Proposed Rule2025-10777
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Three Species Not Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened 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
June 17, 2025
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
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 bog spicebush (Lindera subcoriacea), Edward's Aquifer diving beetle (Haideoporus texanus), and Texas screwstem (Bartonia paniculata ssp. texana). 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.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 115 (Tuesday, June 17, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 17, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25559-25564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-10777]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FXES1111090FEDR-256-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 bog spicebush (Lindera subcoriacea), Edward's Aquifer
diving beetle (Haideoporus texanus), and Texas screwstem (Bartonia
paniculata ssp. texana). 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 17, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the bases for these findings are
available on the internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under the
following docket numbers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bog spicebush................................ FWS-R4-ES-2024-0104
Edwards Aquifer diving beetle................ FWS-R2-ES-2024-0105
Texas screwstem.............................. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0109
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bog spicebush............................. James Austin, Field Office
Supervisor, Mississippi
Ecological Services Field
Office, 601-540-2576,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a8c2c9c5cddbf7c9dddbdcc1c6e8cedfdb86cfc7de"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5f353e323a2c003e2a2c2b36311f39282c71383029">[email protected]</span></a>.
Edwards Aquifer diving beetle............. Karen Myers, Field
Supervisor, Austin
Ecological Services Field
Office, 512-937-7371,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#94fff5e6f1facbf9edf1e6e7d4f2e3e7baf3fbe2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2e454f5c4b407143574b5c5d6e48595d00494158">[email protected]</span></a>.
Texas screwstem........................... Catherine Yeargan, Project
Leader, Texas Coastal and
Central Plains Ecological
Services Field Office, 512-
363-6862,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2f4c4e5b474a5d46414a70564a4e5d484e416f49585c01484059"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91f2f0e5f9f4e3f8fff4cee8f4f0e3f6f0ffd1f7e6e2bff6fee7">[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:
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 an ``endangered
species'' as a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range and a ``threatened species'' as a
species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. The Act requires that we determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the
following 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 species' expected response and
the effects of the threats--in light of those
[[Page 25560]]
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 definition of an ``endangered
species'' or a ``threatened species'' only after conducting this
cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect on the species.
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 <a href="https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf">https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf</a>).
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 bog spicebush,
Edward's Aquifer diving beetle, and Texas screwstem meet the Act's
definition of an ``endangered species'' or a ``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 petition, information available in our
files, and other available published and unpublished information for
the 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 the
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 actions included in this
document. Below, we describe the documents containing these analyses.
The species assessment forms for the bog spicebush, Edward's
Aquifer diving beetle, and Texas screwstem each 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 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
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under the appropriate docket number (see
ADDRESSES, above).
Bog Spicebush
Previous Federal Actions
On April 20, 2010, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity, Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition,
Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration Network, Tennessee Forests Council,
and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to list 404 species, including
the bog spicebush, as an endangered or threatened species under the
Act. On September 27, 2011, we published a 90-day finding in the
Federal Register (76 FR 59836) concluding that the petition presented
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that
listing may be warranted for the bog spicebush. This document
constitutes our 12-month finding on the April 20, 2010, petition to
list bog spicebush under the Act.
Summary of Finding
Bog spicebush is a wetland shrub endemic to the southeastern United
States, including the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The species'
current distribution is not substantively reduced from its known
historical distribution. Bog spicebush occurs in two general wetland
habitats including seepage slopes with frequent fire, and in swamp
forests and baygalls (or bay swamps) with less frequent fire. These
habitat types are typically embedded within other upland forest
ecosystems. Bog spicebush requires soils that are saturated but not
permanently inundated. These soils are acidic and high in organic
matter (e.g., peaty, or other mucky soils). The wetlands where bog
spicebush occurs are situated in landscapes that experience frequent
fire that acts to reduce woody competition.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to bog spicebush, and we evaluated all relevant factors under the Act's
five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these threats. The primary threats
affecting the bog spicebush's biological status include habitat loss or
modification due to urbanization and fire suppression, as well as the
future changes to hydrologic regimes, habitat condition, disease, and
insect herbivory of this shrub, the latter of which would potentially
result from increasing temperatures and subsequent increases in
survival and reproduction of insect herbivores. We also examined other
factors including the effects of laurel wilt disease, invasive species,
mineral and materials extraction, silviculture, seed predation, and the
effects of small, isolated populations, but these factors did not rise
to such a level that they affected the species as a whole.
