Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-day Finding on a Petition to List the Mohave Ground Squirrel as Endangered with Critical Habitat, 22063-22070 [2010-9377]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these
actions merely do not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
State law and the Clean Air Act. For that
reason, these actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
actions’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxides,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 14, 2010.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010–9753 Filed 4–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2010-0006]
[MO 92210-0-0008 B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90–day Finding on a
Petition to List the Mohave Ground
Squirrel as Endangered with Critical
Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90–day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90–day finding on a petition to list the
Mohave ground squirrel
(Xerospermophilus mohavensis) as an
endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Based on our review, we
find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel may be
warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are
initiating a status review of the species
to determine if listing the species is
warranted. To ensure that this status
review is comprehensive, we are
requesting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding
this species. Based on the status review,
we will issue a 12–month finding on the
petition, which will address whether
the petitioned action is warranted, as
provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
We will make a determination on
critical habitat for this species, which
was also requested in the petition, if and
when we initiate a listing action.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that we
receive information on or before June
28, 2010. After this date, you must
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22063
submit information directly to the
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section below). Please note that we may
not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the
date noted above.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for docket
FWS-R8-ES-2010-0006 and then follow
the instructions for submitting
comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R8ES-2010-0006; 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 information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael McCrary, Listing and Recovery
Coordinator, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2593 Portola Road, Suite B,
Ventura, CA 93003; telephone (805)
644-1766; facsimile (805) 644-3958. If
you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), 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 review the status
of the species (status review). For the
status review to be complete and based
on the best available scientific and
commercial information, we request
information on the Mohave ground
squirrel from government agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, and any other
interested parties. We seek information
on:
(1) The species’ biology, range, and
population trends, including:
(a) Habitat requirements for feeding,
breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range,
including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population
levels, and current and projected trends;
and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation
measures for the species, its habitat, or
both.
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
22064
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(2) Historical and current survey
information on the Mohave ground
squirrel, including survey methods and
design, time of year, weather
information, time of day, site selection
method, and descriptions of physical
characteristics of landscapes, soil, and
vegetation.
(3) The factors that are the basis for
making a listing determination for a
species under section 4(a) of the 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.
(4) Information on management
programs for the conservation of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
(5) Information on current or expected
future development within the range of
the Mohave ground squirrel, including
but not limited to: the extent or
magnitude of habitat loss, degradation,
or fragmentation from development for
energy, transportation, agriculture,
military training; land management
prescriptions; or recreation, and how
they may affect the conservation of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
(6) Information on the population
status of predators of the Mohave
ground squirrel, including information
on the occurrence and extent/severity of
predation by coyotes, house cats,
common ravens, domestic dogs, and
feral dogs on the Mohave ground
squirrel, and the effect of this predation
on the Mohave ground squirrel’s longterm survival.
(7) Information on morphological,
behavioral, genetic, or ecological
variability in the Mohave ground
squirrel, and any change in that
variability.
(8) Information on environmental
change within the range of the Mohave
ground squirrel.
(9) Information on the importance of
certain areas or populations to the longterm conservation of the Mohave ground
squirrel that may help us identify
potentially significant portions of the
species’ range. This may include
information that demonstrates the
following factors are important to a
portion of the Mohave ground squirrel’s
range:
(a) The quality, quantity, and
distribution of habitat relative to the
biological requirements of the species;
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
(b) The historical values of the habitat
to the species;
(c) The frequency of use of the habitat;
and
(d) The uniqueness or importance of
the habitat for other reasons, such as
breeding, feeding, seasonal movements,
wintering, or suitability for population
expansion, or for genetic diversity.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as full
references) to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information
you include.
If, after the status review, we
determine that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel is warranted, we will
propose critical habitat (see definition
in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), in
accordance with section 4 of the Act, to
the maximum extent prudent and
determinable at the time we propose to
list the species. Therefore, within the
geographical range currently occupied
by the Mohave ground squirrel, we
request data and information on:
(1) What may constitute ‘‘physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species’’;
(2) Where these features are currently
found; and
(3) Whether any of these features may
require special management
considerations or protection, including
managing for the potential effects of
climate change.
In addition, we request data and
information on ‘‘specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the
species’’ that are ‘‘essential for the
conservation of the species.’’ Please
provide specific comments and
information as to what, if any, critical
habitat you think we should propose for
designation if the species is proposed
for listing, and why such habitat meets
the definition of critical habitat in
section 3 of the Act and the
requirements of section 4 of the Act.
Submissions 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. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the
Act directs that determinations as to
whether any species is an endangered or
threatened species must be made ‘‘solely
on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’
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 you submit a
hardcopy that includes personal
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
identifying information, you may
request at the top of your document that
we withhold this personal identifying
information from public view. 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 supporting
documentation that we received and
used in preparing this finding, will be
available for public inspection at https://
www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
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 indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided 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 our 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
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 review of the status of the species,
which is subsequently summarized in
our 12–month finding.
