[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 184 (Monday, September 27, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53255-53261]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20823]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 17 Species Not
Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of findings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce
findings that 17 species are not warranted for listing as endangered or
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). After a thorough review of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we find that it is not warranted at this time
to list Amargosa tryonia (Tryonia variegata), Ash Meadows pebblesnail
(Pyrgulopsis erythropoma), boat-shaped bugseed (Corispermum navicula),
Burrington jumping-slug (Hemphillia burringtoni), crystal springsnail
(Pyrgulopsis crystalis), Dalles sideband (Monadenia fidelis minor),
distal-gland springsnail (Pyrgulopsis nanus), early dark blue butterfly
(Euphilotes ancilla purpura), Fairbanks springsnail (Pyrgulopsis
fairbanksensis), late dark blue butterfly (Euphilotes ancilla
cryptica), median-gland springsnail (Pyrgulopsis pisteri), minute
tryonia (Tryonia ericae), Point of Rocks tryonia (Tryonia elata),
southern rubber boa (Charina umbratica), southwest Nevada pyrg
(Pyrgulopsis turbatrix), sportinggoods tryonia (Tryonia angulata), and
Virgin spinedace (Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis). However, we ask
the public to submit to us at any time any new information relevant to
the status of any of the species mentioned above or their habitats.
DATES: The findings in this document were made on September 27, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the bases for these findings are
available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under the
following docket numbers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amargosa tryonia................. FWS-R8-ES-2021-0077
Ash Meadows pebblesnail.......... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0078
boat-shaped bugseed.............. FWS-R6-ES-2021-0079
Burrington jumping-slug.......... FWS-R1-ES-2021-0080
crystal springsnail.............. FWS-R8-ES-2021-0081
Dalles sideband.................. FWS-R1-ES-2021-0082
distal-gland springsnail......... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0083
early dark blue butterfly........ FWS-R8-ES-2021-0084
Fairbanks springsnail............ FWS-R8-ES-2021-0085
late dark blue butterfly......... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0086
median-gland springsnail......... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0087
minute tryonia................... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0088
Point of Rocks tryonia........... FWS-R8-ES-2021-0089
southern rubber boa.............. FWS-R8-ES-2015-0119
southwest Nevada pyrg............ FWS-R8-ES-2021-0090
sportinggoods tryonia............ FWS-R8-ES-2021-0091
Virgin spinedace................. FWS-R6-ES-2015-0121
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those descriptions are also available by contacting the appropriate
person as specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please
submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions
concerning this finding to the appropriate person, as specified under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Contact information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amargosa tryonia, Ash Meadows Glen Knowles, Field Supervisor,
pebblesnail, crystal springsnail, Southern Nevada Fish and
distal-gland springsnail, Fairbanks Wildlife Office, (702) 515-
springsnail, median-gland springsnail, 5244.
minute tryonia, Point of Rocks
tryonia, southwest Nevada pyrg,
sportinggoods tryonia, early dark blue
butterfly, late dark blue butterfly.
boat-shaped bugseed.................... Ann Timberman, Field
Supervisor, Colorado Field
Office, (970) 628-7181.
Burrington jumping-slug................ Brad Thompson, State
Supervisor, Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office, (360) 753-
9440.
Dalles sideband........................ Paul Henson, State Supervisor,
Oregon Fish and Wildlife
Office, (503) 231-6179.
southern rubber boa.................... Scott Sobiech, Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, (760) 431-
9440.
Virgin spinedace....................... Yvette Converse, Field
Supervisor, Utah Field Office,
(801) 975-3330.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please
call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we
are required to make a finding whether or not a petitioned action is
warranted within 12 months after receiving any petition for which we
have determined contains substantial scientific or commercial
[[Page 53256]]
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted
(``12-month finding''). We must make a finding that the petitioned
action is: (1) Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3) warranted, but
precluded by other listing activity. We must publish a notification of
these 12-month findings in the Federal Register.
