. (AL,
Georgia. GA).
C*........... 11........... R4........... Argythamnia Euphorbiaceae.. Silverbush, U.S.A. (FL).
blodgettii. Blodgett's.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Artemisia Asteraceae..... Wormwood, U.S.A. (OR,
borealis var. northern. WA).
wormskioldii.
C*........... 2............ R6........... Astragalus Fabaceae....... Milkvetch, U.S.A. (ID, NV,
anserinus. Goose Creek. UT).
C............ 3............ R1........... Astragalus Fabaceae....... Milkvetch, U.S.A. (ID).
cusickii var. Packard's.
packardiae.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Astragalus Fabaceae....... Milkvetch, U.S.A. (CO).
microcymbus. skiff.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Astragalus Fabaceae....... Milkvetch, U.S.A. (CO).
schmolliae. Schmoll.
C*........... 11........... R6........... Astragalus Fabaceae....... Milkvetch, U.S.A. (CO).
tortipes. Sleeping Ute.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Bidens Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
amplectens.
PE........... 3............ R1........... Bidens Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
campylotheca
pentamera.
PE........... 3............ R1........... Bidens Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
campylotheca
waihoiensis.
PE........... 8............ R1........... Bidens conjuncta Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Bidens Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
hillenbrandiana
hillebrandina.
PE........... 3............ R1........... Bidens micrantha Asteraceae..... Ko`oko`olau.... U.S.A. (HI).
ctenophylla.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Boechera Brassicaceae... Rockcress, U.S.A. (WY).
(Arabis) Fremont County
pusilla. or small.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Brickellia Asteraceae..... Brickell-bush, U.S.A. (FL).
mosieri. Florida.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Calamagrostis Poaceae........ Reedgrass, Maui U.S.A. (HI).
expansa.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Calamagrostis Poaceae........ Reedgrass, U.S.A. (HI).
hillebrandii. Hillebrand's.
C*........... 11........... R8........... Calochortus Liliaceae...... Mariposa lily, U.S.A. (CA,
persistens. Siskiyou. OR).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Canavalia Fabaceae....... `Awikiwiki..... U.S.A. (HI).
pubescens.
C*........... 9............ R4........... Chamaecrista Fabaceae....... Pea, Big Pine U.S.A. (FL).
lineata var. partridge.
keyensis.
C*........... 12........... R4........... Chamaesyce Euphorbiaceae.. Sandmat, U.S.A. (FL).
deltoidea pineland.
pinetorum.
C*........... 9............ R4........... Chamaesyce Euphorbiaceae.. Spurge, wedge.. U.S.A. (FL).
deltoidea
serpyllum.
C*........... 6............ R8........... Chorizanthe Polygonaceae... Spineflower, U.S.A. (CA).
parryi var. San Fernando
fernandina. Valley.
PE........... 2............ R4........... Chromolaena Asteraceae..... Thoroughwort, U.S.A. (FL).
frustrata. Cape Sable.
C*........... 8............ R2........... Cirsium wrightii Asteraceae..... Thistle, U.S.A. (AZ,
Wright's. NM), Mexico.
PE........... 2............ R4........... Consolea Cactaceae...... Cactus, Florida U.S.A. (FL).
corallicola. semaphore.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Cordia rupicola. Boraginaceae... No common name. U.S.A. (PR),
Anegada.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
asplenifolia.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
duvalliorum.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea horrida.. Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyanea kunthiana Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
magnicalyx.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea maritae.. Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea mauiensis Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea marksii.. Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea munroi... Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyanea obtusa... Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea profuga.. Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyanea solanacea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. `Aku........... U.S.A. (HI).
tritomantha.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
ferripilosa.
[[Page 70057]]
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
filipes.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
nanawaleensis.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
oxybapha.
PE........... ............. R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
wagneri.
C*........... 3............ R4........... Dalea Fabaceae....... Prairie-clover, U.S.A. (FL).
carthagenensis Florida.
var. floridana.
C*........... 5............ R5........... Dichanthelium Poaceae........ Panic grass, U.S.A. (DE, GA,
hirstii. Hirst NC, NJ).
