[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51864-51869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13617]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FXES1111090FEDR-245-FF09E21000]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Three 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 three 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 the Kiamichi crayfish (Faxonius saxatilis), Rio Grande
chub (Gila pandora), and Rio Grande sucker (Pantosteus plebeius,
formerly Catostomus plebeius). 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 June 20, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the bases for these findings are
available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under the
following docket numbers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kiamichi crayfish............................ FWS-ES-R2-2023-0258
Rio Grande chub.............................. FWS-ES-R2-2024-0081
Rio Grande sucker............................ FWS-ES-R2-2024-0082
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kiamichi crayfish................. Ken Collins, Field Office
Supervisor, Oklahoma Ecological
Services Field Office, 918-382-
4504, [email protected].
Rio Grande chub and Rio Grande Shawn Sartorius, Field Supervisor,
sucker. New Mexico Ecological Services
Office, 505-346-2525,
[email protected].
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of
hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within
their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in
the United States.
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 on whether or not a petitioned action is
warranted within 12 months after receiving any petition that we have
determined contains substantial scientific or commercial 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
[[Page 51865]]
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 of the Interior 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, which is
further described in the 2009 Memorandum Opinion on the foreseeable
future from the Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor (M-
37021, January 16, 2009; ``M-Opinion,'' available online at https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf).
The foreseeable future extends as far into the future as the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service can make
reasonably reliable predictions about the threats to the species and
the species' responses to those threats. We need not identify the
foreseeable future in terms of a specific period of time. We will
describe the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, using the best
available data and taking into account considerations such as the
species' life-history characteristics, threat projection timeframes,
and environmental variability. In other words, the foreseeable future
is the period of time over which we can make reasonably reliable
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the
prediction, in light of the conservation purposes of the Act.
In conducting our evaluation of the five factors provided in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine whether the Kiamichi crayfish,
Rio Grande chub, and Rio Grande sucker 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. 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.
In accordance with the regulations at 50 CFR 424.14(h)(2)(i), this
document announces the not-warranted findings on petitions to list
three species. We have also elected to include brief summaries of the
analyses on which these findings are based. We provide the full
analyses, including the reasons and data on which the findings are
based, in the decisional file for each of the three actions included in
this document. The following is a description of the documents
containing these analyses:
The species assessment forms for the Kiamichi crayfish, Rio Grande
chub, and Rio Grande sucker 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.'' To inform our status reviews, we completed
species status assessment (SSA) reports for these three species. Each
SSA report contains a thorough review of the taxonomy, life history,
ecology, current status, and projected future status for each species.
This supporting information can be found on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see ADDRESSES,
above).
Kiamichi Crayfish
Previous Federal Actions
On June 18, 2007, we received a petition from Forest Guardians (now
WildEarth Guardians) to list 475 species, including the Kiamichi
crayfish (Faxonius saxatilis; petitioned as Orconectes saxatilis), as
an endangered or threatened species under the Act. On December 16,
2009, we published a 90-day finding (74 FR 66866) that the petition
contained substantial information indicating that listing may be
warranted for the Kiamichi crayfish. This document constitutes our 12-
month finding on the June 18, 2007, petition to list the Kiamichi
crayfish under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Kiamichi crayfish is a small crayfish, olive-brown to reddish-
brown dorsally and mostly whitish ventrally. It is distinguished
morphologically from other crayfish species by details of its
coloration and by structural features of sexually mature males. It also
has been confirmed to be a distinct species through genetic analysis.
The species was first described as Orconectes saxatilis, but, based on
phylogenetic analyses, the genus name was changed in 2017 to Faxonius
and that remains the currently accepted genus. The Kiamichi crayfish
historically and currently inhabits the headwaters and larger
tributaries of the upper Kiamichi River in southeastern Oklahoma. The
species has been found only upstream of the community of Whitesboro in
Le Flore County, Oklahoma.
