[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55046-55051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21809]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0102; FXES11130900000C6-123-FF09E32000]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To Delist or Reclassify From Endangered to Threatened Five
Southwest Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to delist the Eriogonum gypsophilum
(gypsum wild-buckwheat), and downlist the black-capped vireo (Vireo
atricapilla), lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae
yerbabuenae), Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri (Kuenzler hedgehog
cactus), and Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii (Tobusch fishhook
cactus) from endangered to threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
Based on our review, we find that the petition presents 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 species to
determine if the respective actions of delisting and reclassifying are
warranted. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act also requires a status review
of listed species at least once every 5 years. We are, therefore,
electing to conduct each of these 5-year reviews simultaneously with
the corresponding 12-month finding. To ensure that this status review
is comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and
other information regarding these species. Based on the status review,
we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, which will address
whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
DATES: We request that we receive information to consider for the
status review on or before November 8, 2013. The deadline for
submitting information using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES section below) is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. After
November 8, 2013, you must submit information directly to the Division
of Policy and Directives Management (see ADDRESSES section below).
Please note that we might not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the above requested date.
ADDRESSES: Document availability: You may obtain copies of the July 11,
2012, petition and the 5-year reviews for petitioned species on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-
0102.
Written comments: You may submit information by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS-R2-ES-2013-0102, which is the
docket number for this action. You may submit information for the
status review by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2013-0102; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept emails or faxes. We will post all information we
receive 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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Shaughnessy, Assistant
Regional Director, Southwest Regional Ecological Services Office, 500
Gold Avenue SW., Albuquerque, NM 87102; telephone 505/248-6920;
facsimile 505/248-6788. If you use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) 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
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 initiate a species status
review, which we subsequently summarize 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. A ``threatened species'' is any
species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. Under the Act, we maintain a List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants at 50 CFR 17.11 (for animals) and 17.12 (for
plants) (List). We amend the List by publishing final rules in the
Federal Register. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we
conduct a review of listed species at least once every 5 years (5-year
review). Section 4(c)(2)(B) requires that we determine: (1) Whether a
species no longer meets the definition of threatened or endangered and
should be removed from the List (delisted); (2) whether a species
listed as endangered more properly meets the definition of threatened
and should be reclassified to threatened (downlisted); or (3) whether a
species listed as threatened more properly meets the definition of
endangered and should be reclassified to endangered (uplisted). Our
regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the
Federal Register announcing those species currently under active
review.
Petition History
On July 16, 2012, we received a petition dated July 11, 2012, from
The Pacific Legal Foundation, Jim Chilton, the New Mexico Cattle
Growers' Association, New Mexico Farm & Livestock Bureau, New Mexico
Federal Lands Council, and Texas Farm Bureau requesting that the
Eriogonum gypsophilum (gypsum wild-buckwheat) be delisted, and the
black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla), lesser long-nosed bat
(Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae), Echinocereus fendleri var.
kuenzleri (Kuenzler hedgehog cactus), and Ancistrocactus tobuschii (an
accepted synonym for Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii--Tobusch
fishhook
[[Page 55047]]
cactus) be reclassified as threatened based on the analysis and
recommendation contained in the most recent 5-year review for these
taxa. The petition appeared to meet all of the requirements of 50 CFR
424.14(a).
Previous Federal Action
Gypsum Wild-Buckwheat
The gypsum wild-buckwheat was federally listed as threatened on
February 18, 1981 (46 FR 5730, January 19, 1981). Critical habitat was
designated at the time of listing for the Seven Rivers population in
Eddy County, New Mexico. A recovery plan was issued March 30, 1984. The
recovery plan has not been revised. A 5-year review was completed on
November 9, 2007, in which the Service recommended delisting the
species.
