[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 78775-78778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30574]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket Nos. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0058; FWS-R3-ES-2014-0056; 4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings on
Two Petitions
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition findings and initiation of status reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on a petition to delist the coastal California gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) and a petition to list the monarch
butterfly (Danaus plexippus plexippus) under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that both
petitions present substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore,
with the publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the
status of these subspecies to determine if the petitioned actions are
warranted. To ensure that these status reviews are comprehensive, we
are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information
regarding these subspecies. Based on the status reviews, we will issue
12-month findings on the petitions, which will address whether the
petitioned action is warranted, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of
the Act.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct the status reviews, we
request that we receive information no later than March 2, 2015.
Information submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the closing date.
ADDRESSES:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket
number (see table below). You may submit information by clicking on
``Comment Now!'' If your information will fit in the provided comment
box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is
most compatible with our information review procedures. If you attach
your information as a separate document, our preferred file format is
Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple comments (such as form letters),
our preferred format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table
below]; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275
Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send information only by the methods described
above. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information
section, below, for more details).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
coastal California gnatcatcher........... FWS-R8-ES-2014-0058
[[Page 78776]]
monarch butterfly........................ FWS-R3-ES-2014-0056
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the coastal California
gnatcatcher: Mendel Stewart, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2177 Salk Ave, Suite 250, Carlsbad, CA 92008;
telephone 760-431-9440; or facsimile (fax) 760-431-5901.
For the monarch butterfly, Tony Sullins, Chief of Endangered
Species, Midwest Region, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990,
Bloomington, MN 55437; telephone 612-713-5334; or fax 612-713-5292.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Information
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing, reclassification, or delisting a
species may be warranted, we are required to promptly review the status
of the species (status review). For the status review to be complete
and based on the best available scientific and commercial information,
we request information on the coastal California gnatcatcher and
monarch butterfly from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes,
the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties.
For both petitioned subspecies we seek information on:
(1) The subspecies' biology, range, and population trends,
including:
(a) Habitat requirements;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the subspecies, its
habitat, or both.
(2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing,
reclassification, or delisting determination for a species under
section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
(3) The potential effects of climate change on the subspecies and
its habitat.
(4) Information specific to a subspecies (e.g., taxonomy of the
entity, information about its status in a particular area, or
information that may be used in a potential rule issued under section
4(d) of the Act for the conservation of the subspecies).
Specific questions for the coastal California gnatcatcher:
(1) The coastal California gnatcatcher's biology, range, and
population trends, including, but not limited to, distribution,
abundance, population trends, demographics, and genetics.
(2) Information related to the taxonomy, particularly the
distinctiveness at the subspecies level, of California gnatcatchers in
southern California and Baja California, Mexico, including:
(a) New morphological, genetic, or other relevant information;
(b) New analyses or new interpretations of existing morphological,
genetic, or other relevant information;
(c) Information on the methods, results, and conclusions of Zink et
al. (2000, entire) and Zink et al. (2013, entire), on which the
petition heavily relies; and
(d) Information related to consideration of the coastal California
gnatcatcher as a distinct population segment (DPS).
Specific questions for the monarch butterfly:
(1) Any relevant aspects of the life history or behavior of the
monarch butterfly that have not yet been documented; and
(2) Thermo-tolerance range and microclimate requirements of the
monarch butterfly.
If, after the status review, we determine that listing the monarch
butterfly is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see
definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act) under section 4 of the Act,
to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time we propose
to list the subspecies. Therefore, we also request data and information
on:
(1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species,'' within the geographical range
occupied by the subspecies;
(2) Where these features are currently found;
(3) Whether any of these features may require special management
considerations or protection;
(4) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
subspecies that are ``essential for the conservation of the species'';
and
(5) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for
designation if the subspecies is proposed for listing, and why such
habitat meets the requirements of section 4 of the Act.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the actions
under consideration without providing supporting information, although
noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.''
You may submit your information concerning these status reviews by
one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit
information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the
Web site. If you submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying
information, you may request at the top of your document that we
withhold this personal identifying information from public review.
However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will
post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting documentation that we received and used
in preparing this finding will be available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal
business hours at the appropriate lead U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90
days of our receipt of the petition and publish our notice of the
finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information
within the
[[Page 78777]]
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition
finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be
warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial scientific
or commercial information was presented, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the species, which will be
subsequently summarized in our 12-month finding.