The Kiamichi crayfish occurs in streams with substrate that is
[[Page 51866]]
predominantly cobble, boulders, gravel, and other coarse rock. The
species prefers riffle habitats but will shift to pool habitats during
dry periods. The species needs stable riffles and pools, sufficient
water quality, and sufficient water availability.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Kiamichi crayfish, and we evaluated all relevant factors under
the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these threats. The primary threats to
the Kiamichi crayfish include water quality degradation and increases
in water temperatures. Water quality degradation caused by low pH
levels and elevated levels of heavy metals may be partially natural,
and conditions may be improving based on current trends. Currently,
water temperatures are within suitable temperature ranges for stream
crayfish species (26-27 degrees Celsius ([deg]C) [78.8-80.6 degrees
Fahrenheit ([deg]F)] and support all life stages of the Kiamichi
crayfish with no negative effects. However, future climate projections
used in concert with established relationships between air temperature
and water temperature indicate that water temperatures are likely to
increase progressively in the future.
Currently, the species occupies four analysis units and the entire
historical range. In general, streamflow does not differ significantly
from historical conditions, and the majority of the Kiamichi crayfish
range is on protected lands and is in a condition that supports
resiliency of the species. The species has tolerated impaired water
quality conditions for multiple decades, including lower pH levels and
elevated heavy metals that may be at least partially natural.
Currently, three analysis units are moderately resilient, and one is
highly resilient, which we consider sufficient to provide redundancy
for the species. In addition, the Kiamichi crayfish has sufficient
representation because it has survived through periods of intensive
logging and drought, has adapted to tolerate drought conditions, and
has had no change in its range. Therefore, the threats appear to have
low imminence and magnitude such that they are not currently having a
significant effect on the species' current viability. Thus, after
assessing the best available information, we conclude that the Kiamichi
crayfish is not in danger of extinction throughout all of its range
(i.e., endangered).
Thus, we proceed with determining whether the species is likely to
become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all of its
range (i.e., threatened). In our projected timeframe of 50 years
(2070), streamflow, landscape condition, pH and heavy metal levels are
not expected to change significantly from the current condition in
either of two scenarios that we evaluated. In fact, pH and heavy metal
levels may improve for the Kiamichi crayfish in the future.
The primary threat considered to have a potentially significant
effect on the Kiamichi crayfish is increased water temperatures due to
climate change. Using processes set forth by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, we evaluated the Kiamichi crayfish under two
future Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios: Under
scenario 1 (RCP 4.5), water temperatures do not rise to a level that
would be negative for the species; under scenario 2 (RCP 8.5), summer
water temperatures rise to levels that may negatively affect the
Kiamichi crayfish periodically. However, potentially suboptimal water
temperatures are projected to be periodic during summer months only,
and the species is adapted to periods of drought and higher
temperatures. Because the Kiamichi crayfish has the ability to tolerate
drought and higher temperatures by burrowing and moving to pools, the
species is expected to be able to tolerate these times of higher
projected water temperatures. Overall increasing water temperatures may
affect the species in the future, but each analysis unit will remain in
the same overall resiliency condition as the current condition because
of the species' ability to modify behavior. Therefore, we anticipate
redundancy and representation to remain similar to current conditions
into the future. After assessing the best available information, we
conclude that the Kiamichi crayfish is not likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the Kiamichi crayfish is endangered or
threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did not find any
portions of the Kiamichi crayfish's range for which both (1) the
portion is significant, and (2) the species is in danger of extinction
in that portion, either now or within the foreseeable future. Thus,
after assessing the best available information, we conclude that the
Kiamichi crayfish is not in danger of extinction in a significant
portion of its range now, or within the foreseeable future.
After assessing the best available information, we conclude that
the Kiamichi crayfish is not in danger of extinction or likely to
become in danger of extinction throughout all of its range or in any
significant portion of its range. Therefore, we find that listing the
Kiamichi crayfish 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 species assessment form and other
supporting documents, which are available on https://www.regulations.gov under docket number FWS-R2-ES-2023-0258.