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations at part 424 of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for adding species to, removing
species from, or reclassifying species on the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists). The Act defines ``species'' as
including any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any
distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or
wildlife which interbreeds when mature. The Act defines ``endangered
species'' as any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)), and
``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 (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under section
4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be determined to be an endangered
species or a threatened species because of any of the following five
factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition or the action or condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) does not necessarily mean that the
species meets the statutory definition of an ``endangered species'' or
a ``threatened species.'' In determining whether a species meets either
definition, we must evaluate all identified threats by considering the
expected response by the species, and the effects of the threats--in
light of those actions and conditions that will ameliorate the
threats--on an individual, population, and species level. We evaluate
each threat and its expected effects on the species, then analyze the
cumulative effect of all of the threats on the species as a whole. We
also consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those
actions and conditions that will have positive effects on the species,
such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The
Secretary determines whether the species meets the Act's definition of
an ``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species'' only after
conducting this cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect
on the species now and in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term
``foreseeable future'' extends only so far into the future as the
Service can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the
species' responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the
prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to
depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define foreseeable future
as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable future
uses the best scientific and commercial data available and should
consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and to the
species' likely responses to those threats in view of its life-history
characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the
species' biological response include species-specific factors such as
lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and
other demographic factors.
In conducting our evaluation of the five factors provided in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine whether Amargosa tryonia, Ash
Meadows pebblesnail, Burrington jumping-slug, crystal springsnail,
Dalles sideband, distal-gland springsnail, early dark blue butterfly,
Fairbanks springsnail, late dark blue butterfly, median-gland
springsnail, minute tryonia, Point of Rocks tryonia, southern rubber
boa, southwest Nevada pyrg, sportinggoods tryonia, or Virgin spinedace
meet the Act's definition of ``endangered species'' or ``threatened
species,'' we considered and thoroughly evaluated the best scientific
and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and
future stressors and threats. In conducting our taxonomic evaluation of
boat-shaped bugseed, we determined that it does not meet the definition
of a ``species'' under the Act, and, as a result, we concluded that
boat-shaped bugseed is not a listable entity. We reviewed the
petitions, information available in our files, and other available
published and unpublished information for all of these species. Our
evaluation may include information from recognized experts; Federal,
State, and Tribal governments; academic institutions; foreign
governments; private entities; and other members of the public.
The species assessment forms for these species contain more
detailed biological information, a thorough analysis of the listing
factors, a list of literature cited, and an explanation of why we
determined that these species do not meet the Act's definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' A thorough review
of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the Amargosa tryonia, Ash
Meadows pebblesnail, Burrington jumping-slug, crystal springsnail,
Dalles sideband, distal-gland springsnail, early dark blue butterfly,
Fairbanks springsnail, late dark blue butterfly, median-gland
springsnail, minute tryonia, Point of Rocks tryonia, southern rubber
boa, southwest Nevada pyrg, sportinggoods tryonia, and Virgin spinedace
is presented in the species' Species Status Assessment reports. The
species assessment form for boat-shaped bugseed contains more detailed
taxonomic information, a list of literature cited, and an explanation
of why we determined that boat-shaped bugseed does not meet the Act's
definition of a ``species.'' This supporting information can be found
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under the
[[Page 53257]]
appropriate docket number (see ADDRESSES, above). The following are
informational summaries for the findings in this document.
Amargosa Tryonia, Ash Meadows Pebblesnail, Crystal Springsnail, Distal-
Gland Springsnail, Fairbanks Springsnail, Median-Gland Springsnail,
Minute Tryonia, Point of Rocks Tryonia, Southwest Nevada Pyrg, and
Sportinggoods Tryonia
Previous Federal Actions
On February 17, 2009, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity (CBD) requesting that the Service list 42 species
of springsnails from the Great Basin and Mojave ecosystems in Nevada,
Utah, and California as endangered or threatened species, and designate
critical habitat for the springsnails. The petition included Amargosa
tryonia, Ash Meadows pebblesnail, crystal springsnail, distal-gland
springsnail, Fairbanks springsnail, median-gland springsnail (as
``median gland Nevada pyrg''), minute tryonia, Point of Rocks tryonia,
southwest Nevada pyrg (as ``southeast Nevada pyrg''), and sportinggoods
tryonia. On September 13, 2011, we published in the Federal Register
(76 FR 56608) a 90-day finding in which we announced that the petition
contained substantial information indicating listing of 32 of the
petitioned species, including these 10 springsnails, may be warranted.
