Rule2024-22914
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for 8 Species
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 8, 2024
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- day findings on eight petitions to add species to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions to list the Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa mazamae), Florida intertidal firefly (Micronaspis floridana), Iowa skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa), San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), and Tecopa bird's beak (Chloropyron tecopense) present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we are initiating status reviews of these species to determine whether the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the species and factors that may affect their status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are warranted in accordance with the Act. We further find that the petitions to list Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis), and southern pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina) do not present substantial information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, we are not initiating status reviews of Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque, or southern pig-tailed macaque.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 195 (Tuesday, October 8, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 8, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81388-81394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22914]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FXES1111090FEDR-245-FF09E21000]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings
for 8 Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition findings and initiation of status
reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on eight petitions to add species to the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find
that the petitions to list the Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa
mazamae), Florida intertidal firefly (Micronaspis floridana), Iowa
skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa), San Francisco Estuary population of
white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), and Tecopa bird's beak
(Chloropyron tecopense) present substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted.
Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we
are initiating status reviews of these species to determine whether the
petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are
comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other
information regarding the species and factors that may affect their
status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition
findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are
warranted in accordance with the Act. We further find that the
petitions to list Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque (Macaca
fascicularis), and southern pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina) do
not present substantial information indicating the petitioned action
may be warranted. Therefore, we are not initiating status reviews of
Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque, or southern pig-tailed macaque.
DATES: These findings were made on October 8, 2024. As we commence our
status reviews, we seek any new information concerning the status of,
or threats to, the Crater Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly, Iowa
skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon, and Tecopa
bird's beak, or their habitats. Any information we receive during the
course of our status reviews will be considered.
ADDRESSES:
Supporting documents: Summaries of the basis for the petition
findings contained in this document are available on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under the appropriate docket number (see tables
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In addition, this supporting
information is available by contacting the appropriate person, as
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the Crater
Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly, Iowa skipper, San Francisco
Estuary population of white sturgeon, or Tecopa bird's beak, or their
habitats, please provide those data or information by one of the
following methods listed below.
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket
number (see table 1 under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on
the ``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may
submit information by clicking on ``Comment.'' If your information will
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, as it is most compatible with our information
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table 1 under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W,
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send information only by the methods described
above. We will post all information we receive on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see Information Submitted for a
Status Review, below).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[[Page 81389]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species common name Contact person
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betta miniopinna............. Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species,
Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#91e3f0f2f9f4fdcefdfefff5feffd1f7e6e2bff6fee7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dfadbebcb7bab380b3b0b1bbb0b19fb9a8acf1b8b0a9">[email protected]</span></a>.
Crater Lake newt............. Jennie Land, Field Supervisor, Klamath
Falls Fish and Wildlife Office, 541-885-
8481, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c66696262656953606d62684c6a7b7f226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ef4fbf0f0f7fbc1f2fff0fadef8e9edb0f9f1e8">[email protected]</span></a>.
Florida intertidal firefly... Lourdes Mena, Classification and Recovery
Division Manager, Florida Ecological
Services Office, 904-731-3134,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4888b9196808197bb89818a85a4829397ca838b92"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="462a293334222335192b2328270620313568212930">[email protected]</span></a>.
Iowa skipper................. Jason Luginbill, Project Leader, Kansas
Ecological Services Field Office, 785-
313-0772, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cfa5aebca0a190a3baa8a6a1ada6a3a38fa9b8bce1a8a0b9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c6aca7b5a9a899aab3a1afa8a4afaaaa86a0b1b5e8a1a9b0">[email protected]</span></a>.
Long-tailed macaque.......... Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species,
Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#daa8bbb9b2bfb685b6b5b4beb5b49abcada9f4bdb5ac"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="225043414a474e7d4e4d4c464d4c624455510c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>.
San Francisco Estuary Donald Ratcliff, Field Supervisor, San
population of white sturgeon. Francisco Bay-Delta Fish and Wildlife
Office, 916-930-5632,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#97f3f8f9f6fbf3c8e5f6e3f4fbfef1f1d7f1e0e4b9f0f8e1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9cdc6c7c8c5cdf6dbc8ddcac5c0cfcfe9cfdeda87cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.
Southern pig-tailed macaque.. Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species,
Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#037162606b666f5c6f6c6d676c6d436574702d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="86f4e7e5eee3ead9eae9e8e2e9e8c6e0f1f5a8e1e9f0">[email protected]</span></a>.
Tecopa bird's beak........... Scott Sobiech, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad
Fish and Wildlife Office, 760-431-9440,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a4d7c7cbd0d0fbd7cbc6cdc1c7cce4c2d3d78ac3cbd2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2457474b50507b574b464d41474c644253570a434b52">[email protected]</span></a>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
Information Submitted for a Status Review
You may submit your comments and materials concerning the status
of, or threats to, the Crater Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly,
Iowa skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon, or
Tecopa bird's beak, or their habitats, by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We request that you send comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES. 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.