There are several historical and ongoing stressors to the species.
However, the best available information indicates that the current
distribution of the species is not substantively reduced from its known
historical distribution. Habitat loss and modification due to
urbanization and fire suppression is the primary factor influencing the
species rangewide. The species is known from 123 populations
historically with 9 documented extirpations distributed across 5
States, including the only known population in Louisiana. Of the 114
assessed populations, 19 (16.7 percent) exhibit high current resiliency
and 76 (66.7 percent) exhibit moderate
[[Page 25561]]
current resiliency, with multiple high and moderately resilient
populations distributed across the 6 States and 3 ecoregions it
occupies in the southeastern United States, providing good species'
redundancy. In addition, 84 of the 114 populations (74 percent) occur
on conservation lands where protection from development and some level
of habitat management is expected, and of these populations, more than
95 percent (80 of the 84 populations) have high or moderate current
resiliency. Overall, the majority of populations have the ability to
withstand stochastic events. Additionally, current representation may
be slightly reduced from historical due to loss of nine extirpated
populations. However, it is currently moderate and sufficient to
support species' viability. To date, the best available information
indicates that the threats to the bog spicebush have not significantly
affected viability. The SSA report describes uncertainties regarding
potential threats and the species' response to these potential threats,
but the best available information indicates the risk of extinction is
low. Therefore, we conclude that the bog spicebush is not in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range. Thus, we proceed with
determining whether the species is likely to become endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
The future scenarios through 2075 in the SSA report encompass the
best available information for future projections of changes in
suitable burn window, changes in forest and wetland land cover classes,
and how the geospatial aspects of a population area may provide some
protection against changing environmental conditions across two
plausible future scenarios (high and low impact). We projected that
more than half of bog spicebush populations (66 to 70 populations; 57.9
to 61.4 percent) are projected to remain moderately to highly
resilient, even under the higher impact scenario in 2075. These high
and moderate resiliency populations are expected to have the ability to
withstand stochastic events. Under each scenario, high and moderate
resiliency populations are distributed across the range of the species
except for the 10 populations in Alabama (7 populations) and Georgia (3
populations). Of the populations on conservation lands, between 73.8
and 76.2 percent are projected to exhibit moderate to high resiliency
in the foreseeable future. However, populations not on conservation
lands are projected to decline in resiliency, with between 24 and 26 of
30 populations projected to exhibit low resiliency. The future
redundancy of the bog spicebush is expected to decrease somewhat as the
resiliency of some populations declines. However, populations with
moderate to high resiliency are projected to be distributed across the
range of the species under both future scenarios and timesteps. We
expect that future redundancy of the bog spicebush, although decreased
from current levels, will remain sufficient to support species'
viability. Therefore, after assessing the best available information,
we conclude that the bog spicebush is not likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the bog spicebush is endangered or
threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did not find any
portions of the bog spicebush'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 bog
spicebush 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 bog spicebush is not in danger of extinction or likely to become in
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all of
its range or in any significant portion of its range. Therefore, we
find that listing bog spicebush 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 bog spicebush species
assessment form and other supporting documents on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2024-0104 (see
ADDRESSES, above).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in
listing actions under the Act, we solicited independent scientific
reviews of the information contained in the bog spicebush SSA report.
We sent the SSA report to four independent peer reviewers and received
one response. Results of this structured peer review process can be
found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2024-
0104 and <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/mississippi-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/mississippi-ecological-services/library</a>. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as appropriate,
into the SSA report, which is the foundation for this finding.
