Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Sonoran Population of Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agasizzii, 44335-44344 [E9-20835]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
This
proposal addresses the following local
rules: SJVUAPCD Rule 1020, Definitions
and SBCAPCD Rule 102, Definitions. In
the Rules and Regulations section of this
Federal Register, we are approving
these local rules in a direct final action
without prior proposal because we
believe these SIP revisions are not
controversial. If we receive adverse
comments, however, we will publish a
timely withdrawal of the direct final
rule and address the comments in
subsequent action based on this
proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
We do not plan to open a second
comment period, so anyone interested
in commenting should do so at this
time. If we do not receive adverse
comments, no further activity is
planned. For further information, please
see the direct final action.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: August 11, 2009.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E9–20805 Filed 8–27–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0079; FRL–8944–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Antelope Valley Air
Quality Management District
(AVAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from
leaking components at industrial
facilities such as petroleum refineries
and chemical manufacturing plants. We
are proposing to approve a local rule to
regulate these emission sources under
the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990
(CAA or the Act). At the same time, we
are also approving a Negative
Declaration and removing rules from the
SIP.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
DATES: Any comments on this proposal
must arrive by September 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2009–0079a, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send e-mail
directly to EPA, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the public comment.
If EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may
not be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry
Wamsley, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4111, wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
proposal addresses the following local
rules: Rule 1173—Fugitive Emissions of
Volatile Organic Compounds, Rule
465—Vacuum Producing Devices or
Systems, Rule 466—Pumps and
Compressors, 466.1—Valves and
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44335
Flanges, and Rule 467—Pressure Relief
Devices. In the Rules and Regulations
section of this Federal Register, we are
approving amendments to Rule 1173
and removing Rules 465, 466, 466.1, and
467 from the SIP in a direct final action
without prior proposal because we
believe these SIP revisions are not
controversial. If we receive adverse
comments, however, we will publish a
timely withdrawal of the direct final
rule and address the comments in
subsequent action based on this
proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
We do not plan to open a second
comment period, so anyone interested
in commenting should do so at this
time. If we do not receive adverse
comments, no further activity is
planned. For further information, please
see the direct final action.
Dated: May 13, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E9–20828 Filed 8–27–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2009-0032]
[92210-1117-0000-B4]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Sonoran
Population of Desert Tortoise
(Gopherus agasizzii) as a Distinct
Population Segment (DPS) With
Critical Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and
initiation of status review.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce a 90–day
finding on a petition to list the Sonoran
desert tortoise (Gopherus agasizzii) as a
distinct population segment (DPS)
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended, and designate critical
habitat. On the basis of our review of the
petition and information readily
available in our files, we have
determined that there is substantial
information indicating that the Sonoran
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
44336
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
desert tortoise may meet the criteria of
discreteness and significance as defined
by our policy on distinct vertebrate
population segments. Further, we find
that the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing the Sonoran
population of the desert tortoise may be
warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are
initiating a status review of the Sonoran
population of the desert tortoise to
determine if listing the population is
warranted. To ensure that the status
review of the Sonoran population of the
desert tortoise is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial data
and other information regarding this
population. At the conclusion of this
review, we will issue a 12–month
finding to determine if the petitioned
action is warranted. We will make a
determination on critical habitat for the
Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise if we initiate a listing action.
DATES: We made the finding announced
in this document on August 28, 2009.
To allow us adequate time to conduct
this review, we request that we receive
information on or before October 27,
2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: [FWS-R2ES-2009-0032]; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Information Solicited section
below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321
West Royal Palm Drive, Suite 103,
Phoenix, AZ 85021; by telephone 602242-0210; or by facsimile 602-242-2513.
Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), may call the
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
When we make a finding that a
petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing a
species may be warranted, we are
required to promptly commence a
review of the status of the species. To
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
ensure that the status review is
complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are soliciting
information on the status of the Sonoran
population of the desert tortoise
(Sonoran desert tortoise). We request
information from the public, other
concerned governmental agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning the status
of the Sonoran desert tortoise. We are
seeking information regarding:
(1) The historical and current status
and distribution of the Sonoran desert
tortoise (particularly with respect to
Mexico), its biology and ecology, and
ongoing conservation measures for the
species and its habitat;
(2) Information relating the
importance of the Sonoran desert
tortoise population to the species as a
whole;
(3) Information relevant to the factors
that are the basis for making a listing
determination for a species under
section 4(a) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
(a) the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species’ 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 and
threats to the species or its habitat; and
(4) Information about any ongoing
conservation measures for, or threats to,
the Sonoran desert tortoise and its
habitat.
If we determine that listing the
Sonoran desert tortoise is warranted, it
is our intent to propose critical habitat
to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable at the time we would
propose to list the Sonoran desert
tortoise. Therefore, with regard to areas
within the geographical range currently
occupied by the Sonoran desert tortoise,
we also request data and information on
what may constitute physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the Sonoran desert
tortoise, where these features are
currently found, and whether any of
these features may require special
management considerations or
protection. In addition, we request data
and information regarding whether
there are areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the Sonoran desert
tortoise that are essential to its
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conservation. Please provide specific
comments and information as to what,
if any, critical habitat should be
proposed for designation if the Sonoran
desert tortoise is proposed for listing,
and why such habitat meets the
requirements of the Act.
Please note that comments merely
stating support for or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’ Based on
the status review, we will issue a 12–
month finding on the petition, as
provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
You may submit your information
concerning this finding by one of the
methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this finding, will be
available for public inspection on https://
www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Arizona Ecological Services
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
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 or
commercial information to indicate that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information contained in the petition,
supporting information submitted with
the petition, and information otherwise
available in our files. To the maximum
extent practicable, we are to make this
finding within 90 days of receipt of the
petition and publish our notice of this
finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific
or commercial information within the
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with
regard to a 90–day 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)).
If we find that substantial scientific or
commercial information was presented,
we are required to promptly commence
a status review of the species.
On October 15, 2008, we received a
petition dated October 9, 2008, from
WildEarth Gardians and Western
Watersheds Project (petitioners)
requesting that the Sonoran population
of the desert tortoise be listed under the
Act as a distinct population segment
(DPS), as threatened or endangered
rangewide (in the United States and
Mexico), and critical habitat be
designated. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included
the requisite identification information
for the petitioners, as required in 50
CFR 424.14(a). The petition contained
detailed information on the natural
history, biology, current status, and
distribution of the Sonoran population
of the desert tortoise. It also contained
information on what the petitioners
reported as potential threats to the
Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise, such as livestock grazing,
urbanization and development, mining,
international border patrol activities,
illegal collection, inadequacy of existing
regulations, altered fire regimes, offhighway vehicle use, drought, and
climate change. In a November 26, 2008,
letter to the petitioners, we responded
that we had reviewed the information
presented in the petition and
determined that issuing an emergency
regulation temporarily listing the
species as per section 4(b)(7) of the Act
was not warranted. We also stated that
we intended to make our finding on
whether the petition presented
substantial information that the
requested action may be warranted, to
the maximum extent practicable within
90 days of receipt of the petition,
according to the provisions of section
4(b)(3) of the Act.
Previous Federal Actions
Throughout this finding, we use
‘‘Mojave’’ to describe desert tortoise
populations north and west of the
Colorado River, which is consistent
with the previous and current spelling
of the common name in Federal actions
that have addressed this population. We
use ‘‘Mohave’’ in the geographic context
to remain consistent with its reference
by the U.S. Board of Geographic Names
(e.g., Mohave Desert, Mohave County).
In addition, while we do not currently
recognize the Sonoran population of the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
desert tortoise as a unique taxonomic
entity, for ease of reference, we refer to
the Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise as the ‘‘Sonoran desert tortoise’’
in this document.
On December 30, 1982, we published
a notice of review which determined the
desert tortoise throughout its range in
the United States and Mexico to be a
Category 2 Federal Candidate species
(47 FR 58454); this was reaffirmed on
September 18, 1985 (50 FR 37958).
Category 2 status was granted to species
for which information in our possession
indicated that a proposed listing as
threatened or endangered was possibly
appropriate, but for which sufficient
data were not available to make a
determination of listing status under the
Act. On April 2, 1990, we issued a final
rule designating the Mojave population
of the desert tortoise (occurring north
and west of the Colorado River) as a
threatened species under the Act (55 FR
12178; see final rule for a summary of
previous actions regarding the Mojave
population of the desert tortoise).
Currently, the Mojave population of the
desert tortoise is recognized as a DPS
under the Act. As part of that
rulemaking, we designated any desert
tortoise from the Sonoran population as
threatened when observed outside of its
known range, due to similarity of
appearance under section 4(a) of the
Act.
On December 5, 1996, we published
a rule that discontinued the practice of
keeping a list of category 2 candidate
species (61 FR 64481). Since that time,
the Sonoran desert tortoise has had no
Federal Endangered Species Act status.
Species Information
The desert tortoise is a member of the
Testudinidae family (terrestrial
tortoises) of turtles in the genus
Gopherus (Rafinesque 1832), or gopher
tortoises. Scientific nomenclature
assigned to the desert tortoise has
undergone a series of changes since its
initial description by Cooper (1863) as
Xerobates agassizii. The desert tortoise
was also once known as Scaptochelys
agassizii (Crother et al. 2008, p. 70).
Further information is available on
classification of the desert tortoise in
Van Devender (2002b), Lamb and
McLuckie (2002), and McCord (2002).
The desert tortoise is recognized by its
gray to orange-brown, high, domed
upper shell. The shell measures 8 to 15
inches (20 to 38 centimeters) in length
(Service 2008, p. 4). Adult desert
tortoises may weigh 8 to 15 pounds (3.6
to 6.8 kilograms) (Service 2008, p. 4).
Hind limbs of the desert tortoise are
stocky and elephantine in appearance
while the forelimbs are paddle-shaped
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44337
and used for digging (Brennan and
Holycross 2006, p. 54). In the wild,
desert tortoises have an average lifespan
of 35 years (Germano 1994).
The Sonoran desert tortoise is closely
associated with rocky bajadas (lower
slopes of mountains) and hillsides, and,
to a lesser extent, flat areas (including
incised washes between or adjacent to
flat terrain) (Riedle et al. 2008). Sonoran
desert tortoises generally occur at
elevations ranging from 510 to 5,300 feet
(155 to 1,615 meters) (Arizona Game
and Fish Department 2001, p. 4).
In the United States, the Sonoran
desert tortoise occurs within Mohave
desertscrub, Sonoran desertscrub, and
semi-desert grassland habitat (Germano
et al. 1994; Van Devender 2002a;
Brennan and Holycross 2006, p. 54). In
Mexico, the Sonoran desert tortoise
occurs in Sonoran desertscrub and semidesert grassland (Germano et al. 1994;
Fritts and Jennings 1994; Bury et al.
2002; Van Devender 2002a; Edwards et
al. 2009, p. 8). The Sonoran desert
tortoise may also occasionally occur in
the lower elevations of Madrean oak
woodland (Germano et al. 1994; Fritts
and Jennings 1994; Bury et al. 2002; Van
Devender 2002a).
Primarily herbivores, Sonoran desert
tortoises consume a variety of plant
material in their diet (Van Devender et
al. 2002).
Sonoran desert tortoises are largely
inactive from mid-October to late
February or early March when they
overwinter in constructed burrows or
rocky cavities or crevices (AverillMurray 2000b). Sonoran desert tortoises
tend to use or construct burrows
differently, depending on habitat. Riedle
et al. (2008) found that the availability
of adequate shelter sites strongly
influenced Sonoran desert tortoise
densities.
Tortoise activity spikes in the spring,
especially following average or aboveaverage winter precipitation that
enhances annual plant production
(Averill-Murray 2000b). However, the
peak activity for the Sonoran desert
tortoises occurs at the onset of the
monsoon (summer rainy season) in midto late-summer when annual and
perennial plants reach peak abundance
and availability, and water sources
become more widely dispersed across
the landscape (Averill-Murray 2000b).
During the hot and dry late-spring/earlysummer season, Sonoran desert tortoises
are less active or may become entirely
dormant until the onset of the monsoon
(Averill-Murray 2000b).
The monsoon also marks the height of
social interaction and reproductive
behaviors for the Sonoran desert
tortoise. During this time, female
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
44338
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Sonoran desert tortoises lay their eggs,
with an average clutch size of 5 (AverillMurray and Klug 2000). Hatchling
Sonoran desert tortoises will emerge
from the nest site (burrow) in late
summer or they may overwinter,
emerging the following spring (Wilson
et al. 1999; Averill-Murray 2000b).
