Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised 12-Month Finding for the Greater Adams Cave Beetle (Pseudanophthalmus pholeter, 72973-72976 [05-23762]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 235 / Thursday, December 8, 2005 / Proposed Rules
that adopted national standards to
control vehicle evaporative emissions,
dynamometer test provisions, and
labeling requirements. The requirements
of the rule will be enforced by the
federal government at the national level.
Thus, the requirements of Section 6 of
the Executive Order do not apply to
today’s action.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This proposed rule does
not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. Today’s
proposed rule does not uniquely affect
the communities of American Indian
tribal governments since the motor
vehicle requirements for private
businesses in today’s rule will have
national applicability. Furthermore,
today’s rule does not impose any direct
compliance costs on these communities
and no circumstances specific to such
communities exist that will cause an
impact on these communities beyond
those discussed in the other sections of
today’s document. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to today’s
action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that
(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
section 5–501 of the Executive Order
directs us to evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by us.
Today’s action is not subject to the
Executive Order because it is not an
economically significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order
12866. Furthermore, today’s action does
not concern an environmental health or
safety risk that we have reason to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Dec 07, 2005
Jkt 208001
72973
believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children.
action will be effective February 6,
2006.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
II. Statutory Provisions and Legal
Authority
Today’s action is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Section 12(d) of
Public Law 104–113, directs us to use
voluntary consensus standards in our
regulatory activities unless it would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs
us to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when we decide not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
Today’s action references technical
standards adopted by us through
previous rulemakings. No new technical
standards are established in today’s
rule. The standards referenced in
today’s action involve the measurement
of vehicle evaporative emissions, the
allowance for four-wheel dynamometer
test capabilities in certification and inuse testing, and labeling requirements
revisions.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to Congress and the
comptroller General of the United
States. We will submit a report
containing today’s action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Today’s
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Statutory authority for today’s final
rule is found in the Clean Air Act, 42
U.S.C. 7401 et seq., in particular,
sections 202 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7521.
Today’s action is being promulgated
under the administrative and procedural
provisions of Clean Air Act section
307(d), 42 U.S.C. 7607(d).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Motor vehicle pollution.
Dated: November 29, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–23713 Filed 12–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Revised 12-Month Finding
for the Greater Adams Cave Beetle
(Pseudanophthalmus pholeter) and
the Lesser Adams Cave Beetle
(Pseudanophthalmus cataryctos)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of revised 12-month
petition finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce our revised
12-month finding for a petition to list
the greater Adams Cave beetle
(Pseudanophthalmus pholeter) and the
lesser Adams Cave beetle
(Pseudanophthalmus cataryctos) under
the Endangered Species Act (Act). After
a review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we
conclude that these species are not
likely to become endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of their range.
Therefore, we find that proposing a rule
to list these species is not warranted,
and we no longer consider them to be
candidate species for listing. The
Service will continue to seek new
information on the taxonomy, biology,
and ecology of these species, as well as
potential threats to their continued
existence.
This finding was made on
November 15, 2005. Although no further
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
72974
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 235 / Thursday, December 8, 2005 / Proposed Rules
action will result from this finding, we
request that you submit new
information concerning the taxonomy,
biology, ecology, and status of the
greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles,
as well as potential threats to their
continued existence, whenever such
information becomes available.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this
finding is available for inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 3761 Georgetown Road,
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601. Submit new
information, materials, comments, or
questions concerning this species to us
at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael A. Floyd, Kentucky Ecological
Services Field Office at the address
listed above, by telephone at 502–695–
0468, by facsimile at 502–695–1024, or
by e-mail at mike_floyd@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Act provides two mechanisms for
considering species for listing. One
method allows the Secretary, on her
own initiative, to identify species for
listing under the standards of section
4(a)(1). We implement this through an
assessment process to identify species
that are candidates for listing, which
means we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability
and threats to support a proposal to list
the species as endangered or threatened,
but for which preparation and
publication of a proposal is precluded
by higher-priority listing actions. Using
this process we identified the greater
and lesser Adams Cave beetles as
candidates for listing in 2001 and
included them in the Candidate Notice
of Review (CNOR) published in the
Federal Register on October 30, 2001
(66 FR 54808). In subsequent CNORs
that we published June 13, 2002 (67 FR
40657) and May 4, 2004 (69 FR 24875),
we continued to recognize these two
species as candidates for listing based
on updated assessments of their status.