This document announces the 12-month finding on the February 17, 2009,
petition to list the Amargosa tryonia, Ash Meadows pebblesnail, crystal
springsnail, distal-gland springsnail, Fairbanks springsnail, median-
gland springsnail, minute tryonia, Point of Rocks tryonia, southwest
Nevada pyrg, and sportinggoods tryonia under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The 10 springsnail species are in the genus Pyrgulopsis or Tryonia
of the Cochliopidae family. In general, the 10 species are
morphologically similar with hardened shells and soft anatomy, and they
are differentiated based on subtle morphological characteristics. They
are small in size, only a few millimeters in length and width, and have
limited ability or tendency to move. These springsnails are herbivores
or detritivores that primarily graze on the periphyton (freshwater
organisms attached or clinging to plants) of exposed surfaces of
aquatic plants and substrates in the small springs they inhabit. Nine
of the springsnails occur in desert aquifer springs comprised of small
aquatic and riparian systems as surface flow maintained by groundwater;
each spring is uniquely influenced by aquifer geology, morphology,
discharge rates, and regional precipitation. The southwest Nevada pyrg
occurs in desert springs that are primarily perennial mountain block
aquifer springs that are less likely to be influenced by groundwater
withdrawals.
All of the species excluding the southwest Nevada pyrg occur only
on Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in the Amargosa Valley
(Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Area) in Nye County, Nevada. However,
additional surveys are necessary to determine if Amargosa tryonia
occurs in more locations on the refuge and on private lands in Shoshone
and Tecopa, California. In contrast, the southwest Nevada pyrg is
widespread across southeastern California (Inyo and San Bernardino
Counties) and southwestern Nevada (Nye and Clark Counties). Spring
conditions that are most critical in influencing the resource needs of
all life stages of the 10 springsnails include water quality (e.g.,
appropriate water temperature, dissolved oxygen levels, conductivity,
pH), presence of aquatic vegetation and appropriate substrate (both of
which can be variable), the continuity of free-flowing water, and
adequate spring discharge.
We carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the springsnails, and we evaluated all relevant factors under the
five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these threats. Historically and
through to the present, the 10 springsnail species and their habitats
were impacted to varying degrees by one or more of the following
threats: Predation and competition, vegetation and soil disturbance,
spring modification, and groundwater pumping. Sources of these threats
include invasive, nonnative and native species; roads; wildfire;
grazing and browsing by ungulates; recreation; herbicides; and human
development. The primary threat currently and into the future is spring
modifications resulting from potential groundwater pumping or altered
precipitation/temperature from climate change, both of which could
affect the availability of adequate water and flow. The species'
locations are as follows:
Amargosa tryonia currently occurs in 12 spring locations
(some of which are comprised of multiple, clustered springs described
as spring provinces). The majority of these spring locations are found
within protected lands on Ash Meadows NWR (11 locations), with the
remaining location at Devils Hole at Death Valley National Park.
Ash Meadows pebblesnail currently occurs on Ash Meadows
NWR in the large Kings Pool and at four small, clustered springs within
the Point of Rocks Spring Province.
Crystal springsnail occurs in a single desert spring known
as the Crystal Spring on Ash Meadows NWR.
Distal-gland springsnail currently occurs on Ash Meadows
NWR in the following three springs/spring provinces that are centrally
located on the refuge: Collins Ranch Spring, Five Springs Province, and
Mary Scott Spring.
Fairbanks springsnail occurs in a single desert spring
known as the Fairbanks Spring on Ash Meadows NWR.
Median-gland springsnail is centrally located in the Warm
Springs area of Ash Meadows NWR in three springs (Marsh Spring, North
Scruggs Spring, and School Spring).
Minute tryonia occurs in a single desert spring known as
North Scruggs Spring within the Warm Springs area of Ash Meadows NWR.
Point of Rocks tryonia occurs on Ash Meadows NWR within
the Point of Rocks Spring Province, which is comprised of six small,
geographically clustered springs, four of which are occupied by the
species.
Sportinggoods tryonia is located within three large
springs on the Ash Meadows NWR (Big Spring, Crystal Pool, and Fairbanks
Pool).