Sonoran desert tortoises reach sexual
maturity at approximately 10 to 12 years
of age (Averill-Murray 2000b).
Desert tortoises are distributed from
California, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona
in the United States, south through the
Mexican states of Sonora and Sinaloa.
The specific distribution of desert
tortoise is likely determined by habitat
and climatic characteristics (e.g.,
vegetation community (food), soil and
substrate characteristics (shelter),
precipitation pattern (water
availability)) within the appropriate
elevation range. The distribution of the
Sonoran desert tortoise in the United
States is considered to be east and south
of the Colorado River, extending south
and east from northwestern Mohave
County in Arizona (Germano et al. 1994;
Van Devender 2002a, Brennan and
Holycross 2006, p. 54), covering roughly
the western portion of the state. The
distribution in the United States is
likely bounded to the northeast and east
by habitat changes imposed by the
Mogollon Rim. In Mexico, the
distribution of the Sonoran desert
tortoise extends from the International
Border of Sonora and Arizona, south to
the vicinity of Guaymas, north of the
Yaqui River, in southern Sonora
(Germano et al. 1994; Fritts and
Jennings 1994; Bury et al. 2002; Van
Devender 2002a; Edwards et al. 2009,
pp. 7-8), covering approximately the
western half of the state of Sonora from
the Gulf of California coast east roughly
to the transition to unsuitable woodland
and conifer forest areas in the higher
elevations of the Sierra Madre
Occidental. The Mojave and Sinaloan
populations of desert tortoises represent
two additional populations of this
species recognized in the literature
(Lamb and McLuckie 2002). The Mojave
population, listed as threatened in 1990,
includes those populations that occur
north and west of the Colorado River in
southern California, southern Nevada,
southwestern Utah, and extreme
northwestern Arizona; and the Sinaloan
population is considered to be generally
distributed along and within the
western face of the Sierra Madre
Occidental of central Sonora south into
the border region between Sonora and
Sinaloa at the extreme southern end of
the species’ range (Lamb and McLuckie
2002). Genotypes (genetic makeup of an
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
organism) differ significantly between
populations (Lamb and McLuckie 2002).
Distinct Population Segment
Under section 3(15) of the Act, we
may consider for listing any species,
subspecies, or, for vertebrates, any DPS
of these taxa. In determining whether an
entity constitutes a DPS, and is therefore
listable under the Act, we follow the
Policy Regarding the Recognition of
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments
Under the Endangered Species Act (DPS
Policy) (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996).
Under our DPS Policy, three elements
are considered in a decision regarding
the status of a possible DPS: (1) the
discreteness of the population segment
in relation to the remainder of the taxon;
(2) the significance of the population
segment to the taxon to which it
belongs; and (3) the population
segment’s conservation status in relation
to the Act’s standards for listing (i.e.,
whether the population segment, when
treated as if it were a species, is
endangered or threatened) (61 FR 4722,
February 7, 1996). The first two
elements are used to determine if the
population segments constitutes a valid
DPS. If it does, then the third element
is used to consider whether such DPS
warrants listing. In this section, we will
consider the first two criteria
(discreteness and significance) to
determine if the Sonoran desert tortoise
may be a valid DPS (i.e., a valid listable
entity). Our policy further recognizes it
may be appropriate to assign different
classifications (i.e. threatened or
endangered) to different DPSs of the
same vertebrate taxon (61 FR 4721).
The petitioners requested we examine
the Sonoran desert tortoise as a DPS.
The information discussed below was
presented by the petitioners, unless
otherwise noted.
The petitioned DPS includes those
populations that occur east and south of
the Colorado River, south to the
biogeographical boundary of the Yaqui
River in southern Sonora, Mexico. In
making this delineation for the
petitioned DPS, the petitioners
considered biogeographic isolation,
ecological divergence, morphological
and physiological characteristics, and
genetic polymorphisms (genetic
material occurring in multiple forms or
configurations).
The petitioners discuss a population
of desert tortoise with the ‘‘Mojave’’
genotype (i.e., having similar genetic
characteristics to the those of the
Mojave DPS of desert tortoise) which
occurs in the Black Mountains of
Mohave County, Arizona (isolated from
the threatened Mojave DPS that occurs
north and west of the Colorado River),
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and are seeking the inclusion of that
population within the petitioned DPS
because it does not currently have
protection under the Act. We will
evaluate this anomalous situation
further in our 12–month finding.
Discreteness
Under the DPS Policy, a population
segment of a vertebrate species may be
considered discrete if it satisfies either
one of the following two conditions: (1)
it is markedly separated from other
populations of the same taxon as a
consequence of physical, physiological,
ecological, or behavioral factors.
Quantitative measures of genetic or
morphological discontinuity may
provide evidence of this separation; or
(2) it is delimited by international
governmental boundaries within which
significant differences in control of
exploitation, management of habitat,
conservation status, or regulatory
mechanisms exist (61 FR 4722, February
7, 1996).
Information Provided in the Petition on
Discreteness
The petitioners claim that the
Sonoran population is discrete from the
Mojave and Sinaloan populations due to
differences in habitat use, reproduction
strategies, physical characteristics, and
genotype. The petitioners claim that the
Colorado (United States) and Yaqui
(Sonora, Mexico) Rivers act as
biogeographical barriers to movement of
tortoises between the Mojave and
Sonoran populations, and between the
Sonoran and Sinaloan populations,
respectively. In view of this
biogeographical isolation, the
petitioners claim that significant
ecological divergence has occurred
between the Mojave and Sonoran
populations of desert tortoise, largely
due to significant differences in geology,
vegetation types, and precipitation
cycles where the populations are
distributed. Desert tortoises in the
Mojave population are most dense in
the intermountain valleys that have soil
types favorable to the construction of
large, deep burrows (Bury et al. 1994).
However, Sonoran desert tortoises reach
maximum densities in the rocky bajadas
and hillsides of higher slope, with
reduced densities in the intermountain
valleys (Averill-Murray et al. 2002b).
The petitioners state that differences in
precipitation cycle have led to notable
differences in seasonal activity patterns
between desert tortoises that occur in
the Sonoran and Mojave deserts.
Information in our files confirms these
assertions. Specifically, analyzing the
genetic population structure among
desert tortoise populations in Mexico,
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Edwards et al. (2009, pp. 7-8) suggest
the Sinaloan population of desert
tortoise uses Sinaloan thornscrub and
tropical deciduous forest habitats
(which are created by higher
precipitation levels). However, some
level of gradation of the Sonoran and
Sinaloan genotypes may occur in the
vegetative transition zone between
Plains of Sonora subdivision of Sonoran
desertscrub and Sinaloan thornscrub
habitats of central Sonora (Edwards et
al. 2009, p. 8).
Differences in reproduction strategies
between the Sonoran and Mojave
populations of desert tortoises were also
discussed in the petition. In the Mojave
population of desert tortoises, females
lay up to three clutches of eggs per year
with larger clutch sizes, earlier in the
year (April to mid-July) while those in
the Sonoran population lay one clutch
per year of smaller size, later in the year
(June through August) (Wallis et al.
1999; Averill-Murray et al. 2002a).
These differences led Averill-Murray
(2002b) and Henen (1997) to
hypothesize that Sonoran desert
tortoises invest all reproductive effort
into a single clutch which hatches at the
peak of forage and water availability and
abundance, whereas desert tortoises in
the Mojave population (maturing at
younger ages and at smaller body sizes),
have higher clutch numbers to account
for higher mortality. Comparative
reproduction strategies of the Sinaloan
population of the desert tortoise were
not discussed in the petition.
The petitioners claim morphological
and physiological characteristics, in
particular, shell characteristics, differ
between the Sonoran and Mojave
populations of desert tortoises. Germano
(1993) found that desert tortoise shells
in the Sonoran population are narrower
than those in the Mojave population,
were less domed, and possessed shorter
gular shields (plates projecting forward
from the lower shell). Desert tortoises in
the Sonoran population also have a
smaller plastron (lower shell) and a
broader carapace (upper shell)
(McLuckie et al. 1999). The petitioners
did not provide information on the
potential differences in morphological
and physiological characters between
the Sonoran and Sinaloan populations
of desert tortoises.
Lastly, the petitioners rely on genetic
polymorphisms (that is, genetic material
occurring in multiple forms) as a
primary basis to consider the Mojave,
Sonoran, and Sinaloan populations of
desert tortoises as evolutionarily
significant units. The Mojave
population of desert tortoise exhibits
three related genotypes but the Sonoran
desert tortoise possesses a single
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
genotype that is closely associated with
Arizona upland and lower Colorado
River subdivisions of Sonoran
desertscrub habitat where the species is
generally found (Lamb et al. 1989; Lamb
and McLuckie 2002). Lamb and
McLuckie (2002) suggest that regional
inundation of the inland area from
Yuma, Arizona, north to the Nevada
border during the Miocene Epoch
correlates with a single maternal
ancestor of the Mojave population of
desert tortoises, which would have
presented significant isolation long
enough to allow such genetic divergence
between these two populations.
Evaluation of Discreteness
The population of desert tortoises in
the Black Mountains of Mohave County,
Arizona, which possess a uniquely
Mojavean genotype, present an anomaly
in the argument for genetic divergence
as a result of regional inundation and
subsequent isolation. McLuckie et al.
(1999) suggest three possible hypotheses
that may have led to the occurrence of
the Mojave genotype east of the
Colorado River: (1) active dispersal from
north of the Miocene Epoch inundation;
(2) river meander and subsequent
geomorphological features assisted in
allowing tortoises to cross the river over
time; and (3) aboriginal human transport
across the river for food stock, ritualistic
or ceremonial use, or for medicinal uses
which may have resulted in released
animals or escapes.
The genetic differentiation between
the entire Mojave and Sonoran
populations of the desert tortoise has
led some researchers to hypothesize that
the two populations may represent
different species entirely (Berry et al.
2002; Murphy et al. 2007). The Sinaloan
population of desert tortoise, has been
documented to have a 4.2 percent
divergence in genotype from the
Sonoran desert tortoise, and a 5.1
percent divergence in genotype from the
Mojave population of desert tortoise
(Lamb and McLuckie 2002). Lamb and
McLuckie (2002) stated, ‘‘Given their
geographic distribution, genealogical
depth, and concordant suite of
characters, the Mohave, Sonoran, and
Sinaloan tortoise assemblages clearly
qualify as [evolutionarily significant
units].’’
We have reviewed the information
presented in the petition, and have
evaluated the information in accordance
with 50 CFR 424.14(b). On the basis of
our review, we find that the petition
provided substantial information
indicating that the Sonoran population
of the desert tortoise as it occurs east
and south of the Colorado River, south
to the Yaqui River, in Sonora, Mexico,
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44339
may be discrete from the Mojave and
Sinaloan desert tortoise populations. We
base this conclusion on ecological
(habitat use), physiological
(reproductive capacity), morphological
(shell dimensions), and behavioral
(seasonal activity patterns) differences
that are further supported by analysis of
genetic polymorphisms that concluded
significant divergence has occurred
among the Mojave, Sonoran, and
Sinaloan populations of the desert
tortoise over time.
Significance
Under our DPS Policy, in addition to
our consideration that a population
segment is discrete, we consider its
biological and ecological significance to
the taxon to which it belongs. This
consideration may include, but is not
limited to: (1) evidence of the
persistence of the discrete population
segment in an ecological setting that is
unique or unusual for the taxon; (2)
evidence that loss of the population
segment would result in a significant
gap in the range of the taxon; (3)
evidence that the population segment
represents the only surviving natural
occurrence of a taxon that may be more
abundant elsewhere as an introduced
population outside its historical range;
and (4) evidence that the discrete
population segment differs markedly
from other populations of the species in
its genetic characteristics (61 FR 4721;
February 7, 1996).
Information Provided in the Petition on
Significance
The current range of the Sonoran
desert tortoise, as described in the
discussion above pertaining to
discreteness, represents several hundred
miles or kilometers of occupied habitat
spanning across an International Border.
The petition contends that this
population segment is confined by two
large perennial rivers; the Colorado
River in its northern periphery, which
separates the Mojave and Sonoran
populations of desert tortoises, and the
Yaqui River at its southern periphery,
which separates the Sonoran and
Sinaloan populations of the desert
tortoise. These two rivers represent
significant biogeographical barriers to
genetic exchange between adjacent
population segments and, therefore,
preclude recolonization of this expanse
of habitat from adjacent populations
should the Sonoran desert tortoise
become extirpated. As a result, the loss
of the Sonoran desert tortoise would
constitute a significant gap of several
hundred miles or kilometers in the
range between the Mojave and Sinaloan
populations of desert tortoises.