A second mechanism that the Act
provides for considering species for
listing is for the public to petition us to
add a species to the Lists of threatened
or endangered species. Under section
4(b)(3)(A), when we receive such a
petition, we must determine within 90
days, to the extent practicable, whether
the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information
that listing may be warranted (a ‘‘90day’’ finding). If we make a positive 90day finding, we must promptly
commence a status review of the species
and under section 4(b)(3)(B), we must
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Dec 07, 2005
Jkt 208001
make and publish one of three possible
findings within 12 months of receipt of
such a petition (a ‘‘12-month finding’’):
1. The petitioned action is not
warranted;
2. The petitioned action is warranted
(in which case we are to promptly
publish a proposed regulation to
implement the petitioned action); or
3. The petitioned action is warranted
but (a) the immediate proposal of a
regulation and final promulgation of a
regulation implementing the petitioned
action is precluded by pending
proposals, and (b) expeditious progress
is being made to add qualified species
to the Lists.
On May 11, 2004, the Service received
a petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity to list 225 species we
previously had identified as candidates
for listing, including the greater and
lesser Adams Cave beetles. Our standard
for making a species a candidate
through our own initiative is identical
to the standard for making a warrantedbut-precluded 12-month petition
finding. Pursuant to requirements in
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, the CNOR
and Notice of Findings on Resubmitted
Petitions published by the Service on
May 11, 2005 (70 FR 24870), included
a finding that the immediate issuance of
a proposed listing rule and the timely
promulgation of a final rule for each of
these petitioned species, including the
greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles,
was warranted but precluded by higher
priority listing actions, and we
described those actions as well as the
expeditious progress being made to add
qualified species to the Lists.
Section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA directs
that when we make a ‘‘warranted but
precluded’’ finding on a petition, we are
to treat the petition as being one that is
resubmitted annually on the date of the
finding; thus the ESA requires us to
reassess the petitioned actions and to
publish a finding on the resubmitted
petition on an annual basis. Although
we typically make the annual finding
for petitioned candidate species through
the CNOR, we need not wait a full year
to reassess the status of such a species
and may publish a revised petition
finding separately from the CNOR. That
is what we are doing in this situation.
As a result of new information
regarding conservation efforts for the
greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles,
we completed a reassessment of their
status in September 2005 (FWS 2005a).
The updated assessment document is
available from our Kentucky Ecological
Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES,
above). This resubmitted 12-month
finding evaluates new information, as
described in the species assessment and
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
related documents referenced in it, and
re-evaluates previously-acquired
information.
Species Information
The greater Adams Cave beetle
(Pseudanopthalmus pholeter) and lesser
Adams Cave beetle (Pseudanopthalmus
cataryctos) were described by Krekeler
(1973) based upon specimens collected
in Adams Cave by T.C. Barr and S.B.
Peck in 1964. The two beetles are
eyeless, reddish-brown insects that
range in length from 3 to 5 mm. Both
species are predatory, feeding upon
small cave invertebrates such as spiders,
mites, springtails, and millipedes. More
detailed information on the taxonomy,
biology, and habitat of these species can
be found in FWS (2005a).
Both the greater and lesser Adams
Cave beetle are restricted to Adams
Cave, a large, limestone cave located in
the Bluegrass region of central
Kentucky. The passageways of Adams
Cave vary in height from approximately
5 to 60 feet and extend over 1,500 feet
in length. The only known entrance to
the cave and part of its underground
passages lie within a 1-acre lot of a
rapidly developing residential
subdivision (Adams Place) located
southwest of Richmond, Kentucky.