Black-Capped Vireo
The black-capped vireo was federally listed as endangered without
critical habitat on November 5, 1987 (52 FR 37420, October 6, 1987). A
recovery plan was issued September 30, 1991. The recovery plan has not
been revised. A 5-year review was completed on July 26, 2007, in which
the Service recommended downlisting the species to threatened.
Lesser Long-Nosed Bat
The lesser long-nosed bat was federally listed as endangered
without critical habitat on October 31, 1988 (53 FR 38456, September
30, 1988). A recovery plan was issued on March 4, 1997. The recovery
plan has not been revised. A 5-year review was completed on August 30,
2007, in which the Service recommended downlisting the species to
threatened.
Kuenzler Hedgehog Cactus
The Kuenzler hedgehog cactus was federally listed as endangered
without critical habitat on November 28, 1979 (44 FR 61924, October 26,
1979). A recovery plan was issued on March 28, 1985. The recovery plan
has not been revised. A 5-year review was completed on June 7, 2005, in
which the Service recommended downlisting the species to threatened.
Tobusch Fishhook Cactus
The Tobusch fishhook cactus was federally listed as endangered
without critical habitat on December 7, 1979 (44 FR 64736, November 7,
1979). A recovery plan was issued on March 18, 1987. The recovery plan
has not been revised. A 5-year review was completed on January 5, 2010,
in which the Service recommended downlisting the species to threatened.
Species Information
Gypsum Wild-Buckwheat
Gypsum wild-buckwheat is a rare, regionally endemic, perennial
plant species (Service 2007a, p. 8). It occupies gypsum soils and
gypsum outcrops of the Permian-age Castile Formation. These habitats
are dry and nearly barren except for common species of gypsophilic
plants and gypsum wild-buckwheat. Gypsum wild-buckwheat reproduces both
by producing seed and also by producing clone rosettes from rhizomes or
rootsprouts. There are only three known populations of gypsum wild-
buckwheat, and all occur in Eddy County, in southeastern New Mexico
(Service 2007a, pp. 8-12). Only one population (Seven River Hills) was
known at the time of listing. Two additional populations were
discovered in 1988 in the Yeso Hills of southern Eddy County, New
Mexico, one near Black River Village and another at Ben Slaughter Draw
below Ben Slaughter Spring. For more information on the life history,
biology, and distribution of gypsum wild-buckwheat, see the 2007 5-year
review of the species.
Black-Capped Vireo
The black-capped vireo is a small (10 to 12 centimeters (cm) (4 to
5 inches (in)) long), insect-eating, migratory songbird (Service 2007b,
p. 7). They nest from Oklahoma south through central Texas to the
Edwards Plateau, then south to the northern portion of Mexico. Breeding
habitat is quite variable across its range, but is generally shrublands
with a distinctive patchy structure. The shrub vegetation is mostly
deciduous and generally extends from the ground to about 2 meters (m)
(6 feet (ft)) above ground and covers about 30 to 60 percent of the
total area. Open grassland separates the clumps of shrubs. Black-capped
vireos may live for more than 5 years, and usually return year after
year to the same territory to breed. They begin to migrate to the
wintering grounds on Mexico's western coast in July and are gone from
Texas by mid-September (Service 2007b, p. 7). For more information on
the life history, biology, and distribution of black-capped vireo, see
the 2007 5-year review of the species.
Lesser Long-Nosed Bat
The lesser long-nosed bat is one of four members of the tropical
bat family Phyllostomidae found in the United States. The bat's core
diet is believed to consist of pollen, nectar, and fruits of columnar
cacti and agaves. These bats depend on caves and abandoned mines and
tunnels for day roosting sites. Night roosts include the bats' day
roosts as well as other caves, mines, rock crevices, trees and shrubs,
and occasionally abandoned buildings. They migrate seasonally from
Mexico to southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico. For more
information on the life history, biology, and distribution of lesser
long-nosed bat, see the 2007 5-year review of the species.