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
44340
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Evaluation of Significance
We have reviewed the information
presented in the petition, and have
evaluated the information in accordance
with 50 CFR 424.14(b). On the basis of
our review, we find that the petition
provided substantial information
indicating that the Sonoran desert
tortoise may be significant to the
continued existence of the taxon. We
base this conclusion on the large
geographic range of the species, which
may be significant to the taxon as a
whole, a gap of several hundred miles
or kilometers that would result from the
loss of the Sonoran population, which
would effectively bisect the species’
range, and the genetic divergence
between the three populations. These
factors indicate that the loss of the
Sonoran population may result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon
that could not be filled over time due to
presence of biogeographical barriers to
movement.
DPS Conclusion
We have reviewed the information
presented in the petition, and have
evaluated the information in accordance
with 50 CFR 424.14(b). In a 90–day
finding, the question is whether a
petition presents substantial
information that the petitioned action
may be warranted. Based on our review,
we find that the petition, supported by
information in our files, presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information to demonstrate that the
Sonoran population of desert tortoise
may be discrete from the Mojave and
Sinaloan populations and that the
Sonoran population may be significant
to the taxon as a whole. As a result, we
have determined that the Sonoran
population of desert tortoise may be a
DPS. Thus, the Sonoran population of
desert tortoise may be a listable entity
under the Act.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Five-Factor Evaluation
We next evaluated the level of threat
to the potential DPS based on the five
listing factors established by the Act.
We thus proceeded with an evaluation
of information presented in the petition,
as well as information in our files, to
determine whether there is substantial
scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing this population
may be warranted.
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR 424, set forth the procedures for
adding species to the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. A species, subspecies, or
distinct population segment of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
vertebrate taxa may be determined to be
endangered or threatened due to one or
more of the five factors described in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of 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.
In making this 90–day finding, we
evaluated whether information
regarding the Sonoran desert tortoise, as
presented in the petition and other
information available in our files, is
substantial, thereby indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Our
evaluation of this information is
presented below. The information
discussed below was presented by the
petitioners, unless otherwise noted.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of the
Species’ Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that habitat
occupied by the Sonoran desert tortoise
is threatened by livestock grazing,
urbanization and development, mining,
and international border patrol
activities.
The petitioners claim that livestock
grazing in occupied habitat adversely
affects the Sonoran desert tortoise in a
number of ways including competition
for forage, vegetative trampling,
alteration of plant community structure,
introducing or enhancing the
establishment of nonnative plant
species, altering fire ecology, damaging
burrows and cover sites, and altering
tortoise behavior (Bostick 1990;
Fleischner 1994; Oldemyer 1994;
Averill-Murray 2000b; Kazmaier et al.
2001; Boarman 2002; Esque et al. 2002).
Over 60 percent of habitat occupied by
the Sonoran desert tortoise occurs on
federally managed land, the majority of
that on lands managed by the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
The petitioners claim that on BLM land
livestock grazing occurs on 78 percent
(on 273 allotments) of potentially
occupied habitats for the Sonoran desert
tortoise. The petitioners also state that
on U.S. Forest Service lands, livestock
grazing occurs on 86 percent of
potentially occupied habitat for the
Sonoran desert tortoise. The percentage
of Sonoran desert tortoise habitat used
for livestock grazing on State, private, or
tribal lands is not identified in the
petition.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The petitioners claim that the
Sonoran desert tortoise and its habitat
are harmed by urbanization and
development in approximately 29
percent of its occupied range in the
United States. The petitioners state that
urbanization and development threaten
the Sonoran desert tortoise and its
habitat. Tortoise habitat within
developing areas may be permanently
lost or degraded, while patterns of
development may fragment habitat,
restrict gene flow, and hamper
recolonization of formerly occupied
habitat.
The human population in Arizona
increased by 394 percent from 1960 to
2000; Arizona is the second-fastest
growing State in terms of human
population (Social Science Data
Analysis Network 2000, p. 1). In
particular, certain counties with habitat
occupied by the Sonoran desert tortoise
have experienced explosive human
population growth over this timeframe:
Maricopa (463 percent); Yavapai (579
percent); and Mohave (2,004 percent)
(Social Science Data Analysis Network
2000). The petition did not specifically
discuss the threat of urbanization and
development in occupied habitat for the
Sonoran desert tortoise in Mexico;
however, information in our files
suggests urbanization and development
might affect the Sonoran desert tortoise
there as well. Information in our files
indicates that Mexico’s human
population grew 700 percent from 1910
to 2000 (Miller et al. 2005, p. 60).
Demand from a growing human
population has spurred the need for
more agricultural development,
according to information from our files
(Contreras Balderas and Lozano 1994, p.
384; va Linda et al. 1997, p. 316).
The petitioners provided evidence
that mining activities may also be a
threat to the Sonoran desert tortoise and
its habitat. Mining activities occur on
Federal and private lands but are stated
to be the most pervasive on BLM lands,
with 4,670 mining claims occurring in
habitat occupied by the Sonoran desert
tortoise. As of 2003, 1,096 of these
claims remained active and 3,574 had
been closed, according to the
petitioners. The petitioners state that
mining activities (both small- and largescale) adversely affect the Sonoran
desert tortoise through habitat
fragmentation, loss, and degradation;
introduction of contaminants and
fugitive dust (dust that cannot be
attributed to a single point of origin,
such as a smokestack); off-road travel
associated with mining activities or
roads created for said activities; and
entrapment of tortoises in mine spoil
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
heaps (Averill-Murray 2000b; Woodman
et al. 2001, 2004; Boarman 2002).
Occupied habitat for the Sonoran
desert tortoise occurs along the
International Border in Yuma, Pima,
and Santa Cruz counties in Arizona. The
petitioners state that patrol activities on
the international border present threats
to the Sonoran desert tortoise and its
habitat. Specifically, the petitioners
state that border patrol activities
threaten the Sonoran desert tortoise and
its habitat through road mortality, and
loss or degradation of occupied habitat.
In particular, the petitioners claim that
the recently constructed border fence
fragments the habitat of Sonoran desert
tortoise populations in Mexico and the
United States, and also directly and
indirectly threatens the Sonoran desert
tortoise habitat from construction and
maintenance activities associated with
the border fence.
Evaluation of Information
In consideration of the threats
summarized above and discussed in the
petition, we find that the petition
provides substantial information that
listing the Sonoran desert tortoise due to
the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range may be warranted.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition claims that the Sonoran
desert tortoise is threatened by
poaching, illegal collection for use as
pets, shooting, and vandalism (physical
harassment or disturbance of the
animals) throughout its range in the
United States and Mexico. Illegal
collection of desert tortoises for food, for
commercial trade, and as pets has been
documented (Fritts and Jennings 1994,
Averill-Murray 2000b; Bury et al. 2002).
Information in our files suggests that the
simple act of handling a Sonoran desert
tortoise may cause an individual
tortoise to void the contents of its
bladder in defense. This loss of water
may jeopardize its life (Averill-Murray
2002, p. 434; Boarman 2002). Shooting
and vandalism of Sonoran desert
tortoises has been reported in Howland
and Rorabaugh (2002) and Woodman et
al. (2002).
Evaluation of Information
In our evaluation of the petition, we
find that the petitioners provided
substantial information that listing the
Sonoran desert tortoise due to
overutilization for commercial,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes may be warranted.
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners cite upper respiratory
tract disease (URTD) as a threat to the
Sonoran desert tortoise and reference
the significant threat URTD is, and has
been, for the Mojave population; a
primary reason that population was
listed as threatened in 1990. This
disease is irreversible and fatal once
acquired. Two species of Mycoplasma (a
genus of small parasitic bacteria that
lack cell walls and can survive without
oxygen), Mycoplasma agassizii and M.
testudineum, are known to cause URTD
in desert tortoises and are easily
transmitted between individual tortoises
from casual contact (Brown et al. 1999;
Wendland et al. 2007). Appendix 2 of
the petition summarizes disease
incidence reports within Sonoran desert
tortoise populations. The petitioners
state that Sonoran desert tortoises have
tested positive for one or both of these
antibodies at Saguaro National Park, and
in the Ragged Top, Hualapai, Harcuvar,
Little Shipp, and Sand Tank mountains
among other locations. Dickinson et al.
(2002) suspected that URTD may not be
as serious a threat to the Sonoran
population of desert tortoises as it has
been for the Mojave population because
tortoises in the Sonoran population do
not occur in as high of densities as those
in the Mojave and because Sonoran
populations are more isolated from one
another. In addition, the Sonoran
population can take advantage of a
bimodal precipitation cycle (two
distinct rainy seasons). This offers
additional opportunities for
rehydration, lessening physiological
stress, and, therefore, lessening
susceptibility to the disease.
In addition to URTD, cutaneous
dyskeratosis (shell disease) has been
observed in numerous Sonoran desert
populations (Appendix 2 of the
petition). The petitioners claim that,
while no serious deleterious effects of
the disease have been observed in
affected tortoises, Homer et al. (2001)
indicated higher mortality rates in some
populations where the disease has been
documented. Lastly, the petitioners state
that additional pathogens have been
noted in free-ranging Sonoran desert
tortoises including Pasteurella sp.,
Streptococcus sp., Staphylococcus sp.,
herpesvirus, Pseudomonas sp., and
Salmonella sp. and that these diseases
may be correlated with physiological
stress induced by habitat destruction
and modification discussed above in
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44341
Factor A (Pettan-Brewer et al. 1996;
Dickinson et al. 2001).
There are numerous natural predators
of the Sonoran desert tortoise, including
the jaguar (Panthera onca) and
mountain lion (Felis concolor) (the only
predators known to be able to break an
adult tortoise’s shell), coyote (Canis
latrans), common raven (Corvus corax),
kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), bobcat (Lynx
rufus), gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus), badger (Taxidea
taxus), Gila monster (Heloderma
suspectum), golden eagle (Aquila
chrysaetos) and other raptors, greater
roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus),
coachwhip (Coluber flagellum),
gophersnake (Pituophis melanoleucus),
and kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula)
(Averill-Murray et al. 2002b). The
petitioners state that urban
encroachment within the distribution of
the Sonoran desert tortoise has created,
or threatens to create, elevated levels of
unnatural predation, mainly by ravens,
coyotes, and feral domestic dogs. As
explained below, petitioners claim these
predators have benefitted, or been
‘‘subsidized,’’ by human activities
within the wild-urban interface areas.
Ravens can effectively prey on
juvenile tortoises because their shells
have not yet hardened (particularly the
plastron) and the ravens are able to
pierce the shells (Boarman 2002).
Ravens, noted as a significant threat to
desert tortoises in the Mojave
population, have increased their
numbers 14-fold within Arizona
(Appendix 3 of the petition; Boarman
and Kristen 2008). The petitioners
suggest that increases in the number of
ravens within the Sonoran desert may
be linked to increased availability of
food and water resources at landfills,
rural and urban developments, along
heavily traveled roads, and at
agricultural areas in particular dairies.
These land uses were also suspected by
the petitioners to result in increased
predation of Sonoran desert tortoises
from coyotes and feral dogs; the latter
being documented at 4 of 17 Sonoran
desert tortoise study plots (Appendix 1
of the petition).
Evaluation of Information
In our evaluation of the petition, we
find that the petitioners provide
substantial information that listing the
Sonoran desert tortoise due to the
incidence of disease and high predation
levels may be warranted.
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
44342
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
In 1988, the Sonoran and Mojave
populations of the desert tortoise were
closed to collection in Arizona by the
Arizona Game and Fish Department,
except as authorized under their
scientific collecting permit program.
This status means that it is illegal to kill
or capture desert tortoises from the wild
(unless under a special permit).
Possession for trade, sale, or other
commercial purposes is prohibited
(Howland and Rorabaugh 2002). Prior to
1988, the Arizona Game and Fish
Department allowed the possession of
one lawfully obtained tortoise per
person, which likely contributed to their
popularity as pets (Averill-Murray
2000b). The Arizona Game and Fish
Department has developed a draft
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy: 2005-2015, in which the
Sonoran desert tortoise has been
identified as a Species of Greatest
Conservation Need for which immediate
conservation is necessary (Tier 1b under
the Vulnerable category) (Arizona Game
and Fish Department 2006a, pp. 485487; 2006b, p. 4). The Arizona Game
and Fish Department has been a
significant contributor in the
conservation and management of the
Sonoran desert tortoise, producing
many documents for public education,
administering an adoption program for
individual Sonoran desert tortoises that
cannot be returned to the wild, and
conducting or funding monitoring and
research on wild Sonoran desert tortoise
populations (Arizona Game and Fish
Department 1990, 1996, 2000, and 2004;
Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise
Team 1996, 1997, and 2000; AverillMurray 2000).