Southwest Nevada pyrg occurs within 36 springs or spring
provinces in 8 different geographic areas (9 different hydrologic
subbasins, which are analogous to medium-sized river basins) in
southwest Nevada and southeast California. Spring locations and
ownership across its range include primarily Federal lands at Death
Valley National Park, Bureau of Land Management lands (Red Rock Canyon
National Conservation Area, Darwin Falls Wilderness, Argus Range
Wilderness, Surprise Canyon Wilderness, Pleasant Canyon), U.S. Forest
Service lands (Spring Mountains National Recreation Area, Big Bear Lake
Range Station and Mill Creek Canyon in the San Bernardino National
Forest), Department of Defense lands (China Lake Naval Weapons Center),
and private lands in both Nevada and California.
The best available information indicates an overall high likelihood
that the 10 springsnails will continue to maintain resilient
populations in the foreseeable future given the significant
[[Page 53258]]
conservation afforded to them across the majority of the springs/
populations, no information suggesting new groundwater pumps or
increased impacts from groundwater pumping compared to current levels,
and climate models showing increased precipitation into the future
across the species' ranges. Coupled with aquifer rate of recharge
information, there is a high likelihood that adequate levels of water
and flow (as well as the other resource needs of the species) would be
available in the foreseeable future. We considered these primary
threats cumulatively with the additional non-primary threats described
above (e.g., invasive species), in our determination.
Therefore, we find that listing the Amargosa tryonia, Ash Meadows
pebblesnail, crystal springsnail, distal-gland springsnail, Fairbanks
springsnail, median-gland springsnail, minute tryonia, Point of Rocks
tryonia, southwest Nevada pyrg, and sportinggoods tryonia as endangered
species or threatened species under the Act is not warranted.
Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration of threats
at a biologically meaningful scale in any portion of the species'
range. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found
in the species assessment forms for these 10 species and other
supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
Boat-Shaped Bugseed
Previous Federal Actions
On July 30, 2007, the Service received a petition from Forest
Guardians (now WildEarth Guardians) requesting that the Service list
206 species the Mountain-Prairie Region, including the boat-shaped
bugseed (formerly Corispermum navicula), as endangered or threatened
species, and designate critical habitat, under the Act.
On August 18, 2009, the Service published a 90-day finding (74 FR
41649) indicating that listing may be warranted for 29 species,
including the boat-shaped bugseed. As a result, the Service initiated a
status review for the boat-shaped bugseed. This document announces the
12-month finding on the July 30, 2007, petition to list the boat-shaped
bugseed under the Act.
Summary of Finding
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the boat-shaped bugseed and evaluated
the petition's claims that the species warrants listing under the Act.
Genetic and morphometric analyses indicate that the boat-shaped bugseed
is not a distinct species or subspecies. The boat-shaped bugseed is not
genetically or morphologically distinguishable from other bugseeds,
including the more wide-ranging American bugseed (C. americanum).
Therefore, the boat-shaped bugseed is not a valid taxonomic entity,
does not meet the definition of a ``species'' under the Act, and, as a
result, does not warrant listing under the Act. A detailed discussion
of the basis for this finding can be found in the boat-shaped bugseed
species assessment form and other supporting documents (see ADDRESSES,
above).
Burrington Jumping-Slug
Previous Federal Actions
On March 17, 2008, we received a petition from CBD, Conservation
Northwest, the Environmental Protection Information Center, the
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, and Oregon Wild, requesting that the
Service list 32 species and subspecies of mollusks in the Pacific
Northwest, including the Burrington jumping-slug, as endangered or
threatened species under the Act. The petition also requested that the
Service designate critical habitat concurrent with listing. On October
5, 2011, the Service published a 90-day finding that the petition
presented substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that Burrington jumping-slug (also known as the ``keeled jumping-
slug'') may be warranted for listing (76 FR 61826). This document
announces the 12-month finding on the March 17, 2008, petition to list
the Burrington jumping-slug under the Act.
Summary of Finding
Burrington jumping-slugs are small terrestrial gastropods that
range throughout the western portions of British Columbia, Washington,
and Oregon. The species is known from approximately 2,350 records, most
of which are a result of surveys conducted prior to vegetation
management, thinning, and timber projects on Federal lands. In British
Columbia, documented Burrington jumping-slug occurrences are limited to
the southern portion of Vancouver Island. In Washington, they occur on
the Olympic Peninsula and along the Pacific coast. In Oregon, they
occur primarily in the Coast Range.
