Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for a Petition To List the Island Marble Butterfly as Threatened or Endangered, 7497-7499 [E6-1930]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 29 / Monday, February 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
discussions designed to elicit information
about problems or concerns with the
regulation (or certain aspects thereof) and
provide an opportunity for sharing ideas
regarding how to address those issues. The
Workshop is not intended [to] develop
detailed alternatives or to obtain consensus
on regulatory proposals. Upon the conclusion
of the Workshop, the Board shall provide
LSC staff with policy guidance on the issues
discussed to aid staff in the development of
the Draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(‘‘NPRM’’).
67 FR 69762, 69763 (November 19,
2002).
During the first workshop, the
participants had a wide-ranging
discussion and identified a number of
issues. These can be summarized as
follows:
• The importance of and reason for
having a client grievance process,
including how the client grievance
process also can be an important part of
a positive client/applicant relations
program and serve as a source of
information for programs and boards in
assessing service and setting priorities;
• Whether programs can be more
‘‘proactive’’ in making clients and
applicants aware of their rights under
the client grievance procedure, but do
so in a positive manner that does not
create a negative atmosphere at the
formation of the attorney-client
relationship. It was noted that while
informing clients of their rights can be
empowering, suggesting at the outset
that they may not like the service they
receive is not conducive to a positive
experience. Query whether an
‘‘ombudsman’’ position would be
appropriate in this context;
• It is unclear how some complaints
should be categorized. Is a complaint
that a recipient refused to take an appeal
for a client represented at the trial or
initial hearing level a complaint about
the manner or quality of service or a
complaint about the denial of service?;
• The appropriate role of the
governing body in the client grievance/
client relations process;
• Challenges presented in providing
proper notice of the client grievance
procedure to applicants and clients who
are served only over the telephone and/
or email/internet interface;
• Application of the process to
Limited English Proficiency clients and
applicants;
• Whether and to what extent it is
appropriate for the composition of a
grievance committee to deviate from the
approximate proportions of lawyers and
clients on the governing body, e.g. by a
higher proportion of clients than the
governing body has generally;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:33 Feb 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
• Challenges presented by a
requirement for in-person hearing and
what other options may be appropriate;
• Whether the limitation of the
grievance process related to denials of
service to the three enumerated reasons
for denial in the current rule is too
limited given the wide range of reasons
a program may deny someone service;
• Whether the regulation
appropriately addresses issues of client
confidentiality in LSC access to
complaint files;
• Whether the grievance process
should include cases handled by nonstaff such as PAI attorneys, volunteers,
attorneys on assignment to the grantee
(often as part of a law firm pro bono
program);
• Whether and to what extent it is
appropriate for a recipient to abrogate
the client grievance process, e.g., where
the recipient is facing potential
litigation requiring notification to the
malpractice insurance carrier or where
the complainant poses a reasonable
threat to the health and safety of
recipient employees or governing body
members;
• When does an inquiry become an
application for service for which there
could be a denial and a grievance
process? Sometimes a person who calls
a program is not clear about whether
they just want some information or are
actually seeking legal assistance, and
other times if a caller asks about
something the program does not handle,
they may hang up or be referred to
another provider before ever going
through an intake process;
• Whether and to what extent it is
appropriate for a grantee to provide
assistance to a client/applicant in the
filing of a complaint; and
• Whether and to what extent is it
appropriate for a grantee to provide
assistance to a client at a grievance
hearing.
With this notice, LSC is inviting
expressions of interest from the
interested stakeholder community to
participate in a second Rulemaking
Workshop. This second Workshop is
intended to further explore issues
identified during the first Workshop,
along with identifying any issues which
may not have been discussed in the first
Workshop. LSC is particularly
interested in soliciting further input
from both client representatives and
LSC programs, especially hotline-only
programs and others programs where inperson contact between staff and
clients/applicants is difficult or nonexistent (such as in service areas with
widely disbursed and rural client
populations), on the issues and
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7497
challenges presented by the client
grievance procedure and regulation.