The Sonoran desert tortoise does not
currently have special status under the
Endangered Species Act. The desert
tortoise is included in Appendix I of the
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora and a permit is required for the
export of tortoises (Howland and
Rorabaugh 2002).
Several Federal agencies have
management authority for Sonoran
desert tortoise habitat, including the
BLM, the National Park Service, the U.S.
Forest Service, the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, the U.S. Department of
Defense, and the Service. Significant
land use protections are afforded the
Sonoran desert tortoise on National Park
Service lands and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service refuges, in particular
where they occur adjacent to U.S.
Department of Defense lands such as the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
Barry M. Goldwater Range and the
Yuma Proving Grounds, because of the
relatively large amounts of primarily
undisturbed habitat within the
boundary zone between these managed
lands.
The Sonoran desert tortoise is
considered a ‘‘sensitive species’’ by the
BLM. In 1988, the BLM adopted a
rangewide management strategy for
desert tortoise habitat (BLM 1988;
Howland and Rorabaugh 2002).
Subsequently, habitat for the Mojave
and Sonoran populations of desert
tortoise was categorized into one of
three categories: Category one being the
highest quality; Category three, the
lowest. In 1991, the BLM, the Service,
and state wildlife agencies (Arizona,
Nevada, Utah, and California)
developed a policy whereby persons
who disturbed occupied habitat were
required to pay monetary compensation
(usually in the form of land acquisition).
The monetary compensation was
weighted using the BLM’s habitat
categorization criteria. Mitigation ratios
ranged from 1:1 (acres protected: acres
disturbed) for category three habitat, to
6:1 for category one habitat (Howland
and Rorabaugh 2002). The petitioners
also cite numerous reports, management
strategies, and formal actions taken by
the BLM with regard to management of
the Sonoran desert tortoise, but
conclude that, based on their review,
these measures may be insufficient to
adequately protect the Sonoran desert
tortoise on BLM lands.
The Sonoran desert tortoise occurs on
both the Tonto and Coronado National
Forests. The Sonoran desert tortoise is
on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive
Species List, which means it is
considered in land-management
decisions. The petitioners claim that,
despite this recognition, threats to the
Sonoran desert tortoise continue to
occur within these National Forests and
that potential protections, such as those
afforded under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4321-4327), have failed to come to
fruition, particularly with respect to
livestock grazing (see Table 6, p. 55 of
the petition).
There are currently 10 Native
American reservations within Arizona
that contain known or potential Sonoran
desert tortoise habitat: Fort Mojave
Indian Tribe, Colorado River Indian
Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Fort McDowell
Yavapai Nation, Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community, Gila River
Indian Community, Ak Chin, Tohono
O’odham Nation, Pasqua Yaqui Tribe,
and San Carlos Apache Tribe, although
the status of populations on these
reservations has not been established
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(Averill-Murray 2000b). The petitioners
state that historically no reservations
conducted surveys or performed active
management for the Sonoran desert
tortoise or its habitat. However, the
petitioners note that recently the
Tohono O’odham Nation developed the
Wildlife and Vegetation Management
Program and now has oversight over the
desert tortoise on their land. This
program authorizes surveys for Sonoran
desert tortoise and the establishment of
monitoring plots, but does not provide
funding to implement these activities
(Averill-Murray 2000b). The petitioners
also suggest that many Native American
tribes have a historical relationship with
desert tortoises that is of important
cultural and spiritual significance,
which may provide added protection of
the species on their lands (Nabhan
2002).
On State lands, the Arizona State
Land Department manages occupied
Sonoran desert tortoise habitat,
according to the petition, with the goal
of ‘‘maximizing revenue to benefit
education, health and penal
institutions,’’ and works cooperatively
with the Arizona Game and Fish
Department in management of Sonoran
desert tortoises (Averill-Murray 2000b).
Specifically, the petitioners state that
the Arizona Game and Fish Department
‘‘recommends mitigation measures for
tortoise impacts for which it is
consulted ... (and) comments on State
land projects related to urban planning,
land sales and exchanges, rights of way,
and commercial leases,’’ but these
recommendations are not binding
(Averill-Murray 2000b).
The petition also notes that Pima
County has considered the Sonoran
desert tortoise in its habitat
conservation planning by
acknowledging that populations are
decreasing in Pima County. However,
Pima County offers few specific
protections for the species.
In Mexico, the Secretaria de
Deserrollo Social lists both the Sonoran
and Sinaloan populations of the desert
tortoise as threatened (Secretaria de
Deserrollo 2008, p. 99). Populations of
the Sonoran desert tortoise in Mexico
are reportedly in decline. Factors
believed to contribute to this decline are
related to lack of resources for
enforcement and include habitat
destruction or modification, capture of
tortoises for food or pets, and predation
by feral dogs (particularly in areas
adjacent to settlements or urban areas)
(Fritts and Jennings 1994; Bury et al.
2002).
In the United States, as part of a
multi-agency collaborative project, the
Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Team was formed in 1985 to coordinate
research and management of Sonoran
desert tortoise populations in Arizona.
Participating agencies in the Arizona
Interagency Desert Tortoise Team
include the Arizona Game and Fish
Department, Arizona State Lands
Department, the U.S. Forest Service, the
BLM, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation,
the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, the
Service, the National Park Service, the
U.S. Geological Survey, and several U.S.
Department of Defense military
reservations (Arizona Interagency Desert
Tortoise Team 1996). Since its
inception, the Arizona Interagency
Desert Tortoise Team has collaborated
in the development of numerous
publically available documents
addressing conservation of the Sonoran
desert tortoise (Averill-Murray 2000a,
2000b; Arizona Game and Fish
Department 2007a, 2007b; Arizona
Interagency Desert Tortoise Team 2008).
The Arizona Interagency Desert
Tortoise Team’s Memorandum of
Understanding, signed in 1995,
established specific objectives for the
team including: (1) ensuring the
survival of the species; (2) preventing
loss of the species; and (3) improving
the quality of Sonoran desert tortoise
habitat in Arizona, with the team to
function as an advocate for the Sonoran
desert tortoise (Arizona Interagency
Desert Tortoise Team 1996). A
management plan for the Sonoran desert
tortoise completed in 1996 called for
improved monitoring protocols, the
implementation of threat-minimization
activities, and the creation of Sonoran
Desert Management Areas for
conservation of the Sonoran desert
tortoise (Arizona Interagency Desert
Tortoise Team 1996). However, the
petitioners claim that the 1996 plan: (1)
lacked meaningful goals and objectives;
(2) lacked political willpower without
legal protection for the Sonoran desert
tortoise; (3) failed to designate Sonoran
Desert Management Areas; and (4) was
poorly funded, which hampered
implementation of threat minimization
activities outlined in the plan. These
shortcomings in the 1996 plan were
collectively recognized by the Arizona
Interagency Desert Tortoise Team
members who in 2002 reconvened to
initiate the development of a revised
plan in the form of a State Conservation
Agreement for the Sonoran desert
tortoise. The State Conservation
Agreement, when finalized, is expected
to: (1) mandate more practical
conservation recommendations; (2)
garner a higher level of commitment and
responsibility from its signatories; (3)
set measurable goals and objectives; and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
(4) establish Key Habitat Areas on
public lands where management
strategies for the Sonoran desert tortoise
will focus.
Evaluation of Information
There are significant protections in
place with respect to management for
the Sonoran desert tortoise on lands
managed by the Service, National Park
Service, and to a lesser degree, lands
managed by the U.S. Department of
Defense. The Arizona Interagency Desert
Tortoise Team has also provided
technical expertise and guided habitatmanagement decisions of participating
agencies with marginal success. Despite
these protections, we conclude that the
petition and information in our files
present substantial information that
existing regulatory mechanisms may be
inadequate to prevent declines of the
Sonoran desert tortoise, particularly on
lands managed as ‘‘multiple-use’’ such
as U.S. Forest Service, BLM, and the
Arizona State Land Department, where
threats continue to occur. An additional
concern is the limited implementation
of recommendations of the Arizona
Interagency Desert Tortoise Team’s 1996
management plan.
In our evaluation of the petition, we
find that the petitioners provided
substantial information that listing the
Sonoran desert tortoise due to the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms may be warranted.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that off-highway
vehicle (OHV) use, alteration of fire
frequency in the Sonoran Desert
resulting from nonnative plant invasion,
mortality on roads, drought, and climate
change are among additional threats to
the Sonoran desert tortoise. The
petitioners claim that OHV use has
increased significantly on public lands
within the distribution of the Sonoran
desert tortoise, especially on U.S. Forest
Service and BLM lands, and particularly
in incised washes, which are important
habitat for the Sonoran desert tortoise
(Averill-Murray 2000b; Averill-Murray
and Averill-Murray 2002; Riedle et al.
2008). We have information in our files
that indicates the use of OHVs has
grown considerably in Arizona. For
example, as of 2007, 385,000 OHVs
were registered in Arizona (a 350percent increase since 1998) and 1.7
million people (29 percent of Arizona’s
population) engaged in off-road activity
from 2005-2007 (Sacco 2007). Over half
of OHV users reported that merely
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44343
driving off-road was their primary
activity, versus using the OHV for the
purpose of seeking a destination to
hunt, fish, or hike (Sacco 2007). Specific
threats cited by the petitioners to the
Sonoran desert tortoise or its habitat
from OHV use include crushing
tortoises, collapsing occupied and
unoccupied burrows, changes in plant
abundance and species composition,
reduced habitat connectivity, soil
compaction, soil erosion, reduced water
infiltration, higher soil temperatures,
and increased fire-starts (Boarman 2002;
Ouren et al. 2007, pp. 6-7, 11, 16). The
petitioners further claims that OHV use
causes destruction of cryptogamic soils,
which are soils with crusts formed by an
association of algae, mosses, and fungi,
which stabilize desert soil, retain
moisture, and protect germinating seeds
(Boarman 2002, pp. 46-47; Ouren et al.
2007, pp. 7-8).
Nonnative plant species such as
Mediterranean splitgrass (Schismus
barbatus), red brome (Brombus rubens),
and African buffelgrass (Pennisetum
cilare) have significantly degraded
Sonoran desert tortoise habitat by outcompeting more nutritional, native
plant species and altering the frequency
and magnitude of wildfires in many
areas within its distribution (Howland
and Rorabaugh 2002). The petitioners
state that in addition to injury and
mortality of Sonoran desert tortoises,
wildfire within occupied habitat is
expected to result in the complete
conversion of desertscrub to grasslands
at higher elevations and to barren
landscapes at lower elevations (Esque et
al. 2002). Pennisetum cilare poses
unique problems for the Sonoran desert
tortoise in Sonora, Mexico, because
Sonoran desertscrub is actively cleared
in favor of planting P. cilare as forage for
livestock; P. cilare disperses naturally
from these sites into adjacent habitat
where it self-perpetuates, and is ‘‘likely
to dominate the entire area’’ (Bury et al.
2002).
The petitioners cite several adverse
effects to the Sonoran desert tortoise
from roads. Among these threats were
direct mortality, injury, facilitation of
increased raven populations, increased
roadside foraging by tortoises (as a
result of increased plant growth from
precipitation runoff), population
fragmentation, and contamination of
roadside habitat (Homer et al. 2001;
Boarman 2002). Boarman and Kristin
(2008, Appendix 3 of the petition) states
that roads are one of the most prevalent
threats in the study plots they reviewed.
Lastly, the petitioners claim that
drought and climate change pose
additional threats to the Sonoran desert
tortoise. Drought increases the
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
44344
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 166 / Friday, August 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules
physiological stress of desert tortoises
and reduces reproductive rates within
populations because of reduced forage
quality and abundance (Averill-Murray
and Klug 2000). The petitioners also
state that the effects of drought can act
synergistically with other threats to the
Sonoran desert tortoise such as disease
and habitat destruction or modification.
Increased magnitude and frequency of
drought is expected to occur as a result
of climate change. Weiss and Overpeck
(2005) predict that the Sonoran Desert
may be displaced in the south by hotter,
drier habitats and may expand to the
north and to higher elevations,
displacing cooler, drier habitats. In our
review of available files, we find that
Seagar et al. (2007, pp. 1181-1184)
analyzed 19 different computer models
of differing variables to estimate the
future climatology of the southwestern
United States and northern Mexico in
response to predictions of changing
climatic patterns. All but one of the 19
models predicted a drying trend within
the Southwest; one predicted a trend
toward a wetter climate (Seagar et al.