The species inhabits moist, cool, and shady forest floors where
there is sufficient shade and downed, decaying logs and leaf litter.
They are found in a variety of forest types including dense old-growth
rainforests, riparian areas, late-successional and old-growth
coniferous forests, mixed coniferous forests, and areas densely
forested with Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii). Red alder (Alnus
rubra), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), vineleaf maple (Acer
circinatum), and Pacific dogwood are consistently associated with the
understory and mid-story components of suitable habitat for the
species.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Burrington jumping-slug, and evaluated all relevant factors
under the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these stressors. The primary stressors
affecting the Burrington jumping-slug's biological status include
habitat loss and fragmentation due to forest management and
development, and climate-mediated changes in temperature and wildfire
risk. Currently, the species has more than 50 populations in good or
moderate condition that are distributed across its historical range and
occupy a diversity of ecological settings. The projected effects of
habitat loss, rising temperatures, and increased fire risk are likely
to reduce the number of populations in good or moderate condition and
lead to some additional extirpations of populations. However, due to
the number and spatial heterogeneity of remaining populations, the
species is projected to maintain adequate levels of resiliency. Given
the species' continued widespread distribution and its ecological and
genetic diversity, we project that it will also maintain adequate
redundancy and representation rangewide in the foreseeable future.
Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration of threats
at any biologically meaningful scale in any portion of the species'
range.
Therefore, we find that listing the Burrington jumping-slug as an
endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not
warranted. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be
found in the Burrington jumping-slug SSA report and other supporting
documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
Dalles Sideband
Previous Federal Actions
On March 17, 2008, we received a petition from CBD, Conservation
Northwest, the Environmental Protection Information Center, the
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, and Oregon Wild, requesting that the
Service list 32 species and subspecies of mollusks in the Pacific
Northwest,
[[Page 53259]]
including the Dalles sideband, as endangered or threatened under the
Act. The petition also requested that the Service designate critical
habitat concurrent with listing. On October 5, 2011, the Service
published a 90-finding that the petition presented substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that the Dalles
sideband may be warranted for listing (76 FR 61826). To inform our
status review, we completed an SSA for the Dalles sideband. This
document announces the 12-month finding on the March 17, 2008, petition
to list the Dalles sideband under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Dalles sideband is a small, terrestrial snail that is a
subspecies of the Pacific sideband snail (Monadenia fidelis), with a
known range east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington,
primarily along the Columbia River corridor, extending east to the
mouth of the John Day River. Occurrences have been documented near The
Dalles, Oregon, with more recent detections on the Mount Hood National
Forest in Oregon and the Gifford Pinchot National Forest in Washington.
The Dalles sideband has been identified in Wasco, Hood River, and
Sherman Counties in Oregon, and Skamania, Lewis, and Klickitat Counties
in Washington. The majority of known occurrences are a result of
surveys conducted prior to vegetation management, thinning, and timber
projects on Federal lands.
The Dalles sideband inhabits forested environments, particularly
those near talus slopes and/or in areas containing a high concentration
of woody debris, leaves, or other refugia. They also live in cool,
moist areas near springs and riparian areas. While the specific diet of
the Dalles sideband is not known, other members of its genus feed on
various plant material, roots, fungus, microorganisms, and other
organic matter.
We carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Dalles sideband, and we evaluated all relevant factors under the
five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these stressors. The primary stressors
affecting the Dalles sideband's biological status include habitat loss
and fragmentation due to forest management, and the climate-mediated
risk of drought and wildfire. Currently, the subspecies is known from
23 resiliency units (delineated from 174 occurrence records), the
majority of which are in high condition, with the remainder in moderate
condition. These resiliency units are distributed across the historical
range of the subspecies and occupy a diversity of ecological settings.