Expressions of interest should be
forwarded in writing to Victor M.
Fortuno, Vice President & General
Counsel, Legal Services Corporation,
3333 K Street, NW., Washington, DC
20007. Such expressions of interest may
be alternatively sent via e-mail to
vfortuno@lsc.gov or via fax to 202–337–
6831, but must be received by close of
business on December 2, 2005. LSC will
select participants shortly thereafter and
will inform all those who expressed
interest of whether or not they have
been selected.
The Workshops will be open to public
observation but only persons selected
will be allowed to participate.
Participants are expected to cover their
own expenses (travel, lodging, etc.). LSC
may consider providing financial
assistance to participants for whom
travel costs would represent a
significant hardship and barrier to
participation. Any such person should
so note in his/her expression of interest
for LSC’s consideration.
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President & General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E6–1928 Filed 2–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding for a
Petition To List the Island Marble
Butterfly as Threatened or Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
island marble butterfly (Euchloe
ausonides insulanus) as an endangered
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We find
that the petition presents substantial
scientific information indicating that
listing the island marble butterfly may
be warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are
initiating a status review of the species,
and we will issue a 12-month finding to
determine if the petitioned action is
warranted. To assist and ensure that the
review is comprehensive, we are
soliciting information and data
regarding this species.
E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM
13FEP1
7498
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 29 / Monday, February 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
The finding announced in this
document was made on February 13,
2006. To be considered in the 12-month
finding for this petition, data,
information, and comments must be
submitted to us by April 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this
finding is available for inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the Western Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 510 Desmond Drive,
SE., Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503. Please
submit any new information, materials,
comments, or questions concerning this
species or this finding to the above
address, or via electronic mail at
islandmarble@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken
Berg, Manager, at the above address (see
ADDRESSES section above), by telephone
(360–753–4327), or by facsimile (360–
753–9405). For more information, go to
https://www.fts.gsa.gov/frs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
DATES:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
that we make a finding on whether a
petition to list, delist, or reclassify a
species presents substantial scientific
information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To
the maximum extent practicable, this
finding is to be made within 90 days of
receipt of the petition, and the finding
is to be published promptly in the
Federal Register.
This finding is based on information
included in the petition and information
readily available to us at the time of the
petition review. Our review of a 90-day
finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Act and section 424.14(b) of our
regulations is limited to a determination
of whether the information in the
petition meets the ‘‘substantial scientific
information’’ threshold. Our standard
for substantial scientific information
with regard to a 90-day listing petition
finding is ‘‘that amount of information
that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the
petition may be warranted’’ (50 CFR
424.14(b)).
We have to satisfy the Act’s
requirement that we use the best
available science to make our decisions.
However, we do not conduct additional
research at this point, nor do we subject
the petition to rigorous critical review.
Rather, at the 90-day finding stage, we
accept the petitioner’s sources and
characterizations of the information, to
the extent that they appear to be based
on accepted scientific principles (such
as citing published and peer reviewed
articles, or studies done in accordance
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:33 Feb 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
with valid methodologies), unless we
have specific information to the
contrary. Our finding considers whether
the petition states a reasonable case for
listing on its face. Thus, our 90-day
finding expresses no view as to the
ultimate issue of whether the species
should be listed.
Petition
On December 11, 2002, we received a
petition dated December 10, 2002,
requesting that we list the island marble
butterfly (Euchloe ausonides insulanus)
as an endangered species, and that
critical habitat be designated
concurrently with the listing. The
petition, submitted by the Xerces
Society, Center for Biological Diversity,
Friends of the San Juans, and Northwest
Ecosystem Alliance, was clearly
identified as a petition for a listing rule,
and contained the names, signatures,
and addresses of the requesting parties.
Included in the petition was supporting
information regarding the species’
taxonomy and ecology, historical and
current distribution, present status, and
potential causes of decline and active
imminent threats. We sent a letter,
acknowledging receipt of the petition, to
the Xerces Society on January 22, 2003.