2007, p. 1181). A total of 49 projections
were created using the 19 models and
all but three predicted a shift to
increasing aridity (dryness) in the
Southwest as early as 2021-2040 (Seagar
et al. 2007, p. 1181).
Evaluation of Information
In consideration of the above, we find
that the petition and information in our
files provide substantial information to
indicate that OHV use, altered fire
regimes, roads, and effects from
prolonged drought, exacerbated by
climate change, may be threats to the
Sonoran desert tortoise.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Finding
On the basis of our determination
under section 4 of the Act and our
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 27, 2009
Jkt 217001
evaluation of the five factors, we have
determined that the petition presents
substantial information indicating that
listing the Sonoran population of desert
tortoise may be warranted.
The petitioners presented substantial
information indicating that the Sonoran
population of desert tortoise may be
discrete and significant and, therefore,
may be a listable entity (DPS) under the
Act. Further, the petitioners presented
substantial information that the Sonoran
population of desert tortoise may be
threatened by Factors A through E
throughout the entire range, with the
exception of Factor C where the
petitioners did not provide information
on disease or predation in Mexico, nor
did we have information in our files on
disease or predation of the Sonoran
desert tortoise in Mexico. Based on this
review and evaluation, we find that the
petition has presented substantial
scientific or commercial information
that listing the Sonoran population of
desert tortoise throughout its range in
the United States and Mexico as a DPS
may be warranted due to current and
future threats presented in our
discussion of the five listing factors. As
such, we are initiating a status review to
determine whether listing the Sonoran
desert tortoise under the Act is
warranted. We will issue a 12–month
finding as to whether any of the
petitioned actions are warranted. To
ensure that the status review is
comprehensive, we are soliciting
scientific and commercial information
regarding the Sonoran desert tortoise,
particularly with respect to its status
and threats in Mexico.
The ‘‘substantial information’’
standard for a 90–day finding differs
from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and
commercial data’’ standard that applies
to a status review to determine whether
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
a petitioned action is warranted. A 90–
day finding does not constitute a status
review under the Act. In a 12–month
finding, we will determine whether a
petitioned action is warranted after we
have completed a thorough status
review of the species, which is
conducted following a substantial 90–
day finding. Because the Act’s standards
for 90–day and 12–month findings are
different, as described above, a
substantial 90–day finding does not
mean that the 12–month finding will
result in a warranted finding.
The petitioners requested that critical
habitat be designated for this DPS. If we
determine in our 12–month finding that
listing the Sonoran population of desert
tortoise is warranted, we will address
the designation of critical habitat to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable at the time of the proposed
rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
is available, upon request, from the
Arizona Ecological Services Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Arizona
Ecological Services Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Dated: August 19, 2009.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E9–20835 Filed 8–27–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 166 (Friday, August 28, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44335-44344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20835]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2009-0032]
[92210-1117-0000-B4]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Sonoran Population of Desert Tortoise (Gopherus
agasizzii) as a Distinct Population Segment (DPS) With Critical Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 90-day
finding on a petition to list the Sonoran desert tortoise (Gopherus
agasizzii) as a distinct population segment (DPS) under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended, and designate critical habitat. On the
basis of our review of the petition and information readily available
in our files, we have determined that there is substantial information
indicating that the Sonoran
[[Page 44336]]
desert tortoise may meet the criteria of discreteness and significance
as defined by our policy on distinct vertebrate population segments.
Further, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing the Sonoran population
of the desert tortoise may be warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are initiating a status review of the
Sonoran population of the desert tortoise to determine if listing the
population is warranted. To ensure that the status review of the
Sonoran population of the desert tortoise is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial data and other information
regarding this population. At the conclusion of this review, we will
issue a 12-month finding to determine if the petitioned action is
warranted. We will make a determination on critical habitat for the
Sonoran population of the desert tortoise if we initiate a listing
action.
DATES: We made the finding announced in this document on August 28,
2009. To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request that
we receive information on or before October 27, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: [FWS-R2-ES-2009-0032]; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Information Solicited
section below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Drive, Suite
103, Phoenix, AZ 85021; by telephone 602-242-0210; or by facsimile 602-
242-2513. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-
877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating 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 scientific and commercial information, we are soliciting
information on the status of the Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise (Sonoran desert tortoise). We request information from the
public, other concerned governmental agencies, Native American Tribes,
the scientific community, industry, or any other interested parties
concerning the status of the Sonoran desert tortoise. We are seeking
information regarding:
(1) The historical and current status and distribution of the
Sonoran desert tortoise (particularly with respect to Mexico), its
biology and ecology, and ongoing conservation measures for the species
and its habitat;
(2) Information relating the importance of the Sonoran desert
tortoise population to the species as a whole;
(3) Information relevant to the factors that are the basis for
making a listing determination for a species under section 4(a) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), which are:
(a) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species' 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 and threats to the species or its habitat; and
(4) Information about any ongoing conservation measures for, or
threats to, the Sonoran desert tortoise and its habitat.
If we determine that listing the Sonoran desert tortoise is
warranted, it is our intent to propose critical habitat to the maximum
extent prudent and determinable at the time we would propose to list
the Sonoran desert tortoise. Therefore, with regard to areas within the
geographical range currently occupied by the Sonoran desert tortoise,
we also request data and information on what may constitute physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the Sonoran desert
tortoise, where these features are currently found, and whether any of
these features may require special management considerations or
protection. In addition, we request data and information regarding
whether there are areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
Sonoran desert tortoise that are essential to its conservation. Please
provide specific comments and information as to what, if any, critical
habitat should be proposed for designation if the Sonoran desert
tortoise is proposed for listing, and why such habitat meets the
requirements of the Act.
Please note that comments merely stating support for or opposition
to the action under consideration without providing supporting
information, although noted, will not be considered in making a
determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.'' Based on the status review, we will issue
a 12-month finding on the petition, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B)
of the Act.
You may submit your information concerning this finding by one of
the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding, will be available for
public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment,
during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Arizona Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
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 or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information contained in the petition, supporting information submitted
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90
days of receipt of the petition and publish our notice of this finding
promptly in the Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information
within the
[[Page 44337]]
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day 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)). If we find that substantial scientific
or commercial information was presented, we are required to promptly
commence a status review of the species.
On October 15, 2008, we received a petition dated October 9, 2008,
from WildEarth Gardians and Western Watersheds Project (petitioners)
requesting that the Sonoran population of the desert tortoise be listed
under the Act as a distinct population segment (DPS), as threatened or
endangered rangewide (in the United States and Mexico), and critical
habitat be designated. The petition clearly identified itself as such
and included the requisite identification information for the
petitioners, as required in 50 CFR 424.14(a). The petition contained
detailed information on the natural history, biology, current status,
and distribution of the Sonoran population of the desert tortoise. It
also contained information on what the petitioners reported as
potential threats to the Sonoran population of the desert tortoise,
such as livestock grazing, urbanization and development, mining,
international border patrol activities, illegal collection, inadequacy
of existing regulations, altered fire regimes, off-highway vehicle use,
drought, and climate change. In a November 26, 2008, letter to the
petitioners, we responded that we had reviewed the information
presented in the petition and determined that issuing an emergency
regulation temporarily listing the species as per section 4(b)(7) of
the Act was not warranted. We also stated that we intended to make our
finding on whether the petition presented substantial information that
the requested action may be warranted, to the maximum extent
practicable within 90 days of receipt of the petition, according to the
provisions of section 4(b)(3) of the Act.
Previous Federal Actions
Throughout this finding, we use ``Mojave'' to describe desert
tortoise populations north and west of the Colorado River, which is
consistent with the previous and current spelling of the common name in
Federal actions that have addressed this population. We use ``Mohave''
in the geographic context to remain consistent with its reference by
the U.S. Board of Geographic Names (e.g., Mohave Desert, Mohave
County). In addition, while we do not currently recognize the Sonoran
population of the desert tortoise as a unique taxonomic entity, for
ease of reference, we refer to the Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise as the ``Sonoran desert tortoise'' in this document.
On December 30, 1982, we published a notice of review which
determined the desert tortoise throughout its range in the United
States and Mexico to be a Category 2 Federal Candidate species (47 FR
58454); this was reaffirmed on September 18, 1985 (50 FR 37958).
Category 2 status was granted to species for which information in our
possession indicated that a proposed listing as threatened or
endangered was possibly appropriate, but for which sufficient data were
not available to make a determination of listing status under the Act.
On April 2, 1990, we issued a final rule designating the Mojave
population of the desert tortoise (occurring north and west of the
Colorado River) as a threatened species under the Act (55 FR 12178; see
final rule for a summary of previous actions regarding the Mojave
population of the desert tortoise). Currently, the Mojave population of
the desert tortoise is recognized as a DPS under the Act. As part of
that rulemaking, we designated any desert tortoise from the Sonoran
population as threatened when observed outside of its known range, due
to similarity of appearance under section 4(a) of the Act.
On December 5, 1996, we published a rule that discontinued the
practice of keeping a list of category 2 candidate species (61 FR
64481). Since that time, the Sonoran desert tortoise has had no Federal
Endangered Species Act status.
Species Information
The desert tortoise is a member of the Testudinidae family
(terrestrial tortoises) of turtles in the genus Gopherus (Rafinesque
1832), or gopher tortoises. Scientific nomenclature assigned to the
desert tortoise has undergone a series of changes since its initial
description by Cooper (1863) as Xerobates agassizii. The desert
tortoise was also once known as Scaptochelys agassizii (Crother et al.
2008, p. 70). Further information is available on classification of the
desert tortoise in Van Devender (2002b), Lamb and McLuckie (2002), and
McCord (2002).
The desert tortoise is recognized by its gray to orange-brown,
high, domed upper shell. The shell measures 8 to 15 inches (20 to 38
centimeters) in length (Service 2008, p. 4). Adult desert tortoises may
weigh 8 to 15 pounds (3.6 to 6.8 kilograms) (Service 2008, p. 4). Hind
limbs of the desert tortoise are stocky and elephantine in appearance
while the forelimbs are paddle-shaped and used for digging (Brennan and
Holycross 2006, p. 54). In the wild, desert tortoises have an average
lifespan of 35 years (Germano 1994).
The Sonoran desert tortoise is closely associated with rocky
bajadas (lower slopes of mountains) and hillsides, and, to a lesser
extent, flat areas (including incised washes between or adjacent to
flat terrain) (Riedle et al. 2008). Sonoran desert tortoises generally
occur at elevations ranging from 510 to 5,300 feet (155 to 1,615
meters) (Arizona Game and Fish Department 2001, p. 4).
In the United States, the Sonoran desert tortoise occurs within
Mohave desertscrub, Sonoran desertscrub, and semi-desert grassland
habitat (Germano et al. 1994; Van Devender 2002a; Brennan and Holycross
2006, p. 54). In Mexico, the Sonoran desert tortoise occurs in Sonoran
desertscrub and semi-desert grassland (Germano et al. 1994; Fritts and
Jennings 1994; Bury et al. 2002; Van Devender 2002a; Edwards et al.
2009, p. 8). The Sonoran desert tortoise may also occasionally occur in
the lower elevations of Madrean oak woodland (Germano et al. 1994;
Fritts and Jennings 1994; Bury et al. 2002; Van Devender 2002a).
Primarily herbivores, Sonoran desert tortoises consume a variety of
plant material in their diet (Van Devender et al. 2002).
Sonoran desert tortoises are largely inactive from mid-October to
late February or early March when they overwinter in constructed
burrows or rocky cavities or crevices (Averill-Murray 2000b). Sonoran
desert tortoises tend to use or construct burrows differently,
depending on habitat. Riedle et al. (2008) found that the availability
of adequate shelter sites strongly influenced Sonoran desert tortoise
densities.
Tortoise activity spikes in the spring, especially following
average or above-average winter precipitation that enhances annual
plant production (Averill-Murray 2000b). However, the peak activity for
the Sonoran desert tortoises occurs at the onset of the monsoon (summer
rainy season) in mid- to late-summer when annual and perennial plants
reach peak abundance and availability, and water sources become more
widely dispersed across the landscape (Averill-Murray 2000b). During
the hot and dry late-spring/early-summer season, Sonoran desert
tortoises are less active or may become entirely dormant until the
onset of the monsoon (Averill-Murray 2000b).