We considered three plausible future scenarios that included projected
changes in forest management, and the risk of drought and wildfire, as
influenced by climate change, and how these threats would impact Dalles
sideband habitat and population connectivity. We determined that these
threats are likely to reduce the number of Dalles sideband populations
in high or moderate condition, and may lead to some populations
becoming extirpated in the future. However, our analysis indicates that
even with the projected decline in habitat quality, and by proxy the
populations, the subspecies will maintain adequate levels of resiliency
across most remaining populations, and adequate redundancy and
representation rangewide, to maintain the subspecies' viability in the
foreseeable future.
Therefore, we find that listing the Dalles sideband as an
endangered or threatened species under the Act is not warranted.
Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration of threats
at a biologically meaningful scale in any portion of the species'
range. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found
in the Dalles sideband species assessment form and other supporting
documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
Early Dark Blue Butterfly and Late Dark Blue Butterfly
Previous Federal Actions
On October 6, 2011, we received a petition, dated September 30,
2011, from WildEarth Guardians to list the two dark blue butterfly
subspecies as endangered or threatened under the Act. On August 7,
2012, we published a 90-day finding stating that the petition presented
substantial information indicating that listing the dark blue
butterflies (as ``two Spring Mountains dark blue butterflies'') may be
warranted (77 FR 47003). This document announces our 12-month finding
on the September 30, 2011, petition to list the two dark blue butterfly
subspecies.
Summary of Finding
The Spring Mountains dark blue butterflies are two subspecies of
the Ancilla dotted blue butterfly (Euphilotes ancilla) found in the
Spring Mountains in Clark County in southwestern Nevada. The two
subspecies have no widely recognized common names, so we refer to them
as the early subspecies (E. a. purpura) and the late subspecies (E. a.
cryptica) to coincide with their respective flight periods.
The Spring Mountains dark blue butterflies are distributed across
the Spring Mountains above an elevation of 1,600 meters (5,250 feet).
The late dark blue butterfly is distributed throughout the Spring
Mountains, and the early dark blue butterfly has a narrower range
restricted to the northern third of the Spring Mountains. The two
subspecies overlap with each other in three locations in this part of
their range. The early dark blue butterfly has a flight period from May
to June, and the late dark blue butterfly has a flight period from late
June to early September. Both subspecies use varieties of sulphur-
flowered buckwheats (Eriogonum umbellatum) as their host plants.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the early and late dark blue butterflies, and we evaluated all
relevant factors under the five listing factors, including any
regulatory mechanisms and conservation measures addressing these
threats. The primary threats affecting both the early and the late dark
blue butterflies' biological status include fire, herbivory of host
plants, drought, and climate change. If the magnitude or frequency of
fire increased with less time for habitat to recover, the effects of
fire on dark blue butterflies and their habitat could become more
severe. However, current models show that fire risk in the Spring
Mountains is moderate to low, and we do not have any information that
fires will increase in magnitude into the foreseeable future. As a
result of climate change in the Spring Mountains, droughts could become
more frequent, and host plants will likely shift upward in elevation.
However, both subspecies of dark blue butterfly already occur at a wide
elevational range, which may allow them to respond by moving upslope to
more favorable areas. Adult dark blue butterflies are capable of
finding diffuse and small patches of flowers, which allows them to
match with habitat over a wide range of elevations, allowing for
survival during climatic fluctuations. Additionally, although herbivory
by native species and feral horses is occurring at most dark blue
butterfly locations, the magnitude of impacts is low.
Currently, all 9 populations of early dark blue butterflies and 30
of 33 populations of late dark blue butterflies are experiencing low or
moderate exposure to threats. In all future scenarios, we expect that
populations will continue to experience only low or
[[Page 53260]]
moderate levels of threat in the foreseeable future. In scenarios for
the two subspecies, the resiliency, redundancy, and representation of
both may decrease depending on the severity of climate change as the
risk of drought and catastrophic fires increases the potential for
population extirpation. The early dark blue butterfly is at greater
risk because it occurs at only nine locations. However, dark blue
butterflies display adaptive capacity in their ability to recolonize
areas following disturbance, and as previously discussed, they likely
have the ability to shift upslope in response to climate change.