In our response we advised the
petitioners that we had insufficient
funds to respond to the petition at that
time and that we would not be able to
begin processing the petition in a timely
manner.
On April 5, 2004, we received a 60day notice of intent to sue for three
butterfly species, the Taylor’s
checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori),
the mardon skipper (Polites mardon),
and the island marble. On October 18,
2004, a complaint for declaratory and
injunctive relief was filed by the
plaintiffs that specifically addressed
conservation actions needed for the
island marble butterfly. We negotiated a
stipulated settlement agreement, dated
February 28, 2005, to work
cooperatively with our conservation
partners to conduct surveys and to
assess the ecological needs of the island
marble during 2005. We also agreed to
submit the petition finding to the
Federal Register by February 5, 2006,
and if the 90-day finding was found to
be substantial, to submit a 12-month
finding by November 5, 2006. This
notice constitutes our 90-day finding for
the petition to list the island marble
butterfly.
Species Information
The island marble butterfly (island
marble) is a member of the Pieridae
family, subfamily Pirinae, primarily
consisting of white and yellow
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
butterflies. Prior to its rediscovery in
1998, at American Camp, a 1,223-acre
(ac) (495-hectare (ha)) unit of the San
Juan Island National Historic Park in
Washington State, the last observation
of the island marble was on Gabriola
Island, British Columbia, in 1908. Island
marble larvae are known to feed on two
types of plants: (1) Nonnative annual
mustards such as Brassica campestris
(field mustard) and Sisymbrium
altissimum (tall tumble-mustard) in the
uplands and (2) Lepidium virginicum
var. menziesii (native tall peppergrass)
found at the edge of coastal lagoons just
above the marine shoreline of San Juan
Channel, north of American Camp
(Lambert 2005a; Miskelly 2005).
Between April 13 and July 13, 2005,
WDNR, the Service, and the Xerces
Society conducted more than 225
surveys for the island marble at 110
sites in 6 counties of northwest
Washington. Sites were selected based
on proximity to known island marble
occurrences and the presence of
grassland vegetation containing host
plants. Adult butterflies were observed
from April 21 to June 6, eggs were
observed from April 25 to June 14, and
larvae were observed from May 8 to July
1 (Miskelly 2005). Based on the
distribution of sites where island marble
butterflies were found and the habitat
linkages or barriers between these sites,
it is believed that there are four
populations of island marble butterflies,
two on San Juan Island and two on
Lopez Island (Miskelly 2005). At three
of the four populations fewer than 10
adults were observed (Miskelly 2005).
The largest and most concentrated
population of island marbles was
observed on the grasslands of American
Camp and the adjacent Cattle Point
Natural Resources Conservation Area
(NRCA), owned by the WDNR, on San
Juan Island. Pyle (2004) observed ‘‘at
least 100 individuals’’ at American
Camp in 2003, based on five site visits.
Lambert (2005a, 2005b, 2005c) reported
total transect counts at American Camp
of 270 adults and 194 adults in 2004
and 2005, respectively.
Discussion
Section 4 of the Act and its
implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal list of endangered
and threatened species. 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) of the Act. The five listing factors
are: (1) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)
overutilization for commercial,
E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM
13FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 29 / Monday, February 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (5) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
The Service believes that substantial
information exists that threats to the
species exist under one or more of the
five listing factors. Because so few
populations and individuals exist, the
species may be especially vulnerable to
random natural events.
The petitioners state that many, if not
most, insect populations normally
experience large fluctuations in size
(Ehrlich 1992; Schultz 1998) with
weather, predation, and disease
potentially causing annual changes in
butterfly numbers of an order of
magnitude or more. They go on to state
that normal population fluctuations,
coupled with habitat alteration or loss
can result in population extirpations
(Hanski et al. 1995). Based on this, the
petitioners conclude that, with only one
known population, this butterfly is
extremely vulnerable to extinction.