Brothers'.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Digitaria Poaceae........ Crabgrass, U.S.A. (FL).
pauciflora. Florida
pineland.
PE........... 3............ R2........... Echinomastus Cactaceae...... Cactus, Acuna.. U.S.A. (AZ),
erectocentrus Mexico.
var. acunensis.
PT........... 2............ R1........... Eriogonum codium Polygonaceae... Buckwheat, U.S.A. (WA).
Umtanum Desert.
C*........... 6............ R8........... Eriogonum Polygonaceae... Buckwheat, Las U.S.A. (NV).
corymbosum var. Vegas.
nilesii.
C............ 5............ R8........... Eriogonum Polygonaceae... Buckwheat, U.S.A (NV).
diatomaceum. Churchill
Narrows.
C*........... 5............ R8........... Eriogonum Polygonaceae... Buckwheat, Red U.S.A. (CA).
kelloggii. Mountain.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Eriogonum Polygonaceae... Buckwheat, U.S.A. (UT).
soredium. Frisco.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Festuca Poaceae........ No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
hawaiiensis.
C*........... 11........... R2........... Festuca ligulata Poaceae........ Fescue, U.S.A. (TX),
Guadalupe. Mexico.
PE........... ............. R1........... Festuca Poaceae........ No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
molokaiensis.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Gardenia remyi.. Rubiaceae...... Nanu........... U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... 8............ R1........... Geranium Geraniaceae.... Nohoanu........ U.S.A. (HI).
hanaense.
PE........... 8............ R1........... Geranium Geraniaceae.... Nohoanu........ U.S.A. (HI).
hillebrandii.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Gonocalyx Ericaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (PR).
concolor.
PE........... 2............ R4........... Harrisia Cactaceae...... Pricklyapple, U.S.A. (FL).
aboriginum. aboriginal
(shellmound
applecactus).
C*........... 5............ R8........... Hazardia Asteraceae..... Orcutt's U.S.A. (CA),
orcuttii. hazardia. Mexico.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Hedyotis Rubiaceae...... Kampua`a....... U.S.A. (HI).
fluviatilis.
C*........... 2............ R4........... Helianthus Asteraceae..... Sunflower, U.S.A. (AL, GA,
verticillatus. whorled. TN).
PT........... 2............ R2........... Hibiscus Malvaceae...... Rose-mallow, U.S.A. (TX).
dasycalyx. Neches River.
C*........... 5............ R8........... Ivesia webberi.. Rosaceae....... Ivesia, Webber. U.S.A. (CA,
NV).
C*........... 3............ R1........... Joinvillea Joinvilleaceae. `Ohe........... U.S.A. (HI).
ascendens
ascendens.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Leavenworthia Brassicaceae... Gladecress, U.S.A. (AL).
crassa. unnamed.
C............ 3............ R4........... Leavenworthia Brassicaceae... Gladecress, U.S.A. (KY).
exigua var. Kentucky.
laciniata.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Leavenworthia Brassicaceae... Gladecress, U.S.A. (TX).
texana. Texas golden.
C*........... 8............ R6........... Lepidium ostleri Brassicaceae... Peppergrass, U.S.A. (UT).
Ostler's.
C*........... 5............ R4........... Linum arenicola. Linaceae....... Flax, sand..... U.S.A. (FL).
C*........... 3............ R4........... Linum carteri Linaceae....... Flax, Carter's U.S.A. (FL).
var. carteri. small-flowered.
C............ 3............ R8........... Mimulus Phrymaceae..... Monkeyflower, U.S.A. (CA).
fremontii var. Vandenberg.
vandenbergensis.
PE........... ............. R1........... Mucuna sloanei Fabaceae....... Sea bean....... U.S.A. (HI).
var. persericea.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Myrsine Myrsinaceae.... Kolea.......... U.S.A. (HI).
fosbergii.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Myrsine Myrsinaceae.... Kolea.......... U.S.A. (HI).
vaccinioides.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Nothocestrum Solanaceae..... `Aiea.......... U.S.A. (HI).
latifolium.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Ochrosia Apocynaceae.... Holei.......... U.S.A. (HI).
haleakalae.