Edwards Aquifer Diving Beetle
Previous Federal Actions
On June 25, 2007, we received a petition from Forest Guardians (now
WildEarth Guardians) to list 475 species, including the Edwards Aquifer
diving beetle, as endangered or threatened species under the Act. On
December 16, 2009, we published a 90[hyphen]day finding (74 FR 66866)
that the petition presented substantial scientific information
indicating that listing may be warranted for the Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle. This document constitutes our 12-month finding on the June 25,
2007, petition to list Edwards Aquifer diving beetle under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Edwards Aquifer diving beetle (also referred to as the Texas
cave diving beetle) is a small subterranean aquatic insect that lives
underground in the southern segment of the Edwards Aquifer. The diving
beetle has been expelled from four artesian wells and springs at two of
the largest spring ecosystems in this segment: San Marcos Springs in
Hays County, Texas, and Comal Springs in Comal County, Texas. The
species exhibits subterranean morphological traits, feeds on resources
found at deeper levels within the Edwards Aquifer near the freshwater/
saline-water interface, and is infrequently captured compared to other
subterranean taxa and congener species. The best available information
suggests the species inhabits deeper aquifer habitat (as opposed to
hyporheic zone, springs, or surface habitats). The presence of diving
beetles expelled from the San Marcos artesian well, which reaches
depths of 60 meters (197 feet), suggests that their habitat extends to
at least this depth, if not deeper.
Aquifer habitats are characterized by the absence of light and
relatively stable physiochemical properties, and they can be buffered
against abrupt changes, depending on their distance from surface and
the amount of terrestrial inputs. The Edwards Aquifer is recognized for
its unique biodiversity in part explained by the abundant energy
sources supported through chemolithoautotrophy (i.e., a process when
microorganisms convert inorganic compounds into energy) at the
freshwater/saline water interface. Interstitial pore spaces serve as
microhabitats for subterranean invertebrates, and thus the sizes of the
[[Page 25562]]
pore space select for smaller and more elongated invertebrates with
certain physiological characteristics. The diving beetle is highly
specialized to navigate these passageways and, having no wings, may be
isolated in subterranean waters where movement is restricted by
geologic barriers, such as faults. The diving beetle has never been
directly observed in its natural subterranean habitat due to
limitations in accessibility of these habitats to humans. The best
available information does not currently indicate the size and range of
preferred water-filled void spaces, nor the preferred water quality.
Edwards Aquifer diving beetles are opportunistically predaceous and
are primary consumers. The food sources for the Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle vary between the populations from the two spring ecosystems,
with San Marcos Springs and Comal Springs individuals having 92 percent
and 27 percent, respectively, of their stomach contents from
chemolithoautotrophic organic matter. We assume this difference in what
the diving beetles in each of these populations consume is influenced
by where they live. The population at San Marcos Springs is underground
in the artesian zone where a more impervious rock layer separates the
surface from the groundwater habitat. This physical separation makes
the San Marcos Spring population less likely to access food from the
surface. The population at Comal Springs is in the recharge zone of the
aquifer, where the less impervious rocks at the surface are exposed and
would introduce surface-derived food resources more readily.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle, and we evaluated all relevant
factors under the Act's five listing factors, including any regulatory
mechanisms and conservation measures addressing these threats. The
primary threats to the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle's biological
status that we evaluated include reductions in water quantity through
groundwater pumping and development, water quality, effects of extreme
droughts and increased temperatures, and mortality from groundwater
wells.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we found that the best available information does not project
a negative impact from environmental or anthropogenic factors directly
to Edwards Aquifer diving beetle populations, nor does the best
available information indicate a change to historic demographic
factors. The primary driving factors of Edwards Aquifer diving beetle's
viability are water quantity (i.e., groundwater pumping and
development) and water quality (i.e., development and impervious
cover). The Edwards Aquifer diving beetle has survived significant
drought periods (including the drought of record), and despite the
ongoing threats, the population has been regularly observed since its
initial discovery half a century ago. Groundwater volume extracted from
the aquifer has reduced since 2008. The best available information does
not indicate that groundwater quantity is impacting the species, and it
is not expected to become a stressor because of Texas State legislation
and current conservation measures (i.e., the Edwards Aquifer Authority
Act and the associated habitat conservation plan). The absence of long-
term declines in aquifer levels suggests that suitable habitat, in
terms of water quantity, for the diving beetle has experienced little
change from historical conditions and has not declined. It is also
unlikely that widespread loss or degradation of water-filled
subterranean spaces has occurred due to reduced recharge and
groundwater pumping. Flow protection measures have sustained the Comal
and San Marcos Spring ecosystems during drought and have provided
protection for water levels in deeper portions of the southern segment.