Kuenzler Hedgehog Cactus
A Kuenzler hedgehog cactus individual may be single stemmed or
branched. The stems are normally 15 cm (6 in) long and 10 cm (4 in)
wide. Typical Kuenzler hedgehog cactus habitat occurs on gentle,
gravelly to rocky slopes and benches on limestone or limy sandstone
along the lower fringes of the pinyon-juniper woodland at elevations of
1,600 to 2,000 m (5,200 to 6,600 ft). The recovery plan for Kuenzler
hedgehog cactus identified two populations of cacti in the Rio Hondo
and Rio Pe[ntilde]asco drainages in Lincoln County (Service 1985).
However, by the time of the 2005 5-year review, there were 11
documented population centers (Service 2005). For more information on
the life history, biology, and distribution of Kuenzler hedgehog
cactus, see the 2005 5-year review of the species.
Tobusch Fishhook Cactus
The Tobusch fishhook cactus is a small, round cactus, usually 5.1
to 7.6 cm (2 to 3 in) tall and up to 8.9 cm (3.5 in) in diameter, with
light yellow spines with red tips. The lower central spines are hooked
at the tip, like a fishhook. It produces yellow to cream flowers about
3.0 to 3.8 cm (1 to 1.5 in) long and wide during February through
March. The fruit is fleshy and green, ripening to pink or pinkish-brown
by late spring or early summer. The seeds are black.
The Tobusch fishhook cactus grows in discontinuous patches of very
shallow, moderately alkaline, rocky loams or clay soils (primarily of
the Tarrant, Ector, or Eckrant series) over massive, fractured
limestone bedrock (usually the Edwards formation or an equivalent
formation). The sites are open, in full sunlight, with a thin
herbaceous cover of grasses and other herbaceous species, but within a
matrix of woodland or savanna of live oak-juniper woodland community.
In 1979 when the species was federally listed as endangered, fewer than
200 individuals had been documented in Bandera and Kerr Counties,
Texas. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Natural Diversity
Database indicates that, by 1999, researchers had documented 3,395
extant individuals in 8 counties of the Edwards Plateau
[[Page 55048]]
(Bandera, Edwards, Kerr, Kimble, Kinney, Real, Uvalde, and Val Verde).
For more information on the life history, biology, and distribution of
Tobusch fishhook cactus, see the 2010 5-year review of the species.
Evaluation of Information for This Finding
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:
(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.
We must consider these same five factors in delisting a species. 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 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 data used at the time the species was
classified were in error.
In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look
beyond the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine
whether the species responds to the factor in a way that causes actual
impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a factor, but no
response, or only a positive response, that factor is not a threat. If
there is exposure and the species responds negatively, the factor may
be a threat and we then attempt to determine how significant a threat
it is. If the threat is significant, it may drive or contribute to the
risk of extinction of the species such that the species may warrant
listing as threatened or endangered as those terms are defined by the
Act. This does not necessarily require empirical proof of a threat. The
combination of exposure and some corroborating evidence of how the
species is likely impacted could suffice. The mere identification of
factors that could impact a species negatively may not be sufficient to
compel a finding that listing may be warranted. The information shall
contain 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 threatened or endangered under the Act.
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information
regarding threats to the gypsum wild-buckwheat, black-capped vireo,
lesser long-nosed bat, Kuenzler hedgehog cactus, and Tobusch fishhook
cactus, as presented in the petition and other information available in
our files, is substantial, thereby indicating that the petitioned
action may be warranted. Our evaluation of this information is
presented below.
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner requested the Service delist the gypsum wild-
buckwheat and reclassify the black-capped vireo, lesser long-nosed bat,
Kuenzler hedgehog cactus, and Tobusch fishhook cactus as threatened
based on the analysis and recommendations contained in the most recent
5-year reviews of these taxa. The petition cited the 5-year reviews for
each of these respective species as supporting information for the
petition, but provided no other information.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
We completed 5-year reviews for each of these five species, which
included recommendation of status changes. Each 5-year review contains
general background and life-history information, an overview of
recovery criteria, an analysis of threats to each taxon based on the
five listing factors found in section 4 of the Act, and recommendation
of status change. In each 5-year review conducted for the five
petitioned species, we analyzed the threats specific to each taxon
based on the five listing factors in section 4 of the Act.