PE........... 3............ R2........... Pediocactus Cactaceae...... Cactus, U.S.A. (AZ).
peeblesianus Fickeisen
var. plains.
fickeiseniae.
PT........... 2............ R6........... Penstemon Scrophulariacea Beardtongue, U.S.A. (CO,
grahamii. e. Graham's. UT).
C*........... 9............ R6........... Penstemon Scrophulariacea Beardtongue, U.S.A. (CO,
scariosus var. e. White River. UT).
albifluvis.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Peperomia Piperaceae..... `Ala `ala wai U.S.A. (HI).
subpetiolata. nui.
C............ 5............ R8........... Phacelia Hydrophyllaceae Phacelia, U.S.A. (CA),
stellaris. Brand's. Mexico.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Phyllostegia Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
bracteata.
PE........... 8............ R1........... Phyllostegia Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
floribunda.
PE........... ............. R1........... Phyllostegia Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
haliakalae.
[[Page 70058]]
PE........... ............. R1........... Phyllostegia Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
pilosa.
PT........... 9............ R1........... Physaria Brassicaceae... Bladderpod, U.S.A. (WA).
douglasii White Bluffs.
tuplashensis.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Physaria globosa Brassicaceae... Bladderpod, U.S.A. (IN, KY,
Short's. TN).
C*........... 2............ R6........... Pinus albicaulis Pinaceae....... Pine, whitebark U.S.A. (CA, ID,
MT, NV, OR,
WA, WY),
Canada (AB,
BC).
PE........... ............. R1........... Pittosporum Pittosporaceae. Hoawa.......... U.S.A. (HI).
halophilum.
PE........... ............. R1........... Pittosporum Pittosporaceae. Hoawa.......... U.S.A. (HI).
hawaiiense.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Platanthera Orchidaceae.... Orchid, white U.S.A. (AL, GA,
integrilabia. fringeless. KY, MS, NC,
SC, TN, VA).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Platydesma remyi Rutaceae....... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Pleomele Agavaceae...... Hala pepe...... U.S.A. (HI).
fernaldii.
C*........... 11........... R8........... Potentilla Rosaceae....... Cinquefoil, U.S.A. (NV).
basaltica. Soldier Meadow.
PE........... ............. R1........... Pritchardia Arecaceae...... Loulu.......... U.S.A. (HI).
lanigera.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Pseudognaphalium Asteraceae..... `Ena`ena....... U.S.A. (HI).
(= Gnaphalium)
sandwicensium
var.
molokaiense.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Ranunculus Ranunculaceae.. Makou.......... U.S.A. (HI).
hawaiensis.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Ranunculus Ranunculaceae.. Makou.......... U.S.A. (HI).
mauiensis.
C*........... 8............ R8........... Rorippa Brassicaceae... Cress, Tahoe U.S.A. (CA,
subumbellata. yellow. NV).
PE........... ............. R1........... Schiedea diffusa Caryophyllaceae No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
macraei.
PE........... ............. R1........... Schiedea Caryophyllaceae No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
hawaiiensis.
PE........... ............. R1........... Schiedea jacobii Caryophyllaceae No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
PE........... ............. R1........... Schiedea laui... Caryophyllaceae No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
C*........... 2............ R1........... Schiedea Caryophyllaceae Ma`oli`oli..... U.S.A. (HI).
pubescens.
PE........... 2............ R1........... Schiedea Caryophyllaceae No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
salicaria.
C*........... 5............ R8........... Sedum Crassulaceae... Stonecrop, Red U.S.A. (CA).
eastwoodiae. Mountain.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Sicyos Cucurbitaceae.. `Anunu......... U.S.A. (HI).
macrophyllus.
C............ 12........... R4........... Sideroxylon Sapotaceae..... Bully, U.S.A. (FL).
reclinatum Everglades.
austrofloridens
e.
C*........... 2............ R4........... Solanum Solanaceae..... Bacora, marron. U.S.A. (PR).
conocarpum.