Additionally, the best available information does not indicate that
any groundwater contamination is affecting the Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle. Past and current urbanization and human population growth have
not resulted in significant degradation in water quality at the Comal
and San Marcos Spring systems. Despite increases in localized
impervious cover, most of the groundwater comes from a much larger
regional area that is currently less developed and less impacted by
contamination.
Finally, direct mortality through expulsion from groundwater wells
is occurring, but the best available information available indicates
that expulsion of individuals via wells are infrequent, and the
species' likely high reproductive rate results in this level of
mortality being unlikely to affect the population's current resiliency.
Thus, after assessing the best available information, we conclude that
the Edwards aquifer diving beetle is not in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range.
The primary driving factors on the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle
populations' future viability are water quality (i.e., development and
impervious cover) and water quantity (i.e., groundwater pumping and
development). Increases in development in the areas of influence would
lead to increases in impervious cover, altered recharge rates, and
degraded water quality. The lands directly above Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle habitat are already developed, although future developments may
occur in the areas of influence in the recharge and contributing zones
that impact groundwater quantity and quality. Projections indicate that
the human populations of Bexar, Comal, Hays, and Kendall Counties,
Texas, will continue to increase over the next three decades. Land-use
projections indicate the potential for increases in impervious cover
that could degrade water quality and lower recharge capacity for the
southern segment of the aquifer. The best available information does
not indicate projected levels of impervious cover will affect
groundwater quality to a level that it would become unsuitable for the
Edwards Aquifer diving beetle.
Water quantity is expected to remain sufficient for the Edwards
Aquifer diving beetle. At the depths at which this species occurs in
the aquifer, future groundwater extraction and changes in precipitation
events are not expected to have significant effects on the species'
habitat. Flow protection measures have sustained Comal and San Marcos
Spring ecosystems during drought and provide protection for water
levels in deeper portions of the southern segment. There is no evidence
indicating any threat to the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle under
current groundwater management implementation, and if current
management of the southern segment continues into the future, aquifer
levels should not decline to a level where Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle habitat would be affected.
Thus, the best available information does not project a negative
impact from environmental or anthropogenic factors directly to the
known Edwards Aquifer diving beetle population, nor is there evidence
indicating a negative change to demographic factors historically. We
expect that resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the species
will be maintained into the foreseeable future. After assessing the
best available information, we conclude that the Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle is not likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle is
endangered or threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did
not find any portions of the Edwards
[[Page 25563]]
Aquifer diving beetle'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 Edwards
Aquifer diving beetle 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 Edwards Aquifer diving beetle is not in danger of extinction or
likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range or in any significant portion of its range.
Therefore, we find that listing the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle 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 Edwards Aquifer diving beetle species assessment form and
other supporting documents on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket
No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0105 (see ADDRESSES, above).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270) and our August 22, 2016,
memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in the
listing actions under the Act, we solicited independent scientific
reviews of the information contained in the Edwards Aquifer diving
beetle SSA report. We sent the SSA report to three independent peer
reviewers and received one response. Results of this structured peer
review process can be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket
No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0105. We incorporated the results of these reviews,
as appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation for this
finding.
Texas Screwstem
Previous Federal Actions
On April 20, 2010, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity, Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition,
Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration Network, Tennessee Forests Council,
and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy to list 404 species, including
Texas screwstem, as an endangered or threatened species under the Act.
On September 27, 2011, we published a 90-day finding in the Federal
Register (76 FR 59836) concluding that the petition presented
substantial scientific information indicating that listing may be
warranted for the Texas screwstem. This document constitutes our 12-
month finding on the April 20, 2010, petition to list the Texas
screwstem under the Act.
Summary of Finding
The Texas screwstem is a small and inconspicuous plant, usually
growing less than 30 centimeters (12 inches) in height. It is native to
the Pineywoods region of east Texas with a single occurrence in
Louisiana. The species has been documented in 24 locations since it was
first described in 1965. Since 2010, it has been observed in 12 of
those locations, all occurring in seven counties in east Texas.