Overall, even if some reductions occur, we expect that the subspecies
will maintain enough viability that they will not be likely to be
endangered in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, we find that listing the early dark blue butterfly as an
endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not
warranted. We also find that listing the late dark blue butterfly as an
endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not
warranted. Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration
of threats at a biologically meaningful scale in any portion of either
the early dark blue butterfly's range or the late dark blue butterfly's
range. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found
in the species assessment form for the early and late dark blue
butterflies and other supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
Southern Rubber Boa
Previous Federal Actions
On July 11, 2012, we received a petition from CBD requesting that
the Service list 53 amphibians and reptiles in the United States,
including the southern rubber boa, as an endangered or threatened
species and designate critical habitat for these species under the Act.
We published a 90-day finding on 25 species, including the southern
rubber boa, in the Federal Register on September 18, 2015 (80 FR
56423), in response to the petition. We determined in our 90-day
finding that the petition presented substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing may be warranted for 23
species, including the southern rubber boa. This document announces the
12-month finding on the July 11, 2012, petition to list the southern
rubber boa under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The southern rubber boa is one of six rubber boas of the genus
Charina that reside within the Boidae family, aptly named because they
have skin that folds in a way that resembles rubber. The southern
rubber boa is a stout-bodied snake with a short, blunt tail; measures
between 13 and 21 inches (35 and 55 centimeters); and may live over 60
years in the wild. It is historically and currently known exclusively
from the higher elevations within the San Bernardino Mountains and San
Jacinto Mountains of southern California, in San Bernardino and
Riverside Counties, California. Each mountain range is believed to
support a single population, as there are no clear separations in the
species' distribution within each mountain range. The species is
fossorial (burrows), nocturnal, and only infrequently active
aboveground.
Southern rubber boa habitat is characterized as montane forest with
relatively high humidity, well-developed soil, woody canopy openings,
and piles or outcroppings of granitic rock formations. The species uses
rock outcroppings, as well as existing rodent burrows, as winter
hibernacula--warm areas that allow boas to remain protected underground
from predators and winter weather. Deep rock crevices and area beneath
large rocks are also used throughout the year for basking at night, or
when they are not searching for mates or prey such as juvenile rodents,
insects, and lizard eggs. Approximately 88 percent of the species'
range, as quantified by our examination of modeled habitat, occurs on
public or conserved lands owned and managed by the San Bernardino
National Forest, the Bureau of Land Management, the State of
California, and local governments and conservancies; thus, the species
is protected from large-scale habitat loss. The southern rubber boa's
resource needs reflect the species' reliance on moisture; their
nocturnal habits; and the importance of shelters for hibernation,
gestation, basking under cover, and humidity. Habitat and demographic
needs include appropriate humidity, sufficient prey, appropriate
gestation sites and shelter, mate availability and adult abundance, and
adequate habitat diversity.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the southern rubber boa, and we evaluated all relevant factors under
the five listing factors in the Act, including any regulatory
mechanisms and conservation measures addressing these threats. We
evaluated both San Bernardino and San Jacinto mountain range
populations, including, for the purposes of our analysis, evaluating
the San Bernardino Mountains population as consisting of an eastern and
a western subpopulation.. The primary threats to the southern rubber
boa are (1) the loss, degradation, or modification of habitat from
drying conditions, and (2) loss of individuals, with the most
significant sources of these threats for both individual southern
rubber boa losses and species' habitat impacts resulting from changing
climate conditions (i.e., drought, increased temperatures), wildfire,
and rock pile disturbance from snake collectors and field hobbyists.
Other less significant sources of threats that could also result in
loss, degradation, or modification of habitat, and loss of individuals,
include development/land use change, recreation, infrastructure and
forest management, and resource extraction.
After evaluation of impacts from current threats on habitat and
demographic needs, we determined that each of the three analysis units
(western San Bernardino Mountains subpopulation, eastern San Bernardino
Mountains subpopulation, and San Jacinto Mountains population) consist
of moderately to highly resilient populations/subpopulations that are
likely to be able to withstand normal year-to-year variations in
environmental conditions such as temperature changes; periodic
disturbances within the normal range of variation such as wildfire; and
normal variation in demographic rates such as mortality and fecundity.
The best available information indicates the southern rubber boa is
also able to withstand catastrophic events within each of the analysis
units, and has the ability to adapt to environmental changes, such as
changes to climate or habitat conditions. At this time, the best
available information (based on our assumptions given significant
unknowns surrounding the species and its response to changing habitat
conditions) indicates an overall high likelihood that the species will
continue to maintain resilient populations in the foreseeable future,
particularly in light of significant conservation afforded the species
across its range.