C*........... 8............ R1........... Solanum nelsonii Solanaceae..... Popolo......... U.S.A. (HI).
C*........... 8............ R4........... Solidago plumosa Asteraceae..... Goldenrod, U.S.A. (NC).
Yadkin River.
PE........... 2............ R2........... Sphaeralcea Malvaceae...... Mallow, U.S.A. (AZ,
gierischii. Gierisch. UT).
PE........... 2............ R1........... Stenogyne Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
cranwelliae.
PE........... ............. R1........... Stenogyne Lamiaceae...... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
kauaulaensis.
C............ 8............ R2........... Streptanthus Brassicaceae... Twistflower, U.S.A. (TX).
bracteatus. bracted.
C*........... 8............ R4........... Symphyotrichum Asteraceae..... Aster, Georgia. U.S.A. (AL, FL,
georgianum. GA, NC, SC).
C*........... 8............ R6........... Trifolium Fabaceae....... Clover, Frisco. U.S.A. (UT).
friscanum.
PE........... ............. R1........... Wikstroemia Thymelaeaceae.. Akia........... U.S.A. (HI).
villosa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERNS AND ALLIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*........... 8............ R1........... Cyclosorus Thelypteridacea No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
boydiae. e.
C*........... 2............ R1........... Huperzia (= Lycopodiaceae.. Wawae`iole..... U.S.A. (HI).
Phlegmariurus)
stemmermanniae.
C*........... 3............ R1........... Microlepia Dennstaedtiacea Palapalai...... U.S.A. (HI).
strigosa var. e.
mauiensis (=
Microlepia
mauiensis).
C............ 3............ R4........... Trichomanes Hymenophyllacea Florida bristle U.S.A. (FL).
punctatum e. fern.
floridanum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70059]]
Table 2--Animals and Plants Formerly Candidates or Formerly Proposed for Listing
[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status
----------------------------- Lead region Scientific name Family Common name Historical
Code Expl. range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPTILES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rp........... U............ R2........... Sceloporus Iguanidae...... Lizard, sand U.S.A. (TX,
arenicolus. dune. NM).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMPHIBIANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R3........... Cryptobranchus Crytobranchidae Hellbender, U.S.A. (AR,
alleganiensis Ozark. MO).
bishopi.
E............ L............ R4........... Eleutherodactylu Leptodactylidae Coqui, Llanero. U.S.A. (PR).
s juanariveroi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R4........... Villosa Unionidae...... Bean, Choctaw.. U.S.A. (AL,
choctawensis. FL).
E............ L............ R3........... Villosa fabalis. Unionidae...... Bean, rayed.... U.S.A. (IL, IN,
KY, MI, NY,
OH, TN, PA,
VA, WV),
Canada (ON).
E............ L............ R4........... Fusconaia Unionidae...... Ebonyshell, U.S.A. (AL,
rotulata. round. FL).
E............ L............ R4........... Ptychobranchus Unionidae...... Kidneyshell, U.S.A. (AL,
jonesi. southern. FL).
E............ L............ R3........... Plethobasus Unionidae...... Mussel, U.S.A. (AL, IA,
cyphyus. sheepnose. IL, IN, KY,
MN, MO, MS,
OH, PA, TN,
VA, WI, WV).
E............ L............ R4........... Margaritifera Margaritiferida Pearlshell, U.S.A. (AL).
marrianae. e. Alabama.
T............ L............ R4........... Pleurobema Unionidae...... Pigtoe, fuzzy.. U.S.A. (AL,
strodeanum. FL).
T............ L............ R4........... Fusconaia Unionidae...... Pigtoe, narrow. U.S.A. (AL,
escambia. FL).
T............ L............ R4........... Fusconaia (= Unionidae...... Pigtoe, tapered U.S.A. (AL,
Quincuncina) FL).
burkei.
T............ 5............ R4........... Hamiota (= Unionidae...... Sandshell, U.S.A. (AL,
Lampsilis) southern. FL).
australis.