At the time the petition was written,
American Camp was the only area
known to be occupied by island
marbles. Extensive surveys conducted
after the petition was submitted
revealed 3 additional areas that were
occupied (Miskelly 2005). Fewer than
10 adults were observed in each of these
areas (Miskelly 2005). Miskelly (2005)
suggests that the three satellite
populations found in 2005 may not be
self sustaining, and that conservation of
the island marble is largely dependent
on having a viable population at
American Camp.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Finding
On the basis of our review, we find
that the petition and information in our
files presents substantial information
indicating that listing of the island
marble butterfly may be warranted. The
small number of individuals remaining
and their limited distribution increases
extinction risk and makes the species
especially vulnerable to threats that may
exist under one or more of the five
listing factors.
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that
substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be
warranted, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species. To ensure that the status review
is complete and based on the best
available science and commercial
information, we are soliciting additional
information on the island marble
butterfly. We are requesting additional
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:04 Feb 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
information, comments, and suggestions
concerning the status of the island
marble butterfly from the public, other
concerned governmental agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties. We are seeking
information regarding the species’
historical and current status and
distribution, its biology and ecology,
ongoing conservation measures for the
species and its habitat, and threats to
the species and its habitat.
If you wish to comment or provide
information, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning this
finding to our Western Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES
section above).
Our practice is to make comments and
materials provided, including names
and home addresses of respondents,
available for public review during
regular business hours. Respondents
may request that we withhold a
respondent’s identity, to the extent
allowable by law. If you wish us to
withhold your name or address, you
must state this request prominently at
the beginning of your submission.
However, we will not consider
anonymous comments. To the extent
consistent with applicable law, we will
make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
Comments and materials received will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address (see
ADDRESSES section above).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
is available, upon request, from our
Western Washington Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES section above).
Author
The primary author of this notice is
Ted Thomas, Western Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES
section above).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: February 3, 2006.
Marshall P. Jones,
Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6–1930 Filed 2–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7499
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 060201021–6021–01; I.D.
100405C]
RIN 0648–AT73
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;
Atlantic Swordfish Quotas
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
Proposed rule; request for
comments; notice of public hearings.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to amend the
regulations governing the North and
South Atlantic swordfish fisheries to
modify the North and South Atlantic
Swordfish quotas for the 2005 fishing
year (June 1, 2005, through May 31,
2006) to account for updated landings
information from the 2003 and 2004
fishing years. This action is necessary to
ensure that current quotas are based on
the most recent landings information
and account for any underharvest from
previous fishing years, consistent with
the regulations at 50 CFR part 635.
Additionally, this action proposes to
implement a subsequent
recommendation by the International
Commission for the Conservation of
Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT)
(Recommendation 04–02), which
extends the 2005 North Atlantic
swordfish management measures. The
recommendation specifies that the
extension of the 2005 North Atlantic
swordfish quota is through the 2006
fishing year, but this proposed action
would extend the 2005 North Atlantic
swordfish management measures until
ICCAT provides a recommendation for a
new U.S. allocation of the North
Atlantic swordfish total allowable catch.
ICCAT’s Standing Committee for
Research and Statistics (SCRS) plans to
conduct a stock assessment for North
Atlantic swordfish in 2006. If the stock
assessment is completed as anticipated,
ICCAT intends to review the results
during the Fall 2006 meeting and
develop new management
recommendations. In the event that
ICCAT does not recommend a new U.S.
allocation, this action proposes to
extend the 2005 North Atlantic
swordfish management measures until
such time as ICCAT provides the
recommendation.
E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM
13FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 29 (Monday, February 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7497-7499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1930]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for
a Petition To List the Island Marble Butterfly as Threatened or
Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the island marble butterfly
(Euchloe ausonides insulanus) as an endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We find that the
petition presents substantial scientific information indicating that
listing the island marble butterfly may be warranted. Therefore, with
the publication of this notice, we are initiating a status review of
the species, and we will issue a 12-month finding to determine if the
petitioned action is warranted. To assist and ensure that the review is
comprehensive, we are soliciting information and data regarding this
species.
