Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Not-Warranted Finding for the Temblor Legless Lizard

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

May 4, 2026

Issuing agencies

Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service

Abstract

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list the Temblor legless lizard (Anniella alexanderae) as an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Temblor legless lizard inhabits the eastern foothills of the Temblor and Diablo ranges of California, along with adjacent portions of the San Joaquin Valley floor. After a thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing the Temblor legless lizard as an endangered or threatened species is not warranted at this time. However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new information relevant to the status of the Temblor legless lizard or its habitat.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 85 (Monday, May 4, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 85 (Monday, May 4, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23934-23938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08665]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2026-0299; FXES1111090FEDR-267-FF09E21000]

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Not-
Warranted Finding for the Temblor Legless Lizard

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notification of finding.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list the Temblor legless lizard
(Anniella alexanderae) as an endangered or threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Temblor legless
lizard inhabits the eastern foothills of the Temblor and Diablo ranges
of California, along with adjacent portions of the San Joaquin Valley
floor. After a thorough review of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we find that listing the Temblor legless lizard
as an endangered or threatened species is not warranted at this time.
However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new
information relevant to the status of the Temblor legless lizard or its
habitat.

DATES: The finding in this document was made on May 4, 2026.

DATES: A detailed description of the basis for this finding is
available on the internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket
No. FWS-R8-ES-2026-0299. Supporting information used to prepare this
finding is also available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office.
Please submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions
concerning this finding to the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Turner, Acting Field Supervisor,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 916-414-6606,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#97fcfefac8e4c8e3e2e5f9f2e5d7f1e0e4b9f0f8e1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="117a787c4e624e6564637f7463517766623f767e67">[email&#160;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 the 12-month
finding 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.

[[Page 23935]]

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 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 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 Temblor legless
lizard meets 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 included
information from recognized experts; Federal and State governments;
academic institutions; and private entities.
In accordance with the regulations at 50 CFR 424.14(h)(2)(i), this
document announces our not-warranted finding on a petition to list the
Temblor legless lizard. We have also elected to include a brief summary
of the analysis on which this finding is based. We provide the full
analysis, including the reasons and data on which the finding is based,
in the decisional file for the Temblor legless lizard. The following is
a description of the documents containing this analysis.
The species assessment form for the Temblor legless lizard contains
more detailed biological information, a thorough analysis of the
listing factors, a list of literature cited, and an explanation of why
we determined that the species does not meet the Act's definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' To inform our
status review, we completed a species status assessment (SSA) report
for the species. The SSA report contains a thorough review of the
taxonomy, life history, ecology, current status, and projected future
status for the Temblor legless lizard. This supporting information can
be found on the internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under the
Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2026-0299.

Previous Federal Actions

On October 20, 2020, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity to list the Temblor legless lizard as an
endangered or threatened species and designate critical habitat under
the Act. On June 17, 2021, we published a 90-day finding (86 FR 32241)
that the petition contained substantial information indicating listing
may be warranted for the species. This document constitutes our 12-
month finding on the October 20, 2020, petition to list Temblor legless
lizard under the Act.

Summary of Finding

The Temblor legless lizard (lizard) is a thin, snake-like reptile
found in the eastern foothills of the Temblor and Diablo ranges of
California, along with adjacent portions of the San Joaquin Valley
floor west of Interstate 5 (Rose et al. 2022, p. 16). Its range is long
and narrow (approximately 90 miles by 8 miles (145 kilometers by 13
kilometers)) and runs through western portions of Kern, Kings, and
Fresno Counties, as well as a small section of eastern San Luis Obispo
County.
The Temblor legless lizard burrows through relatively loose, well-
drained substrate and has been observed at depths of 1 to 24 inches.
Individuals require soil with sufficient moisture in at least some
accessible layer of substrate to survive and feed successfully. Areas
near intermittent and ephemeral streams often provide particularly good
habitat, because such areas are more likely to have loose soils and
necessary moisture levels. Individuals need arthropod prey populations
and microhabitat structures (including leaf litter, overhanging
vegetation, and larger root systems of trees and shrubs) that provide
shade, hiding places, and prey of various small invertebrates.
To maintain overall viability, the Temblor legless lizard requires
sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and representation. Resiliency is
the ability of a species to sustain populations through the natural
range of favorable and unfavorable conditions. Redundancy is the
ability of a species to withstand catastrophic events. Representation
is the ability of a species to adapt to both near-term and long-term
changes in its physical and biological environments (adaptive
capacity). To achieve sufficient resiliency, generally the Temblor
legless lizard needs one or more populations of sufficient size and
growth rate to allow for recovery from common environmental
fluctuations, such as normal variation in precipitation from year to
year. The Temblor legless lizard needs to be distributed across its
entire range to maximize redundancy. Maintaining sufficient
representation in the form of genetic and ecological diversity is
necessary to maintain the adaptive