Peer Review
In accordance with our July 1, 1994, peer review policy (59 FR
34270; July 1, 1994) and the Service's August 22, 2016, Director's Memo
on the Peer Review Process, we solicited independent scientific reviews
of the information contained in the Kiamichi crayfish SSA report. The
Service sent the SSA report to six independent peer reviewers and
received three responses. Results of this structured peer review
process can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under docket number
FWS-R2-ES-2023-0258. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as
appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation for this
finding.
Rio Grande Chub
Previous Federal Actions
On September 27, 2013, we received a petition from WildEarth
Guardians to list the Rio Grande chub (Gila Pandora) as an endangered
or threatened species under the Act and designate critical habitat. On
March 6, 2016, we published a 90-day finding (81 FR 14058) that the
petition contained substantial information indicating that listing may
be warranted for the Rio Grande chub. This document constitutes our 12-
month finding on the September 27, 2013, petition to list the Rio
Grande chub under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Rio Grande chub is a small freshwater fish found predominantly
in montane stream environments in the upper Rio Grande basin in north-
central New Mexico and south-central Colorado. Its range also includes
portions of the Canadian River basin in New Mexico and the Pecos River
basin in New Mexico and Texas. Another population may exist in the
State of Coahuila, Mexico. The Rio Grande chub now occupies a small
portion of its historical range in fragmented populations.
Found in a variety of aquatic habitats, the Rio Grande chub is
associated with low gradient streams that may
[[Page 51867]]
experience substantial variation in annual environmental conditions.
Streams occupied by this species tend to have low to moderate water
flow, low water depths, and a large temperature range. Like other chub
species, the Rio Grande chub is often associated with instream
structures. As omnivorous mid-water column feeders, the Rio Grande chub
consumes drifting invertebrates, fish, and occasional vegetation.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Rio Grande chub, 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 the Rio Grande chub's biological status include predation and
competition from nonnative species, habitat loss and fragmentation
caused by altered hydrology, catastrophic wildfire, and changes in
environmental conditions due to climate change.
We estimated the risk of extirpation for each Rio Grande chub
population over several time frames. The threats we considered include
catastrophic wildfire, nonnative species, and water withdrawal due to
surface water diversion and/or groundwater pumping. There were three
categories of risk: high, medium, and low. These categories were
defined by the likelihood of the threat occurring and the magnitude of
its impact on the population. High risk meant the threat was likely
(i.e., greater than 50 percent) to occur over the given timeframe and
the magnitude to the population was severe, potentially resulting in
extirpation. Low risk meant a threat had a remote probability (i.e.,
less than 10 percent) of occurring and the magnitude would be minimal.
For medium risk populations, either the threat was unlikely (i.e., less
than 50 percent) to occur or the magnitude of impact was projected to
be moderate, meaning there could be population declines but total
extirpation was unlikely. First, we assessed the risk of extirpation
for each population over the next 10 years based on the current habitat
and demographic characteristics of each population. Since conditions
are expected to change in the future, we next considered two future
time steps: mid-century (i.e., 2050) and late-century (i.e., 2099).
These projections incorporated the effects of changes in environmental
conditions under two climate change scenarios.
There are 53 populations of Rio Grande chub in the United States,
which combined occupy 844 kilometers (km) (524.4 miles (mi)) of stream
length. About 34 percent of these populations are at high risk of
extirpation over the next 10 years. Most populations (57 percent) are
at a medium risk of extirpation, with only 9 percent of populations at
low risk. This risk of extirpation was primarily driven by nonnative
species. No populations were at risk of extirpation due to stream
dewatering and none were at high risk of extirpation due to wildfire
over the next 10 years. Threats appear to have low imminence and
magnitude such that they are not currently having a significant effect
on the species' current viability. These 53 populations are distributed
across a wide geographic area, providing redundancy from catastrophic
events. They also occur across a range of environmental gradients,
indicating the retention of adaptive capacity (i.e., representation).