Therefore, we find that listing the southern rubber boa as an
endangered or threatened species under the Act is not warranted.
Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration of threats
at a biologically meaningful scale in any portion of the species'
range. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found
in the southern rubber boa species assessment form and other supporting
documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
[[Page 53261]]
Virgin Spinedace
Previous Federal Actions
On November 20, 2012, the Service received a petition from CBD to
list the Virgin spinedace as endangered or threatened under the Act. On
September 18, 2015, we published a 90-day finding in the Federal
Register in which we determined that the petition presented substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the Virgin
spinedace may be warranted (80 FR 56423). On March 16, 2016, CBD filed
a complaint alleging failure to complete a 12-month finding for the
species. On August 30, 2016, we entered into a settlement agreement, in
which we committed to submitting a 12-month finding to the Federal
Register by September 30, 2021. This document announces the 12-month
finding on the November 20, 2012, petition to list the Virgin spinedace
under the Act and fulfills our settlement agreement obligations.
Summary of Finding
The Virgin spinedace is a small freshwater minnow found in the
mainstream Virgin River and its tributaries in southwestern Utah
(Washington County), northwestern Arizona (Mohave County), and
southeastern Nevada (Lincoln County). The species' current distribution
is approximately 222 kilometers (138 miles), which is 95 percent of its
historical distribution.
The Virgin spinedace is adapted to a highly variable western stream
hydrology with intermittent drying. Its resource needs include stream
reaches of sufficient length to maintain a population, adequate
perennial flow, unimpeded fish passage, suitable habitat (presence of
pools, runs, and riffles), suitable water quality, sufficient food
base, and absence of predators and competitors. The species is an
opportunistic feeder, but primarily feeds on insects.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Virgin spinedace, and we evaluated all relevant factors under
the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these stressors. The primary stressors
affecting the Virgin spinedace's biological status include reduced
streamflow, impeded fish passage, habitat destruction, poor water
quality, nonnative fish predators/competitors, and climate change. We
conducted a population-specific analysis of the environmental
conditions that negatively affect individuals or populations of the
Virgin spinedace, as well as conservation efforts that ameliorate those
stressors. The Virgin spinedace currently exhibits good resiliency,
redundancy, and representation. We anticipate maintaining good or fair
levels of resiliency, redundancy, and representation in the foreseeable
future across a range of future scenarios. There was no concentration
of stressors in any significant portion of the species' range
sufficient to cause the species to likely become in danger of
extinction in the foreseeable future. Our conclusions are supported by
the fact that since the Virgin Spinedace Conservation Assessment and
Strategy was implemented in 1995, the distribution of the species has
increased to within 95 percent of its historical distribution.
Implementation of the Virgin Spinedace Conservation Assessment and
Strategy is ongoing and involves Federal, State, and local partners.
Therefore, we find that listing the Virgin spinedace as an
endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not
warranted. Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of a concentration
of threats at a biologically meaningful scale in any portion of the
species' range. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can
be found in the Virgin spinedace species assessment form and other
supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
New Information
We request that you submit any new information concerning the
taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or stressors to
Amargosa tryonia, Ash Meadows pebblesnail, boat-shaped bugseed,
Burrington jumping-slug, crystal springsnail, Dalles sideband, distal-
gland springsnail, early dark blue butterfly, Fairbanks springsnail,
late dark blue butterfly, median-gland springsnail, minute tryonia,
Point of Rocks tryonia, southern rubber boa, southwest Nevada pyrg,
sportinggoods tryonia, or Virgin spinedace to the appropriate person,
as specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it becomes
available. New information will help us monitor these species and make
appropriate decisions about their conservation and status. We encourage
local agencies and stakeholders to continue cooperative monitoring and
conservation efforts.
References Cited
A list of the references cited in this petition finding is
available in the relevant species assessment form, which is available
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in the appropriate docket
(see ADDRESSES, above) and upon request from the appropriate person
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above).
Authors
The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the
Species Assessment Team, Ecological Services Program.
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-20823 Filed 9-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P