If you submit information via <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. 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 information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing these findings, will be available
for public inspection on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part 17.
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to add a species to the List (i.e., ``list'' a
species), remove a species from the List (i.e., ``delist'' a species),
or change a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or
from threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable,
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to credible
scientific or commercial information in support of the petition's
claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific
review would conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be
warranted (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i)). A positive 90-day petition finding
does not indicate that the petitioned action is warranted; the finding
indicates only that the petitioned action may be warranted and that a
full review should occur.
A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors
are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes (Factor B);
(c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D);
and
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence (Factor E).
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, affect
individuals of a species negatively. 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) may not be sufficient to compel a
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information
presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest
that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the
species may meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened
species under the Act.
[[Page 81390]]
If we find that a petition presents such information, our
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by
considering the individual-, population-, and species-level effects and
the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the
cumulative effect 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 are expected to have positive effects on the
species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this
cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate
them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable
future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act.
If we find that a petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted, the Act requires that we promptly commence a review of the
status of the species, and we will subsequently complete a status
review in accordance with our prioritization methodology for 12-month
findings (81 FR 49248; July 27, 2016).
We note that designating critical habitat is not a petitionable
action under the Act. Petitions to designate critical habitat (for
species without existing critical habitat) are reviewed under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et. seq.) and are not
addressed in this finding (see 50 CFR 424.14(j)). To the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, any proposed critical habitat will be
addressed concurrently with a proposed rule to list a species, if
applicable.
Summaries of Petition Findings
The petition findings contained in this document are listed in the
tables below, and the basis for each finding, along with supporting
information, is available on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under the
appropriate docket number.
Table 1--Internet Search Information for Substantial Findings for Five Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL to docket on https://
Common name Docket No. www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crater Lake newt............................... FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025</a>
Florida intertidal firefly..................... FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026</a>
Iowa skipper................................... FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226</a>
San Francisco Estuary population of white FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049 https://www.regulations.gov/docket/
sturgeon. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049
Tecopa bird's beak............................. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256</a>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Internet Search Information for Not-Substantial Findings for Three Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL to docket on https://
Common name Docket No. www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betta miniopinna............................... FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229</a>
Long-tailed macaque............................ FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228</a>
Southern pig-tailed macaque.................... FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227</a>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of a Petition To List Betta miniopinna
Species and Range
Betta miniopinna; Bintan Island of the Riau Archipelago, Indonesia.
Petition History
On July 6, 2023, we received a petition dated July 5, 2023, from
the Center for Biological Diversity and the Monitor Conservation
Research Society, requesting that Betta miniopinna be emergency listed
as a threatened species or an endangered species under the Act. The
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). Listing a species on an emergency basis is not a
petitionable action under the Act, and the question of when to list on
an emergency basis is left to the discretion of the Service. If the
Service determines that the standard for emergency listing in section
4(b)(7) of the Act is met, the Service may exercise that discretion to
take an emergency listing action at any time. Therefore, we are
considering the July 5, 2023, petition as a petition to list the B.
miniopinna. This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of
threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the
petition, sources cited in the petition, and other readily available
information, we find that the petition does not provide substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the B.
miniopinna as a threatened species or an endangered species may be
warranted.
The petitioner provided credible information indicating potential
threats to individuals of the species due to habitat loss and
degradation and collection and trade. The petitioner also provided
credible information that the existing regulatory mechanisms may be
inadequate to address those potential threats. Although the petition
did provide credible information regarding deforestation at less than
one percent per year countrywide, the reference investigated
deforestation across the entire country and did not mention either peat
swamp forest, the specific habitat type for the species, or Bintan
Island, the only island the species is known to exist. Furthermore, the
references provided in the petition that discussed peat swamp forests
did not include Bintan Island, the island where B. miniopinna currently
exists. The petition did not link this general deforestation to effects
on the species.
[[Page 81391]]
Therefore, the petition does not present credible information to
support the claim that habitat loss and degradation is having a
negative impact on the population(s) of the species.
Additionally, regarding trade, the petitioners only presented
information from a brief Google search on the trade of the species.
While this brief search presents evidence of some illegal trade in wild
specimens of the species, without more thorough information on the
amount of trade of wild-caught B. miniopinna and abundance estimates,
the petition does not present credible information to support the claim
that trade is having a negative impact on the population(s) of the
species. Credible sources cited in the petition do not provide
substantial information indicating that threats identified by the
petitions may have synergistic or cumulative effects on the population
such that the petitioned action may be warranted for B. miniopinna.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Crater Lake Newt
Species and Range
Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa mazamae); Crater Lake, Klamath
County, Oregon.