Gypsum Wild-Buckwheat
The 2007 5-year review for the gypsum wild-buckwheat recommended
delisting of the species. The rationale for this recommendation was
that the primary threats to the species at the time of listing were no
longer deemed significant (Service 2007a, p. 12).
At the time of listing, gypsum wild-buckwheat was known from only a
single population on the Seven Rivers Hills. Since the time of listing,
two additional populations of gypsum wild-buckwheat were documented at
Black River and Ben Slaughter Draw in Eddy County, Texas (Service
2007a, p. 12). All three known populations contain between 11,000 and
18,000 plants.
The listing determination for gypsum wild-buckwheat cited off-road-
vehicles, grazing, and reservoir development as threats to this species
(Service 2007a, p. 12). Due to the expanded range of the species at the
time of the 5-year review, these stressors were no longer cited as
threats to the species. However, all of the known gypsum wild-buckwheat
habitat occurs in areas that are now known to have high potential for
mineral extraction and associated development, especially oil and gas.
At the time of the 5-year review, this new threat was thought to be
mitigated by the Bureau of Land Management's Special Management Areas
classification on significant portions of each gypsum wild-buckwheat
population.
In summary, we found that the threats previously identified may no
longer be acting on the species at a level that causes the species to
be in danger of extinction. Further, the range of the species has
expanded, and there is some level of management of newly identified
threats in those areas. Therefore, we find there is substantial
information indicating that the species may no longer in danger of
extinction now or in the foreseeable future, and that delisting may be
warranted. This conclusion is based primarily on the analyses found in
the 2007 5-year review, which was based on the best scientific
information available at that time. Since the time of the 5-year
review, we have received no information that would conflict with the
conclusions found in that review.
Black-Capped Vireo
The 2007 5-year review for the black-capped vireo recommended
reclassification of the species from endangered to threatened. The
primary rationale for this recommendation was that the magnitude of
threats to the species has been reduced since the time of listing, and
that the range of the species has expanded (Service 2007b, pp. 22-24).
At the time of listing, the estimated population of black-capped
vireos consisted of 256 to 525 pairs in Oklahoma (4 counties), Texas
(21 counties), and Mexico (1 state). Since 2000, the known population
consists of 6,200 vireos in Oklahoma (3 counties), Texas (38 counties),
and Mexico (3 states) (Service 2007b, p. 22).
The major threats to the black-capped vireo identified at the time
of listing included habitat loss through land use conversion, grazing
and browsing by domestic and wild herbivores, and brood parasitism by
brown-headed
[[Page 55049]]
cowbirds (Molothrus ater). As discussed in the 5-year review, the
threat of habitat destruction by domestic livestock appears to have
decreased, based upon the decrease in density and abundance of
livestock in those regions of particular concern during the original
listing. However, it appears the density of white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus) and exotic ungulates may have increased in the
same regions, which may be a concern for habitat availability.
Information discussed in the 5-year review concerning brown-headed
cowbirds suggests that the species may be decreasing in abundance where
its range overlaps the black-capped vireo, at least in Texas.
Additionally, in the black-capped vireo's U.S. range, brood parasitism
appears to be effectively managed at the major black-capped vireo
populations occurring on public land, and supplemented by cowbird
control programs on private lands.
In summary, we found that threats to the species identified at the
time of listing do not appear to be acting on the species as severely
as previously thought. Further, the range and abundance of the species
appears to have expanded, and some level of management exists in regard
to threats in those areas. Therefore, we find there is substantial
information that the species may no longer be in imminent danger of
extinction, and that reclassification may be warranted. This conclusion
is based primarily on the analysis found in the 2007 5-year review,
which was based on the best scientific information available at that
time. Since the time of the 5-year review, we have received no
information that would conflict with the conclusions of that review.