Conservation Efforts
The Service secured a commitment
from the prior landowner to donate the
enrolled property to a conservation
organization or other non-profit
organization to further ensure adequate,
long-term protection and conservation
of the cave and species inhabiting it. In
2002, the Southern Conservation
Corporation (SCC), a non-profit land
trust, accepted ownership of 1 acre of
land that includes the only known
entrance to the cave and a small portion
of the 215-acre groundwater basin for
Adams Cave. The Service worked with
SCC to develop a Candidate
Conservation Agreement with
Assurances (CCAA) for the greater and
lesser Adams Cave beetles (SCC and
Service 2005). This CCAA, signed in
March 2005, covers the 1-acre area
owned by SCC, including the cave
entrance. Through the CCAA, SCC
committed to implement three
conservation efforts specifically
designed to further address the primary
threats to the species: (1) SCC will
maintain the Adams Cave property in a
natural state by implementing
provisions that ensure an adequate,
natural energy flow into the cave is
maintained and that development
impacts and the probability of a
contaminants spill that might impact
the cave habitat are minimized; (2) SCC
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 235 / Thursday, December 8, 2005 / Proposed Rules
will maintain the metal gate at the
entrance to Adams Cave; and (3) SCC
will control/limit access to Adams Cave.
Additional information regarding the
details of these three efforts is provided
in the species assessment and in the
CCAA.
Many aspects of the conservation
efforts identified in the CCAA are ongoing, such as maintenance of the gate
and control of access into the cave, and
others are planned. Based on our
evaluation of each of the three
conservation efforts using the criteria
provided in the Policy for Evaluation of
Conservation Efforts When Making
Listing Decisions (PECE) (68 FR 15100),
we have determined that each of the
three efforts is sufficiently certain to be
implemented and effective so as to have
contributed to the elimination or
reduction of threats to the species (FWS
2005b). Therefore, the Service can
consider these conservation efforts in
making a determination as to whether
either the greater or lesser Adams cave
beetle meets the Service’s definition of
a threatened or endangered species.
Discussion of Listing Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424 set forth procedures for adding
species to the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. A
species may be determined to be an
endangered or threatened species due to
one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1). These factors and
their application to greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles are summarized
below. Additional information that
provides the basis for this summary is
available in the species assessment and
is incorporated by reference.
A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
In our initial assessment of the greater
and lesser Adams cave beetles in 2001,
we identified these species candidates
for listing due to the present and
threatened destruction and modification
of their habitat (66 FR 54800). The
activities contributing to this threat
factor have now been addressed, as
summarized below.
One of the identified threats was
debris and trash in the cave and around
the cave entrance. The debris and trash
have been removed.
In our 2001 assessment we identified
a potential risk of destruction or
modification of the cave environment,
including the cave food chain, which
could occur as a result of polluted
runoff from the surrounding residential
development or spills of toxic materials
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Dec 07, 2005
Jkt 208001
in the watershed in which the cave
occurs. We now have determined that
the potential risk of polluted stormwater
runoff is quite limited because the
majority of stormwater flows, the
principal means by which pollutants
could enter the cave, are diverted away
from Adams Cave by a stormwater
collection system for Adams Place
subdivision. Also, native vegetation
plantings now surrounding the cave
entrance serve as natural filters for any
potential non-point source pollutants
that could potentially enter the cave
during storm events. Toxic material
spills from external sources are
improbable because the Adams Cave
watershed is not a commercial area
where toxic chemicals are produced or
stored, nor is there likely to be transport
of any significant amounts of toxic
materials in the area. Further, one of the
conservation efforts in the CCAA
prohibits the use of pesticides on the
property, and under the CCAA the
property cannot be used as a chemical,
waste, or debris storage site or facility,
and the dumping of debris or potential
contaminants on the property is
prohibited.
Adams Cave was utilized for camping
and other activities for several decades.
In an attempt to control access to the
cave, the prior owner placed a concrete
block wall at the cave entrance.
However, this blocked the normal flow
of organic material and air that are
important components of maintaining
the cave ecosystem and food chain. The
Service funded and oversaw the
removal of the concrete block wall from
the cave entrance and the installation of
a locked metal gate just inside the
entrance of Adams Cave. The metal gate
now controls access without limiting
the flow of air and various nutrients
needed to maintain the cave habitat.
Continued maintenance of the metal
gate SCC, coupled with strict control of
access to the cave, ensures that human
entry into the cave is tightly controlled
and restricted. This prevents vandalism
and the deposition of trash or other
debris that could destroy or modify
habitat of the beetles. Routine
inspection and maintenance of the cave
gate prevents the gate from becoming
blocked by fallen rock or other debris,
thereby maintaining the natural flow of
organic matter from the surface to the
cave ecosystem.