[[Page 7498]]
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on February 13,
2006. To be considered in the 12-month finding for this petition, data,
information, and comments must be submitted to us by April 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this finding is available for
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the Western
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
510 Desmond Drive, SE., Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503. Please submit any
new information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this
species or this finding to the above address, or via electronic mail at
islandmarble@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Berg, Manager, at the above
address (see ADDRESSES section above), by telephone (360-753-4327), or
by facsimile (360-753-9405). For more information, go to https://
www.fts.gsa.gov/frs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific information to indicate that the petitioned
action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, this
finding is to be made within 90 days of receipt of the petition, and
the finding is to be published promptly in the Federal Register.
This finding is based on information included in the petition and
information readily available to us at the time of the petition review.
Our review of a 90-day finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and
section 424.14(b) of our regulations is limited to a determination of
whether the information in the petition meets the ``substantial
scientific information'' threshold. Our standard for substantial
scientific information with regard to a 90-day listing petition finding
is ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted''
(50 CFR 424.14(b)).
We have to satisfy the Act's requirement that we use the best
available science to make our decisions. However, we do not conduct
additional research at this point, nor do we subject the petition to
rigorous critical review. Rather, at the 90-day finding stage, we
accept the petitioner's sources and characterizations of the
information, to the extent that they appear to be based on accepted
scientific principles (such as citing published and peer reviewed
articles, or studies done in accordance with valid methodologies),
unless we have specific information to the contrary. Our finding
considers whether the petition states a reasonable case for listing on
its face. Thus, our 90-day finding expresses no view as to the ultimate
issue of whether the species should be listed.
Petition
On December 11, 2002, we received a petition dated December 10,
2002, requesting that we list the island marble butterfly (Euchloe
ausonides insulanus) as an endangered species, and that critical
habitat be designated concurrently with the listing. The petition,
submitted by the Xerces Society, Center for Biological Diversity,
Friends of the San Juans, and Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, was clearly
identified as a petition for a listing rule, and contained the names,
signatures, and addresses of the requesting parties. Included in the
petition was supporting information regarding the species' taxonomy and
ecology, historical and current distribution, present status, and
potential causes of decline and active imminent threats. We sent a
letter, acknowledging receipt of the petition, to the Xerces Society on
January 22, 2003. In our response we advised the petitioners that we
had insufficient funds to respond to the petition at that time and that
we would not be able to begin processing the petition in a timely
manner.
On April 5, 2004, we received a 60-day notice of intent to sue for
three butterfly species, the Taylor's checkerspot (Euphydryas editha
taylori), the mardon skipper (Polites mardon), and the island marble.
On October 18, 2004, a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief
was filed by the plaintiffs that specifically addressed conservation
actions needed for the island marble butterfly. We negotiated a
stipulated settlement agreement, dated February 28, 2005, to work
cooperatively with our conservation partners to conduct surveys and to
assess the ecological needs of the island marble during 2005. We also
agreed to submit the petition finding to the Federal Register by
February 5, 2006, and if the 90-day finding was found to be
substantial, to submit a 12-month finding by November 5, 2006. This
notice constitutes our 90-day finding for the petition to list the
island marble butterfly.
Species Information
The island marble butterfly (island marble) is a member of the
Pieridae family, subfamily Pirinae, primarily consisting of white and
yellow butterflies. Prior to its rediscovery in 1998, at American Camp,
a 1,223-acre (ac) (495-hectare (ha)) unit of the San Juan Island
National Historic Park in Washington State, the last observation of the
island marble was on Gabriola Island, British Columbia, in 1908. Island
marble larvae are known to feed on two types of plants: (1) Nonnative
annual mustards such as Brassica campestris (field mustard) and
Sisymbrium altissimum (tall tumble-mustard) in the uplands and (2)
Lepidium virginicum var. menziesii (native tall peppergrass) found at
the edge of coastal lagoons just above the marine shoreline of San Juan
Channel, north of American Camp (Lambert 2005a; Miskelly 2005).