Lesser Long-Nosed Bat
The 2007 5-year review for the lesser long-nosed bat recommended
reclassification of the species from endangered to threatened. The
primary rationale for this recommendation was that information
indicates the species may be more abundant than was known at the time
of listing (Service 2007c).
At the time of listing, the lesser long-nosed bat occurred at
relatively low population numbers (about 500 individuals in Arizona)
and exhibited a declining trend (Service 2007c). Information gathered
since the listing shows higher population numbers and a generally
stable-to-increasing trend (Service 2007c).
The primary threats identified at the time of listing were habitat
destruction and disruption, disturbance of roosting sites, loss of food
sources, and direct killing by humans. Information in the 5-year review
suggests that these threats persist and may actually be increasing in
some areas. However, the severity of these threats may be reduced as a
result of the increased abundance of the species.
In summary, we found that, while threats to the lesser long-nosed
bat persist, the magnitude of these threats may be reduced due to the
potential increased abundance of the species since the time of listing.
Therefore, we find there is substantial information that the species
may no longer be in imminent danger of extinction, and that
reclassification may be warranted. This conclusion is based primarily
on the analyses found in the 2007 5-year review which was based on the
best scientific information available at that time. Since the time of
the 5-year review, we have received no information that would conflict
with the conclusions found in the review.
Kuenzler Hedgehog Cactus
The 5-year review for the Kuenzler hedgehog cactus recommended
reclassification of the species from endangered to threatened. The
primary rationale for this recommendation was that the threats to the
species have been reduced as compared to the threats at the time of
listing, and the distribution and abundance of the species has
increased (Service 2005).
At the time of listing, only two populations with fewer than 200
individuals were known. However, by the time of the 5-year review, an
estimated 11 populations had a total of more than 5,000 individuals.
While these populations are scattered and usually not locally abundant,
this distribution reflects a wider range and higher overall abundance
than was known at the time of listing. Further, most of the known
populations of Kuenzler hedgehog cactus occur on Federal lands. Federal
land management agencies have inventoried most of the Kuenzler hedgehog
cactus habitats within their jurisdictions in order to consult with the
Service and avoid serious impacts to occupied habitats.
Threats at the time of listing were collection and habitat
degradation due to road improvements, grazing, and real estate
development. As discussed in the 5-year review, collection of Kuenzler
hedgehog cactus from its natural habitats has not had a significant
observable impact on the known populations. The potential threat of
collection is likely mitigated to some extent by the fact that most
populations are relatively remote and less likely to be impacted by
casual collectors. Further, commercial growers are offering greenhouse-
grown plants and seeds to hobbyists who might have otherwise obtained
their plants or seeds from natural populations.
Habitat destruction due to road construction and home building has
affected a very small portion of the area occupied by Kuenzler hedgehog
cactus. At the time of the 5-year review, no significant mining or oil
and gas production activities took place within the habitat of this
cactus. Most of the known occupied habitats occur in relatively remote
areas, which are unlikely to be converted to land uses other than open
range for livestock grazing. Evidence continues to indicate that
livestock grazing may continue to impact Kuenzler hedgehog cactus
through increased erosion and removal of insulating cover that may
affect the success of seedling establishment.
In summary, we found that, while livestock grazing may continue to
affect the species, collection and habitat modification due to
development do not appear to be as severe as they were thought to be at
the time of listing. Further, the range of the species appears to have
expanded, and some level of management occurs in those areas.
Therefore, we find there is substantial information that the species
may no longer be in imminent danger of extinction, and that
reclassification may be warranted. This conclusion is based primarily
on the analyses found in the 2005 5-year review, which was based on the
best scientific information available at that time. Since the time of
that 5-year review, we have received no readily available information
that would conflict with the conclusions found in the review.