We note also that SCC is a non-profit
land trust that acquired the site for the
purpose of protecting it. As such, no
development or other activities that
could directly impact the cave habitat
are likely to occur under their
ownership, as they have committed to,
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72975
and have been implementing, the
conservation efforts in the CCAA.
Based on the information summarized
above, the greater and lesser Adams
Cave beetles are not threatened by the
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of their
habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
We have no evidence of
overutilization of the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles in the past for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes, and have no
information that suggests such a threat
exists in the foreseeable future. Under
the CCAA, collection for scientific
purposes would be allowed only with
the permission of the Service. The cave
has been used for recreational purposes
by spelunkers and by passive
recreationists in the past, but placement
of the locked metal gate across the cave
entrance a few years ago has effectively
eliminated such uses. Further, through
maintenance of the metal gate at the
cave entrance, as required by the CCAA,
all unauthorized access to the cave is
prevented. Based on these
considerations, overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes is not a threat to
the species.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease and predation are not known
to be threats for either of these species
and are, instead, a normal part of their
life history. Mortality from disease or
predation likely occurs but has not
eliminated these species in the past and
we have no reason to expect disease or
predation to pose a substantial risk to
the species in the future.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Although the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles are listed as
endangered in Kentucky by the
Kentucky State Nature Preserves
Commission, they are not protected
under State law. However, there are no
foreseeable reasons why specific
regulatory mechanisms would be
necessary to ensure the survival of these
species because the landowner, SCC, is
committed to and is implementing
various conservation efforts to protect
the cave and the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles. This includes, but
is not limited to, strictly controlling
access to the cave and the property
surrounding the cave opening. The
metal gate is effective in preventing
unauthorized entry into the cave, and as
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
72976
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 235 / Thursday, December 8, 2005 / Proposed Rules
described above, SCC has committed to
and is implementing measures to
strictly control access to the cave.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting Its Continued Existence
Populations of each of these two cave
beetle species are restricted to Adams
Cave and are generally believed to be
represented by a small number of
individuals. Although this is a natural
situation, their limited distribution and
numbers make these species vulnerable
to extirpation due to effects from
various manmade factors, such as spills
of toxic substances, non-point source
pollutants, and habitat-related damage,
as described above under Factor A. As
described above, the conservation
efforts taken prior to the CCAA, as well
as the efforts included in the CCAA,
have removed or substantially reduced
these habitat-related risks. Small
population sizes for these species may
also limit the natural interchange of
genetic material within the population,
which could affect long-term genetic
and population viability. However,
these are endemic species that have
persisted over time despite the risks of
limited genetic interchange. For the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Dec 07, 2005
Jkt 208001
reasons described above, the greater and
lesser Adams Cave beetles are not
threatened by other natural or humancaused factors.
Revised Petition Finding
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats faced by the greater
and lesser Adams Cave beetles.
We have evaluated the threats to the
greater Adams cave beetle and the lesser
Adams cave beetle and considered
factors that, individually and in
combination, presently or potentially
could pose a risk to these species and
their habitat. We conclude that listing
these species under the Endangered
Species Act is not warranted because
the species are not likely to become
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of their range. These
species no longer meet our definition of
a candidate and are removed from
candidate status.
We will continue to monitor the
status of the greater and lesser Adams
Cave beetles, and to accept additional
information and comments from all
concerned governmental agencies, the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
scientific community, industry, or any
other interested party concerning this
finding. We will reconsider this
determination in the event that new
information indicates that the threats to
these species are of a considerably
greater magnitude or imminence than
identified here.
References
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available upon request from
the Kentucky Ecological Services Field
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this finding is
Michael A. Floyd, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 15, 2005.
Richard E. Sayers, Jr.,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05–23762 Filed 12–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 235 (Thursday, December 8, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72973-72976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23762]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised 12-Month
Finding for the Greater Adams Cave Beetle (Pseudanophthalmus pholeter)
and the Lesser Adams Cave Beetle (Pseudanophthalmus cataryctos)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of revised 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce our
revised 12-month finding for a petition to list the greater Adams Cave
beetle (Pseudanophthalmus pholeter) and the lesser Adams Cave beetle
(Pseudanophthalmus cataryctos) under the Endangered Species Act (Act).