Section 3(6) of the Act defines an ``endangered species'' as any
species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Section 3(20) of the Act defines a
``threatened species'' as any species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Section 3(16) of the Act defines
``species'' as including any species or subspecies of fish or wildlife
or plants, and any distinct population segment of any species of
vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species
to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an
endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors
described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:
We may delist a species according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best
available scientific and commercial data indicate that the species is
neither endangered nor threatened for one or more of the following
reasons:
(1) The species is extinct;
(2) The species has recovered and is no longer endangered or
threatened; or
(3) The original scientific or commercial data used at the time the
species was classified, or the interpretation of such data, were in
error.
In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look
beyond the exposure of the species to a factor to evaluate whether the
species may respond to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts
to the species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species
responds negatively, the factor may be a threat, and, during the
subsequent status review, we attempt to determine how significant a
threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes
to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species may
warrant listing as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined
in the Act. However, the identification of factors that could affect a
species negatively may not be sufficient for us to find that the
information in the petition and our files is substantial. The
information must include evidence sufficient to suggest that these
factors may be operative threats that act on the species to the point
that the species may meet the definition of an endangered or threatened
species under the Act.
Review of Petition To Remove the Coastal California Gnatcatcher From
the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Under the Act
Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS-R8-ES-2014-0058 under the Supporting Documents section in the
document labeled Appendix for the coastal California gnatcatcher.
Subspecies and Range
This petition concerns the coastal California gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica). Its range includes coastal
southern California in the United States and northwestern Baja
California, Mexico.
Petition History
On June 11, 2014, we received a petition dated June 10, 2014, from
Pacific Legal Foundation requesting that the coastal California
gnatcatcher be removed from the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife (List) due to error. The petition claims that the coastal
California gnatcatcher is not a valid subspecies and thus does not meet
the definition of ``species'' under the Act. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila
californica californica).
Thus, for the coastal California gnatcatcher, the Service requests
information regarding the species taxonomy and listing factors under
section 4(a)(1) of the Act (see Request for Information).
Review of Petition To List the Monarch Butterfly as a Threatened
Species Under the Act
Additional information regarding our review of this petition can be
found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS-R3-ES-2014-0056 under the Supporting Documents section in the
document labeled Appendix for Monarch Butterfly.
Subspecies and Range
This petition concerns the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus
plexippus), with a range in North America (continental United States,
southern Canada, Mexico), and Cuba and other Caribbean Islands; the
subspecies' nonnative dispersed range includes Hawaii, Australia, New
Zealand, other Pacific Islands, Azores, Canary Islands, and coastal
Spain.
Petition History
On August 26, 2014, we received a petition dated August 26, 2014,
from the Center for Biological Diversity, the Center for Food Safety,
the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, and Dr. Lincoln
Brower requesting that we list the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus
plexippus) as a threatened species under the Act. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included the requisite identification
information for the petitioners, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This
finding addresses the petition.
The petition also requested that we designate critical habitat for
the monarch butterfly, that we consider any significant portion of
range (SPR) when making our listing determination, and that we develop
a rule under section 4(d) of the Act (``4(d) rule'') allowing
activities that promote conservation of the subspecies. Should we
propose to list the monarch butterfly, we will at that time consider
the monarch's status rangewide; whether there may be a threatened or
endangered SPR if the subspecies is not found to be threatened or
endangered throughout its range; if threatened status is warranted,
whether a 4(d) rule may be appropriate; and propose to designate
critical habitat if appropriate.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing may be warranted for the
monarch butterfly under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, based on factors A,
B, C, and E (see Appendix for Monarch Butterfly). We therefore
[[Page 78778]]
request information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1)
of the Act (see Request for Information).
We reviewed the petition and information presented in the petition
and determined that issuing an emergency regulation temporarily listing
the subspecies under section 4(b)(7) of the Act is not warranted.
However, if at any time conditions change and we determine emergency
listing is necessary, an emergency rule may be developed.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented under
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that the petitions
summarized above for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila
californica californica) and the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus
plexippus) present substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that the requested actions may be warranted. Because we have
found that the petitions present substantial information indicating
that the petitioned actions may be warranted, we are initiating status
reviews to determine whether these actions under the Act are warranted.
At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue a 12-month
finding in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, stating
whether listing, reclassification, or delisting, as appropriate, is
warranted.
It is important to note that the ``substantial information''
standard for a 90-day finding differs from the Act's ``best scientific
and commercial data'' standard that applies to a status review to
determine whether a petitioned action is warranted. A 90-day finding
does not constitute a status review under the Act. In a 12-month
finding, we will determine whether a petitioned action is warranted
after we have completed a thorough status review of the species, which
is conducted following a substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's
standards for 90-day and 12-month findings are different, as described
above, a substantial 90-day finding does not mean that the 12-month
finding will result in a warranted finding.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the appropriate lead
Field Offices (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Branch of Listing, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Authority
The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: December 18, 2014.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-30574 Filed 12-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P