[[Page 23936]]

capacity of the Temblor legless lizard to future environmental changes.
Habitat connectivity also increases representation, by allowing such
differences in genetic diversity to spread through the population via
dispersal and interbreeding as needed if the general environment
changes.
We considered whether it was appropriate to separate the range of
the Temblor legless lizard into different analytical units to account
for local habitat differences, local adaptations, or separately
interbreeding populations. The known range is small, and areas with
loose substrate and overhanging, well-rooted vegetation occur
throughout. While there have been fewer records in the central portion
of the range, this is solely due to lack of access to private land.
Therefore, because potential habitat occurs throughout the known range
and we have occurrence data across the known range, lizards appear to
be distributed throughout the entire known range. Additionally, there
are no data to indicate that there are any areas with lizards with
unique markings, behaviors, or genetics. Mitochondrial DNA variation
across the range is low (Parham et al. 2019, pp. 17-18), suggesting
recent interbreeding. While there is the potential for there to be
multiple populations across the range that are separated by barriers
such as roads or patches of unsuitable habitat, we do not have
information on population structure at this time. Lizards may be able
to cross potential impediments to dispersal such as roads by following
the sandy soils in and near intermittent or ephemeral streams, and
either crawling through or being washed through culverts or under
bridges. Accordingly, after a review of the best available information,
we are treating the entire range as a single analytical unit.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Temblor legless lizard. We have evaluated all available
information relevant to the five listing factors, including any
regulatory mechanisms and conservation measures addressing these
threats. Development (Factor A) and increased temperature, drought, and
flooding (Factor E) are the primary threats to the species. Oil and gas
development, urbanization, and agricultural development (conversion to
orchards or row crops) all remove available habitat needed by the
lizard and may also interfere with the lizard's hunting success. For
example, drilling, pumping, and fluid injections (including fracking)
produce powerful ground vibrations that could overwhelm the lizard's
ability to locate its prey by listening for their movements from below
the surface. Spills of oil, wastewater, or both can result in loss of
habitat, and can also sicken or kill lizards directly. Development of
solar plants is also a potential issue in parts of the range. Increased
temperature and drought could result in drier, hotter substrate and in
loss of shrubs and associated shade, leaf litter, and invertebrate
prey. Hotter and drier weather could also lead to increased, or more
severe, wildfires, which could kill lizards directly and remove
additional shrubbery and leaf litter. Warmer temperatures can also
result in changes to flooding patterns and magnitudes.
As stated above, the Temblor legless lizard population functions as
a single unit, and the threats affect the species such that it has
similar extinction risk throughout its entire range. We acknowledge
that higher levels of development have occurred in the northern and
southern areas within the range of the species; however, because of the
extensive network of streams and washes that provide connectivity and
avenues for dispersal, any individual lizards that may be affected by
development could disperse to other areas by using the network of
streams and washes. Further, warmer temperatures, drought, and
increased flooding are expected to impact the entire species' range
because it is a relatively small area. Therefore, all individuals would
be impacted by any potential threat to the lizard, and thus there are
no threats impacting the species' such that there is a different
extinction risk across the species' range. We found no way to divide
this species' range at a scale that is biologically appropriate for a
classification determination (i.e., no possible portion to evaluate).
Therefore, we assessed the Temblor legless lizard's status for both the
endangered species and threatened species classifications based upon
the ``throughout all of its range'' component.
The population size, population growth rate, and effective
population size (an indication of ability to avoid inbreeding
depression) of the Temblor legless lizard are unknown. Therefore, we
used a habitat assessment (habitat quantity and quality) to
characterize resiliency of the lizard. Since 1986, less than 5
additional percent of the lizard's range has been developed, leaving
14.7 percent in agriculture, 10.2 percent in oil or urban development,
and 71.3 percent potentially suitable habitat (grasslands and
shrublands). The extent of shrublands (the most suitable habitat type)
has increased by about 5.5 percent since 1986. Further, there is some
evidence that lizards can successfully occupy and hunt in areas that
are relatively close to ground-disturbing activities such as oil
drilling and landfill maintenance. Floodwaters are likely to be
channeled, leaving many lizards outside flooded areas and giving
lizards at the edges of such areas places to which they can retreat.
Therefore, current resiliency appears sufficient to allow the species
to withstand normal environmental fluctuations. Although the species'
range is relatively small, the occurrences found and the distribution
of likely habitat suggest the species is distributed across the entire
range, and therefore, most local catastrophic events (i.e., drought,
flooding, or oil/wastewater spills) would be unlikely to impact the
entire species. Flooding and oil or wastewater spills are also
channeled and localized by topographic features, thereby limiting their
impacts. Droughts can affect the entire range, but the species has
weathered major droughts (including two in the last 20 years). The
species' redundancy thus appears sufficient to allow recovery from
catastrophic events. Representation in the species is inherently low
due to the lack of known genetic, morphological, or habitat differences
that would help it adapt to environmental change, but the species does
have the ability to ``shift in space'' and burrow deeper into soils to
avoid warmer temperatures.
In summary, current resiliency appears sufficient to allow the
species to withstand normal environmental fluctuations, due to the
continuing presence of high percentages of potentially suitable habitat
across the range. Although the species' range is relatively small, the
occurrences found and the distribution of likely habitat suggest the
species is distributed across the entire range, and therefore, most
local catastrophic events (i.e., drought, flooding, or oil/wastewater
spills) would be unlikely to impact the entire species. Because the
species is a narrow endemic (found only in one small area),
representation is inherently limited due to the lack of known genetic,
morphological, or habitat differences. After considering its
resiliency, redundancy and representation, we find that the species is
not currently in danger of extinction.
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). To characterize the future condition of the
species, we established two plausible future scenarios, which