After a review of the best available scientific and commercial
information, we conclude that these species are not likely to become
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of their range. Therefore, we find that proposing a
rule to list these species is not warranted, and we no longer consider
them to be candidate species for listing. The Service will continue to
seek new information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of these
species, as well as potential threats to their continued existence.
DATES: This finding was made on November 15, 2005. Although no further
[[Page 72974]]
action will result from this finding, we request that you submit new
information concerning the taxonomy, biology, ecology, and status of
the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles, as well as potential threats
to their continued existence, whenever such information becomes
available.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this finding is available for
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 3761 Georgetown Road, Frankfort, Kentucky
40601. Submit new information, materials, comments, or questions
concerning this species to us at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael A. Floyd, Kentucky Ecological
Services Field Office at the address listed above, by telephone at 502-
695-0468, by facsimile at 502-695-1024, or by e-mail at mike_
floyd@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Act provides two mechanisms for considering species for
listing. One method allows the Secretary, on her own initiative, to
identify species for listing under the standards of section 4(a)(1). We
implement this through an assessment process to identify species that
are candidates for listing, which means we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support a
proposal to list the species as endangered or threatened, but for which
preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-
priority listing actions. Using this process we identified the greater
and lesser Adams Cave beetles as candidates for listing in 2001 and
included them in the Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) published in the
Federal Register on October 30, 2001 (66 FR 54808). In subsequent CNORs
that we published June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40657) and May 4, 2004 (69 FR
24875), we continued to recognize these two species as candidates for
listing based on updated assessments of their status.
A second mechanism that the Act provides for considering species
for listing is for the public to petition us to add a species to the
Lists of threatened or endangered species. Under section 4(b)(3)(A),
when we receive such a petition, we must determine within 90 days, to
the extent practicable, whether the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information that listing may be warranted (a
``90-day'' finding). If we make a positive 90-day finding, we must
promptly commence a status review of the species and under section
4(b)(3)(B), we must make and publish one of three possible findings
within 12 months of receipt of such a petition (a ``12-month
finding''):
1. The petitioned action is not warranted;
2. The petitioned action is warranted (in which case we are to
promptly publish a proposed regulation to implement the petitioned
action); or
3. The petitioned action is warranted but (a) the immediate
proposal of a regulation and final promulgation of a regulation
implementing the petitioned action is precluded by pending proposals,
and (b) expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to
the Lists.
On May 11, 2004, the Service received a petition from the Center
for Biological Diversity to list 225 species we previously had
identified as candidates for listing, including the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles. Our standard for making a species a candidate
through our own initiative is identical to the standard for making a
warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding. Pursuant to
requirements in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, the CNOR and Notice of
Findings on Resubmitted Petitions published by the Service on May 11,
2005 (70 FR 24870), included a finding that the immediate issuance of a
proposed listing rule and the timely promulgation of a final rule for
each of these petitioned species, including the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles, was warranted but precluded by higher priority
listing actions, and we described those actions as well as the
expeditious progress being made to add qualified species to the Lists.
Section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA directs that when we make a
``warranted but precluded'' finding on a petition, we are to treat the
petition as being one that is resubmitted annually on the date of the
finding; thus the ESA requires us to reassess the petitioned actions
and to publish a finding on the resubmitted petition on an annual
basis. Although we typically make the annual finding for petitioned
candidate species through the CNOR, we need not wait a full year to
reassess the status of such a species and may publish a revised
petition finding separately from the CNOR. That is what we are doing in
this situation.
As a result of new information regarding conservation efforts for
the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles, we completed a reassessment
of their status in September 2005 (FWS 2005a). The updated assessment
document is available from our Kentucky Ecological Services Field
Office (see ADDRESSES, above). This resubmitted 12-month finding
evaluates new information, as described in the species assessment and
related documents referenced in it, and re-evaluates previously-
acquired information.
Species Information
The greater Adams Cave beetle (Pseudanopthalmus pholeter) and
lesser Adams Cave beetle (Pseudanopthalmus cataryctos) were described
by Krekeler (1973) based upon specimens collected in Adams Cave by T.C.