Tobusch Fishhook Cactus
The 5-year review for the Tobusch fishhook cactus recommended
reclassification from endangered to threatened. The primary rationale
for this recommendation was that the primary threats to the species at
the time of listing have been reduced or were not as severe as
originally determined, and that the distribution and abundance of the
species have increased (Service 2010).
At the time of listing, only 200 individuals were known. The status
of Tobusch fishhook cactus is now thought to be significantly more
secure than when it was listed. The cactus has been documented at 10
protected sites, and its known range now extends to eight counties in
the Edwards Plateau of central Texas.
The threats identified at the time of listing were collection and
habitat
[[Page 55050]]
modification and loss due to real estate development, livestock damage,
and other natural factors. As discussed in the 2010 5-year review,
legally propagated Tobusch fishhook cactus are now available, which
suggests the threat of illegal collection may no longer be as severe a
threat as it was at the time of listing. Further, livestock trampling
and herbivory were not identified as significant causes of mortality or
damage to Tobusch fishhook cactus plants. While a significant ongoing
trend of subdividing large ranches persists in Texas, relatively little
urban or industrial development was occurring within the range of the
species at the time of the 5-year review. However, information
discussed in the 5-year review indicates that the Tobusch fishhook
cactus weevil parasitizes and kills plants, and further suggests that
the weevil may have caused significant declines in some populations.
In summary, we found that, while development and weevil parasitism
may continue to impact the species, collection and livestock grazing do
not appear to be acting on the species as severely as they were thought
to be at the time of listing. Further, the range of the species appears
to have expanded. Therefore, we find there is substantial information
that the species may no longer be in imminent danger of extinction, and
that reclassification may be warranted. This conclusion is based
primarily on the analyses found in the 2010 5-year review, which was
based on the best scientific information available at that time. Since
the time of the 5-year review, we have received no readily available
information that would conflict with the conclusions found in the
review.
Finding
On the basis of our determination under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Act, we find that information in the petition and readily available in
our files presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that delisting the gypsum wild-buckwheat and reclassifying
black-capped vireo, lesser long-nosed bat, Kuenzler hedgehog cactus,
and Tobusch fishhook cactus from endangered to threatened may be
warranted.
Because we have found that the petition presents substantial
information indicating that delisting the gypsum wild-buckwheat, and
reclassifying black-capped vireo, lesser long-nosed bat, Kuenzler
hedgehog cactus, and Tobusch fishhook cactus may be warranted, we are
initiating status reviews for each taxon to determine whether the
petitioned actions are warranted.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding,
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 50 CFR 424.14(b) of our
regulations, 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.
5-Year Reviews
Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we conduct a review of
listed species at least once every 5 years. We are then, under section
4(c)(2)(B), to determine, on the basis of such a review, whether or not
any species should be removed from the List (delisted), or reclassified
from endangered to threatened, or threatened to endangered. Our
regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the
Federal Register announcing those species currently under review. This
notice announces our active review of the gypsum wild-buckwheat, black-
capped vireo, lesser long-nosed bat, Kuenzler hedgehog cactus, and
Tobusch fishhook cactus.
Request for Information
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating that delisting or reclassifying a species may be
warranted, we are required to promptly initiate review of 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 gypsum wild-buckwheat, black-capped vireo,
lesser long-nosed bat, Kuenzler hedgehog cactus, and Tobusch fishhook
cactus from governmental agencies, Native American tribes, the
scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties. We
seek information on:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(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 species, its
habitat or both.
(2) The factors that are the basis for making delisting and
downlisting determinations 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.
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 action
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 this status review 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 your submission is made via 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 is available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours,
at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwesten Region Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
[[Page 55051]]
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Southwest Region
Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Southwest Region Ecological Services Office.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: August 26, 2013.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-21809 Filed 9-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P