The monsoon also marks the height of social interaction and
reproductive behaviors for the Sonoran desert tortoise. During this
time, female
[[Page 44338]]
Sonoran desert tortoises lay their eggs, with an average clutch size of
5 (Averill-Murray and Klug 2000). Hatchling Sonoran desert tortoises
will emerge from the nest site (burrow) in late summer or they may
overwinter, emerging the following spring (Wilson et al. 1999; Averill-
Murray 2000b). Sonoran desert tortoises reach sexual maturity at
approximately 10 to 12 years of age (Averill-Murray 2000b).
Desert tortoises are distributed from California, Nevada, Utah, and
Arizona in the United States, south through the Mexican states of
Sonora and Sinaloa. The specific distribution of desert tortoise is
likely determined by habitat and climatic characteristics (e.g.,
vegetation community (food), soil and substrate characteristics
(shelter), precipitation pattern (water availability)) within the
appropriate elevation range. The distribution of the Sonoran desert
tortoise in the United States is considered to be east and south of the
Colorado River, extending south and east from northwestern Mohave
County in Arizona (Germano et al. 1994; Van Devender 2002a, Brennan and
Holycross 2006, p. 54), covering roughly the western portion of the
state. The distribution in the United States is likely bounded to the
northeast and east by habitat changes imposed by the Mogollon Rim. In
Mexico, the distribution of the Sonoran desert tortoise extends from
the International Border of Sonora and Arizona, south to the vicinity
of Guaymas, north of the Yaqui River, in southern Sonora (Germano et
al. 1994; Fritts and Jennings 1994; Bury et al. 2002; Van Devender
2002a; Edwards et al. 2009, pp. 7-8), covering approximately the
western half of the state of Sonora from the Gulf of California coast
east roughly to the transition to unsuitable woodland and conifer
forest areas in the higher elevations of the Sierra Madre Occidental.
The Mojave and Sinaloan populations of desert tortoises represent two
additional populations of this species recognized in the literature
(Lamb and McLuckie 2002). The Mojave population, listed as threatened
in 1990, includes those populations that occur north and west of the
Colorado River in southern California, southern Nevada, southwestern
Utah, and extreme northwestern Arizona; and the Sinaloan population is
considered to be generally distributed along and within the western
face of the Sierra Madre Occidental of central Sonora south into the
border region between Sonora and Sinaloa at the extreme southern end of
the species' range (Lamb and McLuckie 2002). Genotypes (genetic makeup
of an organism) differ significantly between populations (Lamb and
McLuckie 2002).
Distinct Population Segment
Under section 3(15) of the Act, we may consider for listing any
species, subspecies, or, for vertebrates, any DPS of these taxa. In
determining whether an entity constitutes a DPS, and is therefore
listable under the Act, we follow the Policy Regarding the Recognition
of Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments Under the Endangered Species
Act (DPS Policy) (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996). Under our DPS Policy,
three elements are considered in a decision regarding the status of a
possible DPS: (1) the discreteness of the population segment in
relation to the remainder of the taxon; (2) the significance of the
population segment to the taxon to which it belongs; and (3) the
population segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's
standards for listing (i.e., whether the population segment, when
treated as if it were a species, is endangered or threatened) (61 FR
4722, February 7, 1996). The first two elements are used to determine
if the population segments constitutes a valid DPS. If it does, then
the third element is used to consider whether such DPS warrants
listing. In this section, we will consider the first two criteria
(discreteness and significance) to determine if the Sonoran desert
tortoise may be a valid DPS (i.e., a valid listable entity). Our policy
further recognizes it may be appropriate to assign different
classifications (i.e. threatened or endangered) to different DPSs of
the same vertebrate taxon (61 FR 4721).
The petitioners requested we examine the Sonoran desert tortoise as
a DPS. The information discussed below was presented by the
petitioners, unless otherwise noted.
The petitioned DPS includes those populations that occur east and
south of the Colorado River, south to the biogeographical boundary of
the Yaqui River in southern Sonora, Mexico. In making this delineation
for the petitioned DPS, the petitioners considered biogeographic
isolation, ecological divergence, morphological and physiological
characteristics, and genetic polymorphisms (genetic material occurring
in multiple forms or configurations).
The petitioners discuss a population of desert tortoise with the
``Mojave'' genotype (i.e., having similar genetic characteristics to
the those of the Mojave DPS of desert tortoise) which occurs in the
Black Mountains of Mohave County, Arizona (isolated from the threatened
Mojave DPS that occurs north and west of the Colorado River), and are
seeking the inclusion of that population within the petitioned DPS
because it does not currently have protection under the Act. We will
evaluate this anomalous situation further in our 12-month finding.
Discreteness
Under the DPS Policy, a population segment of a vertebrate species
may be considered discrete if it satisfies either one of the following
two conditions: (1) it is markedly separated from other populations of
the same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological,
or behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or
morphological discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation; or
(2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within
which significant differences in control of exploitation, management of
habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist (61 FR
4722, February 7, 1996).
Information Provided in the Petition on Discreteness
The petitioners claim that the Sonoran population is discrete from
the Mojave and Sinaloan populations due to differences in habitat use,
reproduction strategies, physical characteristics, and genotype. The
petitioners claim that the Colorado (United States) and Yaqui (Sonora,
Mexico) Rivers act as biogeographical barriers to movement of tortoises
between the Mojave and Sonoran populations, and between the Sonoran and
Sinaloan populations, respectively. In view of this biogeographical
isolation, the petitioners claim that significant ecological divergence
has occurred between the Mojave and Sonoran populations of desert
tortoise, largely due to significant differences in geology, vegetation
types, and precipitation cycles where the populations are distributed.
Desert tortoises in the Mojave population are most dense in the
intermountain valleys that have soil types favorable to the
construction of large, deep burrows (Bury et al. 1994). However,
Sonoran desert tortoises reach maximum densities in the rocky bajadas
and hillsides of higher slope, with reduced densities in the
intermountain valleys (Averill-Murray et al. 2002b). The petitioners
state that differences in precipitation cycle have led to notable
differences in seasonal activity patterns between desert tortoises that
occur in the Sonoran and Mojave deserts. Information in our files
confirms these assertions. Specifically, analyzing the genetic
population structure among desert tortoise populations in Mexico,
[[Page 44339]]
Edwards et al. (2009, pp. 7-8) suggest the Sinaloan population of
desert tortoise uses Sinaloan thornscrub and tropical deciduous forest
habitats (which are created by higher precipitation levels). However,
some level of gradation of the Sonoran and Sinaloan genotypes may occur
in the vegetative transition zone between Plains of Sonora subdivision
of Sonoran desertscrub and Sinaloan thornscrub habitats of central
Sonora (Edwards et al. 2009, p. 8).
Differences in reproduction strategies between the Sonoran and
Mojave populations of desert tortoises were also discussed in the
petition. In the Mojave population of desert tortoises, females lay up
to three clutches of eggs per year with larger clutch sizes, earlier in
the year (April to mid-July) while those in the Sonoran population lay
one clutch per year of smaller size, later in the year (June through
August) (Wallis et al. 1999; Averill-Murray et al. 2002a). These
differences led Averill-Murray (2002b) and Henen (1997) to hypothesize
that Sonoran desert tortoises invest all reproductive effort into a
single clutch which hatches at the peak of forage and water
availability and abundance, whereas desert tortoises in the Mojave
population (maturing at younger ages and at smaller body sizes), have
higher clutch numbers to account for higher mortality. Comparative
reproduction strategies of the Sinaloan population of the desert
tortoise were not discussed in the petition.
The petitioners claim morphological and physiological
characteristics, in particular, shell characteristics, differ between
the Sonoran and Mojave populations of desert tortoises. Germano (1993)
found that desert tortoise shells in the Sonoran population are
narrower than those in the Mojave population, were less domed, and
possessed shorter gular shields (plates projecting forward from the
lower shell). Desert tortoises in the Sonoran population also have a
smaller plastron (lower shell) and a broader carapace (upper shell)
(McLuckie et al. 1999). The petitioners did not provide information on
the potential differences in morphological and physiological characters
between the Sonoran and Sinaloan populations of desert tortoises.
Lastly, the petitioners rely on genetic polymorphisms (that is,
genetic material occurring in multiple forms) as a primary basis to
consider the Mojave, Sonoran, and Sinaloan populations of desert
tortoises as evolutionarily significant units. The Mojave population of
desert tortoise exhibits three related genotypes but the Sonoran desert
tortoise possesses a single genotype that is closely associated with
Arizona upland and lower Colorado River subdivisions of Sonoran
desertscrub habitat where the species is generally found (Lamb et al.
1989; Lamb and McLuckie 2002). Lamb and McLuckie (2002) suggest that
regional inundation of the inland area from Yuma, Arizona, north to the
Nevada border during the Miocene Epoch correlates with a single
maternal ancestor of the Mojave population of desert tortoises, which
would have presented significant isolation long enough to allow such
genetic divergence between these two populations.
Evaluation of Discreteness
The population of desert tortoises in the Black Mountains of Mohave
County, Arizona, which possess a uniquely Mojavean genotype, present an
anomaly in the argument for genetic divergence as a result of regional
inundation and subsequent isolation. McLuckie et al. (1999) suggest
three possible hypotheses that may have led to the occurrence of the
Mojave genotype east of the Colorado River: (1) active dispersal from
north of the Miocene Epoch inundation; (2) river meander and subsequent
geomorphological features assisted in allowing tortoises to cross the
river over time; and (3) aboriginal human transport across the river
for food stock, ritualistic or ceremonial use, or for medicinal uses
which may have resulted in released animals or escapes.
The genetic differentiation between the entire Mojave and Sonoran
populations of the desert tortoise has led some researchers to
hypothesize that the two populations may represent different species
entirely (Berry et al. 2002; Murphy et al. 2007). The Sinaloan
population of desert tortoise, has been documented to have a 4.2
percent divergence in genotype from the Sonoran desert tortoise, and a
5.1 percent divergence in genotype from the Mojave population of desert
tortoise (Lamb and McLuckie 2002). Lamb and McLuckie (2002) stated,
``Given their geographic distribution, genealogical depth, and
concordant suite of characters, the Mohave, Sonoran, and Sinaloan
tortoise assemblages clearly qualify as [evolutionarily significant
units].''
We have reviewed the information presented in the petition, and
have evaluated the information in accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). On
the basis of our review, we find that the petition provided substantial
information indicating that the Sonoran population of the desert
tortoise as it occurs east and south of the Colorado River, south to
the Yaqui River, in Sonora, Mexico, may be discrete from the Mojave and
Sinaloan desert tortoise populations. We base this conclusion on
ecological (habitat use), physiological (reproductive capacity),
morphological (shell dimensions), and behavioral (seasonal activity
patterns) differences that are further supported by analysis of genetic
polymorphisms that concluded significant divergence has occurred among
the Mojave, Sonoran, and Sinaloan populations of the desert tortoise
over time.
Significance
Under our DPS Policy, in addition to our consideration that a
population segment is discrete, we consider its biological and
ecological significance to the taxon to which it belongs. This
consideration may include, but is not limited to: (1) evidence of the
persistence of the discrete population segment in an ecological setting
that is unique or unusual for the taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon; (3) evidence that the population segment represents the only
surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant
elsewhere as an introduced population outside its historical range; and
(4) evidence that the discrete population segment differs markedly from
other populations of the species in its genetic characteristics (61 FR
4721; February 7, 1996).
Information Provided in the Petition on Significance
The current range of the Sonoran desert tortoise, as described in
the discussion above pertaining to discreteness, represents several
hundred miles or kilometers of occupied habitat spanning across an
International Border. The petition contends that this population
segment is confined by two large perennial rivers; the Colorado River
in its northern periphery, which separates the Mojave and Sonoran
populations of desert tortoises, and the Yaqui River at its southern
periphery, which separates the Sonoran and Sinaloan populations of the
desert tortoise. These two rivers represent significant biogeographical
barriers to genetic exchange between adjacent population segments and,
therefore, preclude recolonization of this expanse of habitat from
adjacent populations should the Sonoran desert tortoise become
extirpated. As a result, the loss of the Sonoran desert tortoise would
constitute a significant gap of several hundred miles or kilometers in
the range between the Mojave and Sinaloan populations of desert
tortoises.
[[Page 44340]]
Evaluation of Significance
We have reviewed the information presented in the petition, and
have evaluated the information in accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). On
the basis of our review, we find that the petition provided substantial
information indicating that the Sonoran desert tortoise may be
significant to the continued existence of the taxon. We base this
conclusion on the large geographic range of the species, which may be
significant to the taxon as a whole, a gap of several hundred miles or
kilometers that would result from the loss of the Sonoran population,
which would effectively bisect the species' range, and the genetic
divergence between the three populations. These factors indicate that
the loss of the Sonoran population may result in a significant gap in
the range of the taxon that could not be filled over time due to
presence of biogeographical barriers to movement.