Barr and S.B. Peck in 1964. The two beetles are eyeless, reddish-brown
insects that range in length from 3 to 5 mm. Both species are
predatory, feeding upon small cave invertebrates such as spiders,
mites, springtails, and millipedes. More detailed information on the
taxonomy, biology, and habitat of these species can be found in FWS
(2005a).
Both the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetle are restricted to
Adams Cave, a large, limestone cave located in the Bluegrass region of
central Kentucky. The passageways of Adams Cave vary in height from
approximately 5 to 60 feet and extend over 1,500 feet in length. The
only known entrance to the cave and part of its underground passages
lie within a 1-acre lot of a rapidly developing residential subdivision
(Adams Place) located southwest of Richmond, Kentucky.
Conservation Efforts
The Service secured a commitment from the prior landowner to donate
the enrolled property to a conservation organization or other non-
profit organization to further ensure adequate, long-term protection
and conservation of the cave and species inhabiting it. In 2002, the
Southern Conservation Corporation (SCC), a non-profit land trust,
accepted ownership of 1 acre of land that includes the only known
entrance to the cave and a small portion of the 215-acre groundwater
basin for Adams Cave. The Service worked with SCC to develop a
Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) for the greater
and lesser Adams Cave beetles (SCC and Service 2005). This CCAA, signed
in March 2005, covers the 1-acre area owned by SCC, including the cave
entrance. Through the CCAA, SCC committed to implement three
conservation efforts specifically designed to further address the
primary threats to the species: (1) SCC will maintain the Adams Cave
property in a natural state by implementing provisions that ensure an
adequate, natural energy flow into the cave is maintained and that
development impacts and the probability of a contaminants spill that
might impact the cave habitat are minimized; (2) SCC
[[Page 72975]]
will maintain the metal gate at the entrance to Adams Cave; and (3) SCC
will control/limit access to Adams Cave. Additional information
regarding the details of these three efforts is provided in the species
assessment and in the CCAA.
Many aspects of the conservation efforts identified in the CCAA are
on-going, such as maintenance of the gate and control of access into
the cave, and others are planned. Based on our evaluation of each of
the three conservation efforts using the criteria provided in the
Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing
Decisions (PECE) (68 FR 15100), we have determined that each of the
three efforts is sufficiently certain to be implemented and effective
so as to have contributed to the elimination or reduction of threats to
the species (FWS 2005b). Therefore, the Service can consider these
conservation efforts in making a determination as to whether either the
greater or lesser Adams cave beetle meets the Service's definition of a
threatened or endangered species.
Discussion of Listing Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations
at 50 CFR part 424 set forth procedures for adding species to the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more
of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and
their application to greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles are
summarized below. Additional information that provides the basis for
this summary is available in the species assessment and is incorporated
by reference.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
In our initial assessment of the greater and lesser Adams cave
beetles in 2001, we identified these species candidates for listing due
to the present and threatened destruction and modification of their
habitat (66 FR 54800). The activities contributing to this threat
factor have now been addressed, as summarized below.
One of the identified threats was debris and trash in the cave and
around the cave entrance. The debris and trash have been removed.
In our 2001 assessment we identified a potential risk of
destruction or modification of the cave environment, including the cave
food chain, which could occur as a result of polluted runoff from the
surrounding residential development or spills of toxic materials in the
watershed in which the cave occurs. We now have determined that the
potential risk of polluted stormwater runoff is quite limited because
the majority of stormwater flows, the principal means by which
pollutants could enter the cave, are diverted away from Adams Cave by a
stormwater collection system for Adams Place subdivision. Also, native
vegetation plantings now surrounding the cave entrance serve as natural
filters for any potential non-point source pollutants that could
potentially enter the cave during storm events. Toxic material spills
from external sources are improbable because the Adams Cave watershed
is not a commercial area where toxic chemicals are produced or stored,
nor is there likely to be transport of any significant amounts of toxic
materials in the area. Further, one of the conservation efforts in the
CCAA prohibits the use of pesticides on the property, and under the
CCAA the property cannot be used as a chemical, waste, or debris
storage site or facility, and the dumping of debris or potential
contaminants on the property is prohibited.