Between April 13 and July 13, 2005, WDNR, the Service, and the
Xerces Society conducted more than 225 surveys for the island marble at
110 sites in 6 counties of northwest Washington. Sites were selected
based on proximity to known island marble occurrences and the presence
of grassland vegetation containing host plants. Adult butterflies were
observed from April 21 to June 6, eggs were observed from April 25 to
June 14, and larvae were observed from May 8 to July 1 (Miskelly 2005).
Based on the distribution of sites where island marble butterflies were
found and the habitat linkages or barriers between these sites, it is
believed that there are four populations of island marble butterflies,
two on San Juan Island and two on Lopez Island (Miskelly 2005). At
three of the four populations fewer than 10 adults were observed
(Miskelly 2005). The largest and most concentrated population of island
marbles was observed on the grasslands of American Camp and the
adjacent Cattle Point Natural Resources Conservation Area (NRCA), owned
by the WDNR, on San Juan Island. Pyle (2004) observed ``at least 100
individuals'' at American Camp in 2003, based on five site visits.
Lambert (2005a, 2005b, 2005c) reported total transect counts at
American Camp of 270 adults and 194 adults in 2004 and 2005,
respectively.
Discussion
Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal list of
endangered and threatened species. 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) of the Act. The five listing factors are:
(1) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment
of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial,
[[Page 7499]]
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (3) disease or
predation; (4) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and
(5) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
The Service believes that substantial information exists that
threats to the species exist under one or more of the five listing
factors. Because so few populations and individuals exist, the species
may be especially vulnerable to random natural events.
The petitioners state that many, if not most, insect populations
normally experience large fluctuations in size (Ehrlich 1992; Schultz
1998) with weather, predation, and disease potentially causing annual
changes in butterfly numbers of an order of magnitude or more. They go
on to state that normal population fluctuations, coupled with habitat
alteration or loss can result in population extirpations (Hanski et al.
1995). Based on this, the petitioners conclude that, with only one
known population, this butterfly is extremely vulnerable to extinction.
At the time the petition was written, American Camp was the only
area known to be occupied by island marbles. Extensive surveys
conducted after the petition was submitted revealed 3 additional areas
that were occupied (Miskelly 2005). Fewer than 10 adults were observed
in each of these areas (Miskelly 2005). Miskelly (2005) suggests that
the three satellite populations found in 2005 may not be self
sustaining, and that conservation of the island marble is largely
dependent on having a viable population at American Camp.
Finding
On the basis of our review, we find that the petition and
information in our files presents substantial information indicating
that listing of the island marble butterfly may be warranted. The small
number of individuals remaining and their limited distribution
increases extinction risk and makes the species especially vulnerable
to threats that may exist under one or more of the five listing
factors.
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be warranted, we are required to
promptly commence a review of the status of the species. To ensure that
the status review is complete and based on the best available science
and commercial information, we are soliciting additional information on
the island marble butterfly. We are requesting additional information,
comments, and suggestions concerning the status of the island marble
butterfly from the public, other concerned governmental agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any
other interested parties. We are seeking information regarding the
species' historical and current status and distribution, its biology
and ecology, ongoing conservation measures for the species and its
habitat, and threats to the species and its habitat.
If you wish to comment or provide information, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning this finding to our Western
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section above).
Our practice is to make comments and materials provided, including
names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours. Respondents may request that we withhold
a respondent's identity, to the extent allowable by law. If you wish us
to withhold your name or address, you must state this request
prominently at the beginning of your submission. However, we will not
consider anonymous comments. To the extent consistent with applicable
law, we will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and
from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials
of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in
their entirety. Comments and materials received will be available for
public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the
above address (see ADDRESSES section above).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited is available, upon request,
from our Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES
section above).
Author
The primary author of this notice is Ted Thomas, Western Washington
Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section above).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: February 3, 2006.
Marshall P. Jones,
Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6-1930 Filed 2-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