DPS Conclusion
We have reviewed the information presented in the petition, and
have evaluated the information in accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). In
a 90-day finding, the question is whether a petition presents
substantial information that the petitioned action may be warranted.
Based on our review, we find that the petition, supported by
information in our files, presents substantial scientific or commercial
information to demonstrate that the Sonoran population of desert
tortoise may be discrete from the Mojave and Sinaloan populations and
that the Sonoran population may be significant to the taxon as a whole.
As a result, we have determined that the Sonoran population of desert
tortoise may be a DPS. Thus, the Sonoran population of desert tortoise
may be a listable entity under the Act.
Five-Factor Evaluation
We next evaluated the level of threat to the potential DPS based on
the five listing factors established by the Act. We thus proceeded with
an evaluation of information presented in the petition, as well as
information in our files, to determine whether there is substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing this
population may be warranted.
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424, set forth the procedures for adding species
to the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A
species, subspecies, or distinct population segment of vertebrate taxa
may be determined to be endangered or threatened due to one or more of
the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of
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.
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information
regarding the Sonoran desert tortoise, as presented in the petition and
other information available in our files, is substantial, thereby
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Our evaluation
of this information is presented below. The information discussed below
was presented by the petitioners, unless otherwise noted.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
the Species' Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that habitat occupied by the Sonoran desert
tortoise is threatened by livestock grazing, urbanization and
development, mining, and international border patrol activities.
The petitioners claim that livestock grazing in occupied habitat
adversely affects the Sonoran desert tortoise in a number of ways
including competition for forage, vegetative trampling, alteration of
plant community structure, introducing or enhancing the establishment
of nonnative plant species, altering fire ecology, damaging burrows and
cover sites, and altering tortoise behavior (Bostick 1990; Fleischner
1994; Oldemyer 1994; Averill-Murray 2000b; Kazmaier et al. 2001;
Boarman 2002; Esque et al. 2002). Over 60 percent of habitat occupied
by the Sonoran desert tortoise occurs on federally managed land, the
majority of that on lands managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management
(BLM). The petitioners claim that on BLM land livestock grazing occurs
on 78 percent (on 273 allotments) of potentially occupied habitats for
the Sonoran desert tortoise. The petitioners also state that on U.S.
Forest Service lands, livestock grazing occurs on 86 percent of
potentially occupied habitat for the Sonoran desert tortoise. The
percentage of Sonoran desert tortoise habitat used for livestock
grazing on State, private, or tribal lands is not identified in the
petition.
The petitioners claim that the Sonoran desert tortoise and its
habitat are harmed by urbanization and development in approximately 29
percent of its occupied range in the United States. The petitioners
state that urbanization and development threaten the Sonoran desert
tortoise and its habitat. Tortoise habitat within developing areas may
be permanently lost or degraded, while patterns of development may
fragment habitat, restrict gene flow, and hamper recolonization of
formerly occupied habitat.
The human population in Arizona increased by 394 percent from 1960
to 2000; Arizona is the second-fastest growing State in terms of human
population (Social Science Data Analysis Network 2000, p. 1). In
particular, certain counties with habitat occupied by the Sonoran
desert tortoise have experienced explosive human population growth over
this timeframe: Maricopa (463 percent); Yavapai (579 percent); and
Mohave (2,004 percent) (Social Science Data Analysis Network 2000). The
petition did not specifically discuss the threat of urbanization and
development in occupied habitat for the Sonoran desert tortoise in
Mexico; however, information in our files suggests urbanization and
development might affect the Sonoran desert tortoise there as well.
Information in our files indicates that Mexico's human population grew
700 percent from 1910 to 2000 (Miller et al. 2005, p. 60). Demand from
a growing human population has spurred the need for more agricultural
development, according to information from our files (Contreras
Balderas and Lozano 1994, p. 384; va Linda et al. 1997, p. 316).
The petitioners provided evidence that mining activities may also
be a threat to the Sonoran desert tortoise and its habitat. Mining
activities occur on Federal and private lands but are stated to be the
most pervasive on BLM lands, with 4,670 mining claims occurring in
habitat occupied by the Sonoran desert tortoise. As of 2003, 1,096 of
these claims remained active and 3,574 had been closed, according to
the petitioners. The petitioners state that mining activities (both
small- and large-scale) adversely affect the Sonoran desert tortoise
through habitat fragmentation, loss, and degradation; introduction of
contaminants and fugitive dust (dust that cannot be attributed to a
single point of origin, such as a smokestack); off-road travel
associated with mining activities or roads created for said activities;
and entrapment of tortoises in mine spoil
[[Page 44341]]
heaps (Averill-Murray 2000b; Woodman et al. 2001, 2004; Boarman 2002).
Occupied habitat for the Sonoran desert tortoise occurs along the
International Border in Yuma, Pima, and Santa Cruz counties in Arizona.
The petitioners state that patrol activities on the international
border present threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise and its habitat.
Specifically, the petitioners state that border patrol activities
threaten the Sonoran desert tortoise and its habitat through road
mortality, and loss or degradation of occupied habitat. In particular,
the petitioners claim that the recently constructed border fence
fragments the habitat of Sonoran desert tortoise populations in Mexico
and the United States, and also directly and indirectly threatens the
Sonoran desert tortoise habitat from construction and maintenance
activities associated with the border fence.
Evaluation of Information
In consideration of the threats summarized above and discussed in
the petition, we find that the petition provides substantial
information that listing the Sonoran desert tortoise due to the present
or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat
or range may be warranted.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition claims that the Sonoran desert tortoise is threatened
by poaching, illegal collection for use as pets, shooting, and
vandalism (physical harassment or disturbance of the animals)
throughout its range in the United States and Mexico. Illegal
collection of desert tortoises for food, for commercial trade, and as
pets has been documented (Fritts and Jennings 1994, Averill-Murray
2000b; Bury et al. 2002). Information in our files suggests that the
simple act of handling a Sonoran desert tortoise may cause an
individual tortoise to void the contents of its bladder in defense.
This loss of water may jeopardize its life (Averill-Murray 2002, p.
434; Boarman 2002). Shooting and vandalism of Sonoran desert tortoises
has been reported in Howland and Rorabaugh (2002) and Woodman et al.
(2002).
Evaluation of Information
In our evaluation of the petition, we find that the petitioners
provided substantial information that listing the Sonoran desert
tortoise due to overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes may be warranted.
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners cite upper respiratory tract disease (URTD) as a
threat to the Sonoran desert tortoise and reference the significant
threat URTD is, and has been, for the Mojave population; a primary
reason that population was listed as threatened in 1990. This disease
is irreversible and fatal once acquired. Two species of Mycoplasma (a
genus of small parasitic bacteria that lack cell walls and can survive
without oxygen), Mycoplasma agassizii and M. testudineum, are known to
cause URTD in desert tortoises and are easily transmitted between
individual tortoises from casual contact (Brown et al. 1999; Wendland
et al. 2007). Appendix 2 of the petition summarizes disease incidence
reports within Sonoran desert tortoise populations. The petitioners
state that Sonoran desert tortoises have tested positive for one or
both of these antibodies at Saguaro National Park, and in the Ragged
Top, Hualapai, Harcuvar, Little Shipp, and Sand Tank mountains among
other locations. Dickinson et al. (2002) suspected that URTD may not be
as serious a threat to the Sonoran population of desert tortoises as it
has been for the Mojave population because tortoises in the Sonoran
population do not occur in as high of densities as those in the Mojave
and because Sonoran populations are more isolated from one another. In
addition, the Sonoran population can take advantage of a bimodal
precipitation cycle (two distinct rainy seasons). This offers
additional opportunities for rehydration, lessening physiological
stress, and, therefore, lessening susceptibility to the disease.
In addition to URTD, cutaneous dyskeratosis (shell disease) has
been observed in numerous Sonoran desert populations (Appendix 2 of the
petition). The petitioners claim that, while no serious deleterious
effects of the disease have been observed in affected tortoises, Homer
et al. (2001) indicated higher mortality rates in some populations
where the disease has been documented. Lastly, the petitioners state
that additional pathogens have been noted in free-ranging Sonoran
desert tortoises including Pasteurella sp., Streptococcus sp.,
Staphylococcus sp., herpesvirus, Pseudomonas sp., and Salmonella sp.
and that these diseases may be correlated with physiological stress
induced by habitat destruction and modification discussed above in
Factor A (Pettan-Brewer et al. 1996; Dickinson et al. 2001).
There are numerous natural predators of the Sonoran desert
tortoise, including the jaguar (Panthera onca) and mountain lion (Felis
concolor) (the only predators known to be able to break an adult
tortoise's shell), coyote (Canis latrans), common raven (Corvus corax),
kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), bobcat (Lynx rufus), gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus), badger (Taxidea taxus), Gila monster (Heloderma
suspectum), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and other raptors, greater
roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus), coachwhip (Coluber flagellum),
gophersnake (Pituophis melanoleucus), and kingsnake (Lampropeltis
getula) (Averill-Murray et al. 2002b). The petitioners state that urban
encroachment within the distribution of the Sonoran desert tortoise has
created, or threatens to create, elevated levels of unnatural
predation, mainly by ravens, coyotes, and feral domestic dogs. As
explained below, petitioners claim these predators have benefitted, or
been ``subsidized,'' by human activities within the wild-urban
interface areas.
Ravens can effectively prey on juvenile tortoises because their
shells have not yet hardened (particularly the plastron) and the ravens
are able to pierce the shells (Boarman 2002). Ravens, noted as a
significant threat to desert tortoises in the Mojave population, have
increased their numbers 14-fold within Arizona (Appendix 3 of the
petition; Boarman and Kristen 2008). The petitioners suggest that
increases in the number of ravens within the Sonoran desert may be
linked to increased availability of food and water resources at
landfills, rural and urban developments, along heavily traveled roads,
and at agricultural areas in particular dairies. These land uses were
also suspected by the petitioners to result in increased predation of
Sonoran desert tortoises from coyotes and feral dogs; the latter being
documented at 4 of 17 Sonoran desert tortoise study plots (Appendix 1
of the petition).
Evaluation of Information
In our evaluation of the petition, we find that the petitioners
provide substantial information that listing the Sonoran desert
tortoise due to the incidence of disease and high predation levels may
be warranted.
[[Page 44342]]
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
In 1988, the Sonoran and Mojave populations of the desert tortoise
were closed to collection in Arizona by the Arizona Game and Fish
Department, except as authorized under their scientific collecting
permit program. This status means that it is illegal to kill or capture
desert tortoises from the wild (unless under a special permit).
Possession for trade, sale, or other commercial purposes is prohibited
(Howland and Rorabaugh 2002). Prior to 1988, the Arizona Game and Fish
Department allowed the possession of one lawfully obtained tortoise per
person, which likely contributed to their popularity as pets (Averill-
Murray 2000b). The Arizona Game and Fish Department has developed a
draft Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: 2005-2015, in which
the Sonoran desert tortoise has been identified as a Species of
Greatest Conservation Need for which immediate conservation is
necessary (Tier 1b under the Vulnerable category) (Arizona Game and
Fish Department 2006a, pp. 485-487; 2006b, p. 4). The Arizona Game and
Fish Department has been a significant contributor in the conservation
and management of the Sonoran desert tortoise, producing many documents
for public education, administering an adoption program for individual
Sonoran desert tortoises that cannot be returned to the wild, and
conducting or funding monitoring and research on wild Sonoran desert
tortoise populations (Arizona Game and Fish Department 1990, 1996,
2000, and 2004; Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team 1996, 1997,
and 2000; Averill-Murray 2000).
The Sonoran desert tortoise does not currently have special status
under the Endangered Species Act. The desert tortoise is included in
Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and a permit is required for the export
of tortoises (Howland and Rorabaugh 2002).
Several Federal agencies have management authority for Sonoran
desert tortoise habitat, including the BLM, the National Park Service,
the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.
Department of Defense, and the Service. Significant land use
protections are afforded the Sonoran desert tortoise on National Park
Service lands and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges, in particular
where they occur adjacent to U.S. Department of Defense lands such as
the Barry M. Goldwater Range and the Yuma Proving Grounds, because of
the relatively large amounts of primarily undisturbed habitat within
the boundary zone between these managed lands.
The Sonoran desert tortoise is considered a ``sensitive species''
by the BLM. In 1988, the BLM adopted a rangewide management strategy
for desert tortoise habitat (BLM 1988; Howland and Rorabaugh 2002).