Petition History
On November 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity, requesting that the Crater Lake newt (Taricha
granulosa mazamae) be emergency listed as an endangered species and
critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). The petitioners additionally requested that the Service
immediately protect Crater Lake newts with its emergency listing
authority under 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(7). Because the Act does not provide
for petitions to emergency list, we are considering it as a petition to
list the Crater Lake newt. Listing a species on an emergency basis is
not a petitionable action under the Act, and the question of when to
list on an emergency basis is left to the discretion of the Service. If
the Service determines that the standard for emergency listing in
section 4(b)(7) of the Act is met, the Service may exercise that
discretion to take an emergency listing action at any time. This
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding predation by introduced species (particularly by
signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus)) (Factor C), we find that
the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing the Crater Lake newt may be warranted. The
petitioners also presented information suggesting habitat and food web
alteration by signal crayfish, climate change, reduced effective
population size, and range restriction may be threats to the Crater
Lake newt. We will fully evaluate these potential threats during our
12-month status review, pursuant to the Act's requirement to review the
best scientific and commercial information available when making that
finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Florida Intertidal Firefly
Species and Range
Florida intertidal firefly (Micronaspis floridana): Florida
(Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Citrus, Collier, Dixie, Hernando,
Hillsborough, Indian River, Levy, Manatee, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Pasco,
Pinellas, Saint Lucie, Sarasota, and Volusia Counties) and the Bahamas.
Petition History
On March 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Xerces Society
for Invertebrate Conservation, requesting that the Florida intertidal
firefly (Micronaspis floridana) be listed as an endangered species and
critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding the effects of threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding wetland destruction or loss and modified
hydrology (Factor A), we find that the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the
Florida intertidal firefly may be warranted. The petition also
presented information on the following potential threats to Florida
intertidal firefly: sea level rise, habitat fragmentation, modification
of marsh and mangrove habitats for mosquito control, coastal
eutrophication, harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, overutilization,
nematode infection, predators, light pollution, pesticides, invasive
species, small populations, ocean acidification impacts on prey, and
increased temperature and extreme temperature events, and increased
intensity and proportion of severe storms. We will fully evaluate these
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial
information available when making that finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Iowa Skipper
Species and Range
Iowa skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa); mid-continent prairie in
Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and
Wyoming.
Petition History
On March 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for Food
Safety, requesting that the Iowa Skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa) be
listed as a threatened species or an endangered
[[Page 81392]]
species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such
and included the requisite identification information for the
petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding addresses the
petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding habitat loss and fragmentation (Factor A) and
prairie management (Factor A), we find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that
listing the Iowa skipper may be warranted. The petitioners also
presented information suggesting pesticides, invasive species, climate
change, and small, isolated populations may be threats to the Iowa
skipper. We will fully evaluate these potential threats during our 12-
month status review, pursuant to the Act's requirement to review the
best scientific and commercial information available when making that
finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Long-Tailed Macaque
Species and Range
Long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis); Brunei Darussalam,
Cambodia, Hong Kong of China, Nicobar Islands of India, Indonesia, Lao
People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Mauritius, Myanmar, Palau,
Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and
Vietnam.
Petition History
On April 12, 2023, we received a petition requesting that long-
tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis) be listed as a threatened species
or an endangered species under the Act from People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals, Lisa Jones-Engel, Birut[edot] Mary Galdikas, Jane
Goodall, Action for Primates, Born Free USA, Sarah Kite, Nedim C.
Buyukmihci, Angela Grimes, Liz Tyson-Griffin, The Macaque Coalition,
Ecoflix, Ian Redmond, International Primate Protection League, Wildlife
Alliance, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Michael
Schillaci, One Voice, Abolici[oacute]n Vivisecci[oacute]n, Sam Shanee,
Gemunu de Silva, Northwest Animal Rights Network, Pam Mendosa, Phoenix
Zones Initiative, Hope Ferdowsian, ACP, Nikhil Kulkarni, Neotropical
Primate Conservation, EMS Foundation, Tim Ajax, Rise for Animals,
Wildlife Friends Foundation Thailand, Douc Langur Foundation, Fundacion
Entropika, Angela Maldonado, Animal Defenders International, World
Animal Protection, Paula Pebsworth, and Japan Anti-Vivisection
Association. The petition clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification information for the petitioner,
required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of
the threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the petition
and readily available information regarding the effects of habitat loss
and degradation (Factor A), collection and hunting (Factor B), disease
(Factor C), and culling and sterilization (Factor E), we find that the
petition does not provide substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the long-tailed macaque as a
threatened or an endangered species may be warranted. While we found
that the petition provided documentation of negative impacts to
individual macaques from these potential threats, the petition did not
present credible information to support impacts to populations or the
species as a whole due to these potential threats, either separately or
cumulatively, such that the species may warrant listing.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List San Francisco Estuary Population of
White Sturgeon
Species and Range
White sturgeon [petitioned ``San Francisco Estuary Distinct
Population Segment''] (Acipenser transmontanus) (= San Francisco
Estuary white sturgeon); Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in
California.