Thus, after assessing the best available information, we conclude that
the Rio Grande chub is not in danger of extinction throughout all of
its range (i.e., endangered).
We then assessed whether extirpation risk as well as resiliency,
redundancy, and representation would change over time. For resiliency,
we modelled future changes in habitat suitability under two future
Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios: RCP4.5 and
RCP8.5. Then we incorporated these changes in our estimation of future
risk of extirpation for each population. Although the general trend was
a decrease in habitat suitability over time, most populations (75
percent) are projected to have no changes in resiliency. There was
little projected change in extirpation risk by mid- and late-century.
Most populations continue to be at medium risk of extirpation, although
the risks posed by wildfire did increase over time for some
populations. Although changes in redundancy and representation are
anticipated should high risk populations be extirpated, the low and
moderate risk populations will continue to be distributed across the
species range, conferring redundancy and representation. After
assessing the best available information, we conclude that the species
is not likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the Rio Grande chub is endangered or
threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did not find any
portions of the Rio Grande chub's range for which both (1) the portion
is significant, and (2) the species is in danger of extinction in that
portion, either now or within the foreseeable future. Thus, after
assessing the best available information, we conclude that the Rio
Grande chub is not in danger of extinction in a significant portion of
its range now, or within the foreseeable future. After assessing the
best available information, we conclude that the Rio Grande chub is not
in danger of extinction or likely to become in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range or in any significant portion of its range.
Therefore, we find that listing the Rio Grande chub 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
Rio Grande chub species assessment form and other supporting documents
on https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0081
(see ADDRESSES, above).
Peer Review
In accordance with our July 1, 1994, peer review policy (59 FR
34270; July 1, 1994) and the Service's August 22, 2016, Director's Memo
on the Peer Review Process, we solicited independent scientific reviews
of the information contained in the Rio Grande chub SSA report. The
Service sent the SSA report to four independent peer reviewers and
received four responses. Results of this structured peer review process
can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-
2024-0081. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as
appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation for this
finding.
Rio Grande Sucker
Previous Federal Actions
On October 3, 2014, we received a petition from WildEarth Guardians
to list the Rio Grande sucker (Pantosteus plebeius; petitioned as
Catostomus plebeius) as an endangered or threatened species under the
Act and designate critical habitat. The species was originally
described under the genus Catostomus, but has since been reclassified
under the genus Pantosteus. On March 16, 2016, we published a 90-day
finding (81 FR 14058) that the petition contained substantial
information indicating that listing may be warranted for the Rio Grande
sucker. This document constitutes our 12-month finding on the October
3, 2014 petition to list the Rio Grande sucker under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Rio Grande sucker is a small freshwater fish found
predominantly in montane stream environments in the upper Rio Grande
basin in north-central
[[Page 51868]]
New Mexico and south-central Colorado. Its historical range in the
United States also includes portions of the Gila, Pecos, and Mimbres
Rivers basins. The described range of the Rio Grande sucker also
extends into several drainage basins in northern Chihuahua, Mexico.
Found in a variety of aquatic habitats, the Rio Grande sucker is
associated with low gradient streams that may experience substantial
variation in environmental conditions annually. Streams occupied by
this species tend to have low to moderate water flow, low water depths,
and a large temperature range. As a benthic feeder, this species is
often found in areas with cobble and gravel substrates that support
algal growth.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Rio Grande sucker, 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 the Rio Grande sucker's biological status include predation
and competition from nonnative species, habitat loss and fragmentation
caused by altered hydrology, catastrophic wildfire, and changes in
environmental conditions due to climate change.