Adams Cave was utilized for camping and other activities for
several decades. In an attempt to control access to the cave, the prior
owner placed a concrete block wall at the cave entrance. However, this
blocked the normal flow of organic material and air that are important
components of maintaining the cave ecosystem and food chain. The
Service funded and oversaw the removal of the concrete block wall from
the cave entrance and the installation of a locked metal gate just
inside the entrance of Adams Cave. The metal gate now controls access
without limiting the flow of air and various nutrients needed to
maintain the cave habitat.
Continued maintenance of the metal gate SCC, coupled with strict
control of access to the cave, ensures that human entry into the cave
is tightly controlled and restricted. This prevents vandalism and the
deposition of trash or other debris that could destroy or modify
habitat of the beetles. Routine inspection and maintenance of the cave
gate prevents the gate from becoming blocked by fallen rock or other
debris, thereby maintaining the natural flow of organic matter from the
surface to the cave ecosystem.
We note also that SCC is a non-profit land trust that acquired the
site for the purpose of protecting it. As such, no development or other
activities that could directly impact the cave habitat are likely to
occur under their ownership, as they have committed to, and have been
implementing, the conservation efforts in the CCAA.
Based on the information summarized above, the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles are not threatened by the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of their habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
We have no evidence of overutilization of the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles in the past for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes, and have no information that
suggests such a threat exists in the foreseeable future. Under the
CCAA, collection for scientific purposes would be allowed only with the
permission of the Service. The cave has been used for recreational
purposes by spelunkers and by passive recreationists in the past, but
placement of the locked metal gate across the cave entrance a few years
ago has effectively eliminated such uses. Further, through maintenance
of the metal gate at the cave entrance, as required by the CCAA, all
unauthorized access to the cave is prevented. Based on these
considerations, overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes is not a threat to the species.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease and predation are not known to be threats for either of
these species and are, instead, a normal part of their life history.
Mortality from disease or predation likely occurs but has not
eliminated these species in the past and we have no reason to expect
disease or predation to pose a substantial risk to the species in the
future.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Although the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles are listed as
endangered in Kentucky by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves
Commission, they are not protected under State law. However, there are
no foreseeable reasons why specific regulatory mechanisms would be
necessary to ensure the survival of these species because the
landowner, SCC, is committed to and is implementing various
conservation efforts to protect the cave and the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles. This includes, but is not limited to, strictly
controlling access to the cave and the property surrounding the cave
opening. The metal gate is effective in preventing unauthorized entry
into the cave, and as
[[Page 72976]]
described above, SCC has committed to and is implementing measures to
strictly control access to the cave.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Populations of each of these two cave beetle species are restricted
to Adams Cave and are generally believed to be represented by a small
number of individuals. Although this is a natural situation, their
limited distribution and numbers make these species vulnerable to
extirpation due to effects from various manmade factors, such as spills
of toxic substances, non-point source pollutants, and habitat-related
damage, as described above under Factor A. As described above, the
conservation efforts taken prior to the CCAA, as well as the efforts
included in the CCAA, have removed or substantially reduced these
habitat-related risks. Small population sizes for these species may
also limit the natural interchange of genetic material within the
population, which could affect long-term genetic and population
viability. However, these are endemic species that have persisted over
time despite the risks of limited genetic interchange. For the reasons
described above, the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles are not
threatened by other natural or human-caused factors.
Revised Petition Finding
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
faced by the greater and lesser Adams Cave beetles.
We have evaluated the threats to the greater Adams cave beetle and
the lesser Adams cave beetle and considered factors that, individually
and in combination, presently or potentially could pose a risk to these
species and their habitat. We conclude that listing these species under
the Endangered Species Act is not warranted because the species are not
likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of their range. These species
no longer meet our definition of a candidate and are removed from
candidate status.
We will continue to monitor the status of the greater and lesser
Adams Cave beetles, and to accept additional information and comments
from all concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community,
industry, or any other interested party concerning this finding. We
will reconsider this determination in the event that new information
indicates that the threats to these species are of a considerably
greater magnitude or imminence than identified here.
References
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request from the Kentucky Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this finding is Michael A. Floyd, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 15, 2005.
Richard E. Sayers, Jr.,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05-23762 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