Petition History
On December 6, 2023, we received a petition from San Francisco
Baykeeper, The Bay Institute, Restore the Delta, and California
Sportfishing Protection Alliance, requesting that the San Francisco
Estuary white sturgeon population (Acipenser transmontanus) be listed
as a threatened distinct population segment (DPS) and critical habitat
be designated for this species under the Act. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding harmful algal blooms (Factor E), we find that the
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing the San Francisco Estuary population of white
sturgeon as a DPS may be warranted. The petitioners also presented
information suggesting dams, water diversions, entrainment mortality,
recreational harvest, poaching, pollution, climate change, proposed
hatchery supplementation, ship strikes, and dredging may be threats to
the San Francisco Estuary white sturgeon. We will fully evaluate these
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial
information available when making our 12-month finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049
[[Page 81393]]
under the Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Southern Pig-Tailed Macaque
Species and Range
Southern pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina); Brunei Darussalam,
Indonesia (Kalimantan, Sumatra), Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah,
Sarawak), and Thailand.
Petition History
On April 12, 2023, we received a petition requesting that southern
pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina) be listed as a threatened
species or an endangered species under the Act from People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals, Lisa Jones-Engel (Ph.D.), Birute Mary
Galdikas (Ph.D.), Jane Goodall (Ph.D.), Action for Primates, Born Free
USA, Sarah Kite, Nedim Buyukmihci (Ph.D.), Angela Grimes, Liz Tyler-
Griffin (Ph.D.), The Macaque Coalition, Ecoflix, Ian Redmond (Ph.D.),
International Primate Protection League, Wildlife Alliance, the
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Michael Schillaci
(Ph.D.), One Voice, Abolicion Vivseccion, Sam Shanee (Ph.D.), Gemunu de
Silva, Northwest Animal Rights Network, Pam Mendosa, Phoenix Zones
Initiative, Hope Ferdowsian (Ph.D.), Nikhil Kulkarni (Ph.D.),
Neotropical Primate Conservation, The EMS Foundation, Tim Ajax, Rise
for Animals, Wildlife Friends Foundation Thailand, Douc Langur
Foundation, Fundacion Entropika, Angela Maldonado (Ph.D.), Animal
Defenders International, World Animal Protection, Paula Pebsworth, and
The Japan Anti-Vivisection Association. The petition clearly identified
itself as such and included the requisite identification information
for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding
addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of
threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the
petition, sources cited in the petition, and other readily available
information, we find that the petition does not provide substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the
southern pig-tailed macaque as a threatened species or an endangered
species may be warranted. While we found that the petition provided
documentation of negative impacts to individual macaques from these
potential threats, the petition did not present credible information to
support impacts to populations or the species and the petition did not
present credible information to support impacts to populations or the
species as a whole due to these potential threats, either separately or
cumulatively, such that the species may warrant listing.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Tecopa Bird's Beak
Species and Range
Tecopa bird's beak (Chrloropyron tecopense); Esmeralda and Nye
Counties in Nevada and Inyo County in California.
Petition History
On September 26, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity, requesting that Tecopa bird's beak (Chrloropyron
tecopense) be listed as a threatened species or an endangered species
and critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding hydrological alteration and groundwater
extraction related to agriculture and exurban sprawl (Factor A), we
find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the Tecopa bird's beak may be
warranted. The petitioners also presented information suggesting off-
road vehicles, non-native ungulate grazing, herbivory, climate change,
and invasive species, as well as other potential effects from
geothermal power production and mineral exploration and development,
may be threats to the Tecopa bird's beak. We will fully evaluate these
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial
information available when making that finding.
The basis for our finding on this petition and other information
regarding our review of the petition can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the
petitions under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that
the petitions summarized above for the Crater Lake newt, Florida
intertidal firefly, Iowa skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of
white sturgeon, and Tecopa bird's beak present substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be
warranted. We are, therefore, initiating status reviews of these
species to determine whether the actions are warranted under the Act.
At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue findings, in
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether the
petitioned actions are not warranted, warranted, or warranted but
precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species. In addition, we have
determined that the petitions summarized above for Betta miniopinna,
long-tailed macaque, and southern pig-tailed macaque do not present
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned actions may be warranted. We are, therefore, not initiating
status reviews for these species in response to the petitions.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are staff members of the
Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[[Page 81394]]
Authority
The authority for these actions is 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. 2024-22914 Filed 10-7-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 8, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.