The Texas screwstem is a habitat specialist, dependent on the
unique baygall habitat (i.e., wetlands with peat substrates at slopes
maintained by downslope) see page found within the broader Texas
Pineywoods region. It does not appear to be restricted to specific soil
types, climate regimes, or geological substrates, indicating that
baygall habitat is the key driver of species presence. Sufficient
habitat includes proper hydrology and co-occurring plant communities
that create the microhabitats associated with the Texas screwstem.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Texas screwstem, and we evaluated all relevant factors under the
Act's five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and
conservation measures addressing these threats. The primary threats
affecting the Texas screwstem's biological status include habitat loss
and degradation due to human development, timber harvest, and invasive
species; direct damage from invasive hogs; and severe weather events,
including hurricanes. In east Texas, human activity and development has
resulted in the loss and degradation of wetlands, including the baygall
habitats on which the Texas screwstem is dependent. There are
conservation measures that may limit the effects of human development
on the Texas screwstem, such as the occurrence of more than half of the
populations on federally owned lands or privately owned lands that are
managed for conservation. Other threats, such as feral hog damage and
severe weather events, are the most pervasive threats across the range
and can reduce the resiliency of populations by directly impacting
individual Texas screwstem plants or their habitats.
In our analysis of the species and its threats, we found that the
Texas screwstem is known from 24 historical populations, 12 of which
have had detections in recent surveys. At least 1 population is
extirpated, and another 10 currently have low resiliency, making them
vulnerable to stochastic events. However, 11 populations have high
resiliency, meaning they have sufficient habitat and demographic
characteristics that facilitate persistence. As a narrowly distributed
habitat specialist, the Texas screwstem likely had limited redundancy
and representation historically. Populations are also found in two of
the three ecoregions in which the species historically occurred.
However, populations are distributed across three separate hydrological
basins, with at least two high resiliency populations in each basin.
The presence of multiple populations across most of the historical
range and several hydrological basins buffers the Texas screwstem
against the potential effects of catastrophic events. These populations
continue to be distributed across several ecoregions and most of the
historical extent of the species' range, indicating limited declines in
adaptive capacity. Overall, the Texas screwstem is composed of multiple
high resiliency populations that cover much of the historical range of
the species, conferring redundancy and representation. Thus, after
assessing the best available information, we conclude that the Texas
screwstem is not in danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
We project that populations currently in low resiliency will become
extirpated. Loss of these populations will result in reductions in
redundancy and representation. However, populations currently in high
resiliency are projected to remain in that condition in the future. Of
the 11 currently highly resilient populations, in the worst-case
scenario, 6 populations are projected to continue to remain highly
resilient, and 4 populations are projected to decline to moderate
resiliency. Thus, we do not project that there will be reductions in
resiliency that would result in rangewide population extirpations.
These populations will continue to occur across several hydrological
basins and ecoregions, covering much of the historical range.
Therefore, we do not project that there will be substantial declines in
redundancy and representation that would elevate extinction risk. In
total, based on our analysis of the threats that may reduce the
viability of the Texas screwstem, we find that the biological status of
the species is not projected to change substantially in the foreseeable
future.
[[Page 25564]]
After assessing the best available information, we conclude that the
Texas screwstem is not likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
We also evaluated whether the Texas screwstem is endangered or
threatened in a significant portion of its range. We did not find any
portions of the Texas screwstem'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 Texas
screwstem 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 Texas screwstem is not in danger of extinction or likely to become
in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all of
its range or in any significant portion of its range. Therefore, we
find that listing the Texas screwstem 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 Texas
screwstem species assessment form and other supporting documents on
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-0109 (see
ADDRESSES, above).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270) and our August 22, 2016,
memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in the
listing actions under the Act, we solicited independent scientific
reviews of the information contained in the Texas screwstem SSA report.
We sent the SSA report to four independent peer reviewers and received
four responses. Results of this structured peer review process can be
found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2024-
0109. 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 bog
spicebush, Edward's Aquifer diving beetle, and Texas screwstem 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 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> in the
appropriate docket (see ADDRESSES, above) and upon request from the
appropriate person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above).
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.).
Signing Authority
Paul Souza, Regional Director, Region 8, Exercising the Delegated
Authority of the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
approved this action on May 16, 2025, for publication. On June 9, 2025,
Paul Souza authorized the undersigned to sign the document
electronically and submit it to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication as an official document of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Madonna Baucum,
Regulations and Policy Chief, Division of Policy, Economics, Risk
Management, and Analytics of the Joint Administrative Operations, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2025-10777 Filed 6-16-25; 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 June 17, 2025.
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.