Subsequently, habitat for the Mojave and Sonoran populations of desert
tortoise was categorized into one of three categories: Category one
being the highest quality; Category three, the lowest. In 1991, the
BLM, the Service, and state wildlife agencies (Arizona, Nevada, Utah,
and California) developed a policy whereby persons who disturbed
occupied habitat were required to pay monetary compensation (usually in
the form of land acquisition). The monetary compensation was weighted
using the BLM's habitat categorization criteria. Mitigation ratios
ranged from 1:1 (acres protected: acres disturbed) for category three
habitat, to 6:1 for category one habitat (Howland and Rorabaugh 2002).
The petitioners also cite numerous reports, management strategies, and
formal actions taken by the BLM with regard to management of the
Sonoran desert tortoise, but conclude that, based on their review,
these measures may be insufficient to adequately protect the Sonoran
desert tortoise on BLM lands.
The Sonoran desert tortoise occurs on both the Tonto and Coronado
National Forests. The Sonoran desert tortoise is on the Regional
Forester's Sensitive Species List, which means it is considered in
land-management decisions. The petitioners claim that, despite this
recognition, threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise continue to occur
within these National Forests and that potential protections, such as
those afforded under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4321-4327), have failed to come to fruition, particularly with respect
to livestock grazing (see Table 6, p. 55 of the petition).
There are currently 10 Native American reservations within Arizona
that contain known or potential Sonoran desert tortoise habitat: Fort
Mojave Indian Tribe, Colorado River Indian Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Fort
McDowell Yavapai Nation, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community,
Gila River Indian Community, Ak Chin, Tohono O'odham Nation, Pasqua
Yaqui Tribe, and San Carlos Apache Tribe, although the status of
populations on these reservations has not been established (Averill-
Murray 2000b). The petitioners state that historically no reservations
conducted surveys or performed active management for the Sonoran desert
tortoise or its habitat. However, the petitioners note that recently
the Tohono O'odham Nation developed the Wildlife and Vegetation
Management Program and now has oversight over the desert tortoise on
their land. This program authorizes surveys for Sonoran desert tortoise
and the establishment of monitoring plots, but does not provide funding
to implement these activities (Averill-Murray 2000b). The petitioners
also suggest that many Native American tribes have a historical
relationship with desert tortoises that is of important cultural and
spiritual significance, which may provide added protection of the
species on their lands (Nabhan 2002).
On State lands, the Arizona State Land Department manages occupied
Sonoran desert tortoise habitat, according to the petition, with the
goal of ``maximizing revenue to benefit education, health and penal
institutions,'' and works cooperatively with the Arizona Game and Fish
Department in management of Sonoran desert tortoises (Averill-Murray
2000b). Specifically, the petitioners state that the Arizona Game and
Fish Department ``recommends mitigation measures for tortoise impacts
for which it is consulted ... (and) comments on State land projects
related to urban planning, land sales and exchanges, rights of way, and
commercial leases,'' but these recommendations are not binding
(Averill-Murray 2000b).
The petition also notes that Pima County has considered the Sonoran
desert tortoise in its habitat conservation planning by acknowledging
that populations are decreasing in Pima County. However, Pima County
offers few specific protections for the species.
In Mexico, the Secretaria de Deserrollo Social lists both the
Sonoran and Sinaloan populations of the desert tortoise as threatened
(Secretaria de Deserrollo 2008, p. 99). Populations of the Sonoran
desert tortoise in Mexico are reportedly in decline. Factors believed
to contribute to this decline are related to lack of resources for
enforcement and include habitat destruction or modification, capture of
tortoises for food or pets, and predation by feral dogs (particularly
in areas adjacent to settlements or urban areas) (Fritts and Jennings
1994; Bury et al. 2002).
In the United States, as part of a multi-agency collaborative
project, the Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise
[[Page 44343]]
Team was formed in 1985 to coordinate research and management of
Sonoran desert tortoise populations in Arizona. Participating agencies
in the Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team include the Arizona
Game and Fish Department, Arizona State Lands Department, the U.S.
Forest Service, the BLM, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Service, the National Park Service, the
U.S. Geological Survey, and several U.S. Department of Defense military
reservations (Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team 1996). Since its
inception, the Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team has
collaborated in the development of numerous publically available
documents addressing conservation of the Sonoran desert tortoise
(Averill-Murray 2000a, 2000b; Arizona Game and Fish Department 2007a,
2007b; Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team 2008).
The Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team's Memorandum of
Understanding, signed in 1995, established specific objectives for the
team including: (1) ensuring the survival of the species; (2)
preventing loss of the species; and (3) improving the quality of
Sonoran desert tortoise habitat in Arizona, with the team to function
as an advocate for the Sonoran desert tortoise (Arizona Interagency
Desert Tortoise Team 1996). A management plan for the Sonoran desert
tortoise completed in 1996 called for improved monitoring protocols,
the implementation of threat-minimization activities, and the creation
of Sonoran Desert Management Areas for conservation of the Sonoran
desert tortoise (Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team 1996).
However, the petitioners claim that the 1996 plan: (1) lacked
meaningful goals and objectives; (2) lacked political willpower without
legal protection for the Sonoran desert tortoise; (3) failed to
designate Sonoran Desert Management Areas; and (4) was poorly funded,
which hampered implementation of threat minimization activities
outlined in the plan. These shortcomings in the 1996 plan were
collectively recognized by the Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise Team
members who in 2002 reconvened to initiate the development of a revised
plan in the form of a State Conservation Agreement for the Sonoran
desert tortoise. The State Conservation Agreement, when finalized, is
expected to: (1) mandate more practical conservation recommendations;
(2) garner a higher level of commitment and responsibility from its
signatories; (3) set measurable goals and objectives; and (4) establish
Key Habitat Areas on public lands where management strategies for the
Sonoran desert tortoise will focus.
Evaluation of Information
There are significant protections in place with respect to
management for the Sonoran desert tortoise on lands managed by the
Service, National Park Service, and to a lesser degree, lands managed
by the U.S. Department of Defense. The Arizona Interagency Desert
Tortoise Team has also provided technical expertise and guided habitat-
management decisions of participating agencies with marginal success.
Despite these protections, we conclude that the petition and
information in our files present substantial information that existing
regulatory mechanisms may be inadequate to prevent declines of the
Sonoran desert tortoise, particularly on lands managed as ``multiple-
use'' such as U.S. Forest Service, BLM, and the Arizona State Land
Department, where threats continue to occur. An additional concern is
the limited implementation of recommendations of the Arizona
Interagency Desert Tortoise Team's 1996 management plan.
In our evaluation of the petition, we find that the petitioners
provided substantial information that listing the Sonoran desert
tortoise due to the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms may be
warranted.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that off-highway vehicle (OHV) use,
alteration of fire frequency in the Sonoran Desert resulting from
nonnative plant invasion, mortality on roads, drought, and climate
change are among additional threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise. The
petitioners claim that OHV use has increased significantly on public
lands within the distribution of the Sonoran desert tortoise,
especially on U.S. Forest Service and BLM lands, and particularly in
incised washes, which are important habitat for the Sonoran desert
tortoise (Averill-Murray 2000b; Averill-Murray and Averill-Murray 2002;
Riedle et al. 2008). We have information in our files that indicates
the use of OHVs has grown considerably in Arizona. For example, as of
2007, 385,000 OHVs were registered in Arizona (a 350-percent increase
since 1998) and 1.7 million people (29 percent of Arizona's population)
engaged in off-road activity from 2005-2007 (Sacco 2007). Over half of
OHV users reported that merely driving off-road was their primary
activity, versus using the OHV for the purpose of seeking a destination
to hunt, fish, or hike (Sacco 2007). Specific threats cited by the
petitioners to the Sonoran desert tortoise or its habitat from OHV use
include crushing tortoises, collapsing occupied and unoccupied burrows,
changes in plant abundance and species composition, reduced habitat
connectivity, soil compaction, soil erosion, reduced water
infiltration, higher soil temperatures, and increased fire-starts
(Boarman 2002; Ouren et al. 2007, pp. 6-7, 11, 16). The petitioners
further claims that OHV use causes destruction of cryptogamic soils,
which are soils with crusts formed by an association of algae, mosses,
and fungi, which stabilize desert soil, retain moisture, and protect
germinating seeds (Boarman 2002, pp. 46-47; Ouren et al. 2007, pp. 7-
8).
Nonnative plant species such as Mediterranean splitgrass (Schismus
barbatus), red brome (Brombus rubens), and African buffelgrass
(Pennisetum cilare) have significantly degraded Sonoran desert tortoise
habitat by out-competing more nutritional, native plant species and
altering the frequency and magnitude of wildfires in many areas within
its distribution (Howland and Rorabaugh 2002). The petitioners state
that in addition to injury and mortality of Sonoran desert tortoises,
wildfire within occupied habitat is expected to result in the complete
conversion of desertscrub to grasslands at higher elevations and to
barren landscapes at lower elevations (Esque et al. 2002). Pennisetum
cilare poses unique problems for the Sonoran desert tortoise in Sonora,
Mexico, because Sonoran desertscrub is actively cleared in favor of
planting P. cilare as forage for livestock; P. cilare disperses
naturally from these sites into adjacent habitat where it self-
perpetuates, and is ``likely to dominate the entire area'' (Bury et al.
2002).
The petitioners cite several adverse effects to the Sonoran desert
tortoise from roads. Among these threats were direct mortality, injury,
facilitation of increased raven populations, increased roadside
foraging by tortoises (as a result of increased plant growth from
precipitation runoff), population fragmentation, and contamination of
roadside habitat (Homer et al. 2001; Boarman 2002). Boarman and Kristin
(2008, Appendix 3 of the petition) states that roads are one of the
most prevalent threats in the study plots they reviewed.
Lastly, the petitioners claim that drought and climate change pose
additional threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise. Drought increases
the
[[Page 44344]]
physiological stress of desert tortoises and reduces reproductive rates
within populations because of reduced forage quality and abundance
(Averill-Murray and Klug 2000). The petitioners also state that the
effects of drought can act synergistically with other threats to the
Sonoran desert tortoise such as disease and habitat destruction or
modification. Increased magnitude and frequency of drought is expected
to occur as a result of climate change. Weiss and Overpeck (2005)
predict that the Sonoran Desert may be displaced in the south by
hotter, drier habitats and may expand to the north and to higher
elevations, displacing cooler, drier habitats. In our review of
available files, we find that Seagar et al. (2007, pp. 1181-1184)
analyzed 19 different computer models of differing variables to
estimate the future climatology of the southwestern United States and
northern Mexico in response to predictions of changing climatic
patterns. All but one of the 19 models predicted a drying trend within
the Southwest; one predicted a trend toward a wetter climate (Seagar et
al. 2007, p. 1181). A total of 49 projections were created using the 19
models and all but three predicted a shift to increasing aridity
(dryness) in the Southwest as early as 2021-2040 (Seagar et al. 2007,
p. 1181).
Evaluation of Information
In consideration of the above, we find that the petition and
information in our files provide substantial information to indicate
that OHV use, altered fire regimes, roads, and effects from prolonged
drought, exacerbated by climate change, may be threats to the Sonoran
desert tortoise.
Finding
On the basis of our determination under section 4 of the Act and
our evaluation of the five factors, we have determined that the
petition presents substantial information indicating that listing the
Sonoran population of desert tortoise may be warranted.
The petitioners presented substantial information indicating that
the Sonoran population of desert tortoise may be discrete and
significant and, therefore, may be a listable entity (DPS) under the
Act. Further, the petitioners presented substantial information that
the Sonoran population of desert tortoise may be threatened by Factors
A through E throughout the entire range, with the exception of Factor C
where the petitioners did not provide information on disease or
predation in Mexico, nor did we have information in our files on
disease or predation of the Sonoran desert tortoise in Mexico. Based on
this review and evaluation, we find that the petition has presented
substantial scientific or commercial information that listing the
Sonoran population of desert tortoise throughout its range in the
United States and Mexico as a DPS may be warranted due to current and
future threats presented in our discussion of the five listing factors.
As such, we are initiating a status review to determine whether listing
the Sonoran desert tortoise under the Act is warranted. We will issue a
12-month finding as to whether any of the petitioned actions are
warranted. To ensure that the status review is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial information regarding the Sonoran
desert tortoise, particularly with respect to its status and threats in
Mexico.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding
differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard
that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status
review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether
a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough
status review of the species, which is conducted following a
substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and
12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-
day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a
warranted findi