[[Page 23937]]

include the best available information for future projections of
population resiliency (Service 2025, pp. 32-33). The scenarios included
an alternative with lesser impacts (Scenario 1) and an alternative with
greater impacts (Scenario 2). We expect the actual course of future
events to run somewhere between the two alternatives. For both
scenarios, we quantitatively evaluated historical vs. future
distribution of potentially suitable habitat based on future urban,
agricultural, and oil development projections through 2075 and also
considered habitat impacts likely to result from changes to climate
under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) trajectories 4.5
(Scenario 1) and 8.5 (Scenario 2) (IPCC 2014, p. 21) out to 2100. We
also conducted qualitative assessments under both scenarios to evaluate
other aspects of the threats out to 2075, including oil and wastewater
spills, precipitation, and wildfire. These time frames represent the
foreseeable future for this species, as they reflect the greater extent
of available information regarding how these respective changes will
impact the species and its habitat into the future and how the species
will respond to those threats, and thus the timeframes for which we
could make reasonably reliable predictions.
Under Scenario 1, based on all the factors we considered,
resiliency will decrease somewhat but the lizard will likely remain
able to recover from environmental fluctuations through 2075. Oil
development would cause potentially suitable habitat to decline by 4.5
percent of the range (from the current 71.3 percent of the range (487
sq mi) to 66.8 percent (456 sq mi). Urban and agricultural development
is expected under this scenario to be low (1 percent) and to occur in
areas that are not currently potentially suitable habitat. This is
based on current patterns of negative population growth, losses of
agricultural lands, and low acreage of proposed solar plants. Habitat
fragmentation is likely to increase somewhat in the oil fields due to
oil development, but many such fragments will continue to be connected
by intermittent and ephemeral streams, which should serve the lizards
both as dispersal habitat and regular habitat. When considering
temperature and precipitation-related changes alone, a similar result
is expected through 2100. Redundancy will decrease somewhat as chances
of oil spills increase in the oil fields, and catastrophic droughts and
floods become more common, but long-term droughts should not be more
likely, because precipitation is not projected to decrease. However,
the lizard should still be able to recover from such events.
Representation will remain limited but is expected to retain some
capacity to adapt due to the species' ability to burrow deeper into
soil to avoid warmer temperatures.
Under Scenario 2, continued temperature increases across the range
will push the tolerance limits of the lizards and may reduce habitat as
locations with insufficient shade or moisture are abandoned. Increases
in average precipitation and decreases in wildfires will perhaps offset
some impacts from temperature increases, and prevent conversion of
shrubland to grassland, but this means the impacts of droughts will be
greater. Under this scenario, an additional 5 percent of the range will
undergo urban, solar energy, or agricultural development, of which 1
percent will occur in areas not considered potentially suitable
habitat. Potentially suitable habitat will decrease by 4 percent of the
range due to non-oil development. The total loss of potentially
suitable habitat from development of all kinds would be 13 percent of
the range. Potentially suitable habitat is expected to decrease from
the current 71.3 percent of the range (487 sq mi) to 58.3 percent of
the range (398 sq mi). Habitat fragmentation is likely to increase in
the oil fields, but many such fragments will continue to be connected
by ephemeral streams, which should serve the lizards both as dispersal
habitat and regular habitat. Overall, resiliency will decline due to
oil development and changing environmental conditions, but such changes
are unlikely to prevent the species from withstanding stochastic
events. Redundancy will also decline under this scenario, due to
increased chances of oil spills in the oil fields, and increased
chances of flooding and drought across the range. Drought duration
should not increase significantly, however, since precipitation will
increase. Overall, we do not expect catastrophic events to impact the
species such that the entire range would be affected. Representation
under this scenario will remain limited, but the species is expected to
retain some level of ability to adapt to changes in its environment
because it can burrow deeper into the soil to avoid warmer
temperatures. Therefore, after assessing the best available
information, we conclude that the Temblor legless lizard does not meet
the definition of a threatened species because it is not likely to
become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all of its
range.
A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found in
the Temblor legless lizard species assessment form and other supporting
documents on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-
2026-0299 (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 Temblor legless lizard 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-R8-ES-
2026-0299. 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
Temblor legless lizard to the person specified above under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it becomes available. New information
will help us monitor the species and make appropriate decisions about
its 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 this petition finding is
available in the species assessment form, which is available on the
internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-
2026-0299 (see ADDRESSES, above) and upon request from the field office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above).

Authors

The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the
Species Assessment Team, Ecological Services Program.

Authority

The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of

[[Page 23938]]

1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Brian Nesvik,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-08665 Filed 5-1-26; 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>

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on May 4, 2026.

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.