E............ L............ R3........... Epioblasma Unionidae...... Snuffbox....... U.S.A. (IN, MI,
triquetra. NY, OH, PA,
WV), Canada
(ON).
E............ L............ R3........... Cumberlandia Margaritiferida Spectaclecase.. U.S.A. (AL, AR,
monodonta. e. IA, IN, IL,
KS, KY, MO,
MN, NE, OH,
TN, VA, WI,
WV).
E............ L............ R4........... Elliptio spinosa Unionidae...... Spinymussel, U.S.A. (GA).
Altamaha.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNAILS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R2........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (AZ),
bernardina. San Bernardino. Mexico
(Sonora).
E............ L............ R2........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (NM).
chupaderae. Chupadera.
Rc........... U............ R8........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (NV).
notidicola. elongate mud
meadows.
E............ L............ R2........... Pyrgulopsis Hydrobiidae.... Springsnail, U.S.A. (AZ).
trivialis. Three Forks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INSECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R1........... Megalagrion Coenagrionidae. Damselfly, U.S.A. (HI).
nigrohamatum blackline
nigrolineatum. Hawaiian.
E............ L............ R1........... Megalagrion Coenagrionidae. Damselfly, U.S.A. (HI).
leptodemas. crimson
Hawaiian.
E............ L............ R1........... Megalagrion Coenagrionidae. Damselfly, U.S.A. (HI).
oceanicum. oceanic
Hawaiian.
Rc........... U............ R1........... Polites mardon.. Hesperiidae.... Skipper, Mardon U.S.A. (CA, OR,
WA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLOWERING PLANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R8........... Arctostaphylos Ericaceae...... Manzanita, U.S.A. (CA).
franciscana. Franciscan.
Rc........... U............ R1........... Castilleja Scrophulariacea Paintbrush, U.S.A. (ID).
christii. e. Christ's.
E............ L............ R1........... Cyanea calycina. Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
E............ L............ R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
lanceolata.
E............ L............ R1........... Cyanea Campanulaceae.. Haha........... U.S.A. (HI).
purpurellifolia.
E............ L............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
gracilis.
E............ L............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
kaulantha.
E............ L............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
sessilis.
[[Page 70060]]
E............ L............ R1........... Cyrtandra Gesneriaceae... Ha`iwale....... U.S.A. (HI).
waiolani.
Rc........... A............ R2........... Erigeron Asteraceae..... Fleabane, U.S.A. (AZ).
lemmonii. Lemmon.
E............ L............ R1........... Korthalsella Viscaceae...... Hulumoa........ U.S.A. (HI).
degeneri.
E............ L............ R1........... Melicope Rutaceae....... Alani.......... U.S.A. (HI).
christopherseni
i.
E............ L............ R1........... Melicope hiiakae Rutaceae....... Alani.......... U.S.A. (HI).
E............ L............ R1........... Melicope makahae Rutaceae....... Alani.......... U.S.A. (HI).
Rc........... A............ R5........... Narthecium Liliaceae...... Asphodel, bog.. U.S.A. (DE, NC,
americanum. NJ, NY, SC).
E............ L............ R1........... Platydesma Rutaceae....... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
cornuta var.
cornuta.
E............ L............ R1........... Platydesma Rutaceae....... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
cornuta var.
decurrens.
E............ L............ R1........... Pleomele Agavaceae...... Hala pepe...... U.S.A. (HI).
forbesii.
E............ L............ R1........... Psychotria Rubiaceae...... Kopiko......... U.S.A. (HI).
hexandra
oahuensis.
E............ L............ R1........... Pteralyxia Apocynaceae.... Kaulu.......... U.S.A. (HI).
macrocarpa.
E............ L............ R1........... Tetraplasandra Araliaceae..... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
lydgatei.
E............ L............ R1........... Zanthoxylum Rutaceae....... A`e............ U.S.A. (HI).
oahuense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERNS AND ALLIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............ L............ R1........... Doryopteris Pteridaceae.... No common name. U.S.A. (HI).
takeuchii.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2012-28050 Filed 11-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P