We estimated the risk of extirpation for each Rio Grande sucker
population over several time frames. The threats we considered include
catastrophic wildfire, nonnative species, and water withdrawal due to
surface water diversion and/or groundwater pumping. We first assessed
the risk of extirpation for each population over the next 10 years
based on the current demographic and habitat conditions of each
population. Since conditions are expected to change in the future, we
next considered two future time steps: mid-century (i.e., 2050) and
late-century (i.e., 2099). These projections incorporated the effects
of changes in environmental conditions under two climate change
scenarios.
There are currently 32 populations of Rio Grande sucker in the
United States, which combined occupy 605.7 km (376.4 mi) of stream
length. About 38 percent of these populations are at high risk of
extirpation over the next 10 years. Most populations (56 percent) are
at a medium risk of extirpation, with 6 percent at low risk. The risk
of extirpation was primarily driven by nonnative species. Over the next
10 years, two populations were at risk of extirpation due to stream
dewatering and none were at high risk of extirpation due to wildfire.
There was little projected change in risk by mid- and late-century.
Most populations continue to be at medium risk of extirpation, although
the risks posed by wildfire did increase over time for some
populations. Levels of risk were mostly consistent across the range of
the species: across drainages basins, most populations were at an
overall medium risk of extirpation across time steps and scenarios.
Threats appear to have low imminence and magnitude such that they are
not currently having a significant effect on the species' current
viability. These 32 populations are distributed across a wide
geographic area, providing redundancy from catastrophic events. They
also occur across a range of environmental gradients, indicating the
retention of adaptive capacity (i.e., representation). Populations also
occur in Mexico and there is suitable habitat present in basins where
it has been found. Thus, after assessing the best available
information, we conclude that the Rio Grande sucker is not in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range (i.e., endangered).
We then assessed whether extirpation risk as well as resiliency,
redundancy, and representation would change over time. To inform future
resiliency, we modelled future changes in habitat suitability under two
future RCP scenarios: RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. Then we incorporated these
changes in our estimation of future risk of extirpation for each
population. Although the general trend was a decrease in habitat
suitability over time, most populations (69 percent) are projected to
have no changes in resiliency. Similar patterns of habitat change were
projected for portions of the range in Mexico. Although changes in
redundancy and representation are anticipated should high risk
populations be extirpated, the low and moderate risk populations will
continue to be distributed across the species range, conferring
redundancy and representation. After assessing the best available
information, we conclude that the species is not likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the Rio Grande sucker is endangered or
threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did not find any
portions of the Rio Grande sucker's range for which both (1) the
portion is significant, and (2) the species is in danger of extinction
in that portion, either now or within the foreseeable future. Thus,
after assessing the best available information, we conclude that the
Rio Grande sucker is not in danger of extinction in a significant
portion of its range now, or within the foreseeable future.
After assessing the best available information, we concluded that
the Rio Grande sucker is not in danger of extinction or likely to
become in danger of extinction throughout all of its range or in any
significant portion of its range. Therefore, we find that listing the
Rio Grande sucker 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 Rio Grande sucker species assessment form
and other supporting documents on https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0082 (see ADDRESSES, above).
Peer Review
In accordance with our July 1, 1994, peer review policy (59 FR
34270; July 1, 1994) and the Service's August 22, 2016, Director's Memo
on the Peer Review Process we solicited independent scientific reviews
of the information contained in the Rio Grande sucker SSA report. The
Service sent the SSA report to four independent peer reviewers and
received four responses. Results of this structured peer review process
can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-
2024-0082. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as
appropriate, into the SSA Report, which is the foundation for this
finding.
New Information
We request that you submit any new information concerning the
taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or stressors to the
Kiamichi crayfish, Rio Grande chub, or Rio Grande sucker 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
A complete list of the references used in these petition findings
is available in the relevant species assessment form, which is
available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov in the
appropriate docket (see ADDRESSES, above) and upon request from the
appropriate person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above).
[[Page 51869]]
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,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-13617 Filed 6-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P