Petition History
On September 5, 2005, we received a
petition, dated August 30, 2005, from
Defenders of Wildlife and Dr. Glenn R.
Stewart to list the Mohave ground
squirrel as endangered, and to designate
critical habitat concurrently with the
listing. The petition identified the
scientific name for Mohave ground
squirrel as Spermophilus mohavensis;
however, the name was changed in 2009
to Xerospermophilus mohavensis
(Helgen et al. 2009, p. 273), and we refer
to it in this petition finding by its
current name. The petition clearly
identified itself as such and included
the requisite identification information
for the petitioners, as required in 50
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
CFR 424.14(a). The petition contained
detailed information on the natural
history and biology of the Mohave
ground squirrel, and the current status
and distribution of the species. It also
contained information on what the
petitioners reported as potential threats
to the species. In a March 28, 2006,
letter to the petitioners, we informed
them that we would not be able to
address their petition at that time
because further action on the petition
was precluded by court orders and
settlement agreements for other listing
actions that required us to use nearly all
of our listing funds for fiscal year 2006.
We also stated our initial review of the
petition did not indicate that an
emergency situation existed and that
emergency listing was not necessary.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Previous Federal Actions
On December 13, 1993, the Service
received a petition dated December 6,
1993, from Dr. Glenn R. Stewart of
California Polytechnic State University,
Pomona, California, requesting the
Service to list the Mohave ground
squirrel as a threatened species. At that
time, the species was a category 2
candidate (November 15, 1994; 59 FR
58988), and was first included in this
category on September 18, 1985.
Category 2 included taxa for which
information in the Service’s possession
indicated that listing the species as
endangered or threatened was possibly
appropriate, but for which sufficient
data on biological vulnerability and
threats were not available to support a
proposed listing rule. On September 7,
1995, we published our 90–day petition
finding, which determined that the 1993
petition did not present substantial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted (60
FR 46569).
Species Information
The Mohave ground squirrel
(Xerospermophilus mohavensis) is a
distinct, full species with no recognized
subspecies. The petitioners presented
sufficient, reliable information related to
the taxonomic status of the Mohave
ground squirrel. It was discovered in
1886 by F. Stephens and described as a
distinct monotypic species by Merriam
(1889, p. 15). The type locality is near
Rabbit Springs in the Lucerne Valley,
San Bernardino County, California.
The Mohave ground squirrel is a
medium-sized squirrel. Total length is
approximately 23 centimeters (cm) (9
inches (in)) with a tail length of 6.4 cm
(2.5 in). The upper body is grayish
brown, pinkish gray, cinnamon gray,
and pinkish cinnamon without stripes
or flecking. The underparts of the body
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
and the tail are white (Ingles 1965, p.
171). The skin is darkly pigmented and
dorsal hair tips are multi-banded.
The closest relative of the Mohave
ground squirrel is the round-tailed
ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus
tereticaudus). It has a contiguous, but
not overlapping, geographic range with
the Mohave ground squirrel.
Mating and Reproduction
The Mohave ground squirrel mating
season occurs from mid-February to
mid-March (Harris and Leitner 2004, p.
1). Recht (c.f. Gustafson 1993, p. 83)
reported that male Mohave ground
squirrels are territorial during the
mating season. Females may enter male
Mohave ground squirrel territory and
remain for 1 or 2 days. After copulation,
the females establish their own home
ranges. John Harris (personal
communication, Mills College, Oakland,
CA, as cited in the petition, p. 14)
observed male Mohave ground squirrels
staking out the overwintering sites of
females to mate with them when they
emerged.
Gestation is about 30 days with litter
size ranging from four to nine (Best
1995, p. 3). Parental care continues
through mid-May, with juvenile Mohave
ground squirrels emerging above ground
between 10 days to 2 weeks later
(Gustafson 1993, p. 84). Mortality for
juveniles is high during the first year
with more male Mohave ground
squirrels lost than females. Female
Mohave ground squirrels can breed at 1
year of age if environmental conditions
are favorable (Leitner and Leitner 1998,
p. 28).
The reproductive success of the
Mohave ground squirrel is dependent
on the amount of fall and winter
precipitation. Leitner and Leitner (1998,
p. 20) found a positive correlation
between fall and winter rainfall and
recruitment of juvenile squirrels the
following year. In a low rainfall year,
Mohave ground squirrels may forego
breeding, or the low availability of food
due to low rainfall may cause
reproductive failure (Leitner and Leitner
1998, p. 29).
Range and Distribution
The presumed historical range of the
Mohave ground squirrel, which is based
on the current range and historical
locations of suitable habitat, is the
northwest portion of the Mojave Desert
in parts of Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, and
San Bernardino Counties, California.
This area is bounded on the south and
west by the San Gabriel, Tehachapi, and
Sierra Nevada ranges, and on the
northeast by the Owens Lake and Coso,
Slate, Quail, Granite, and Avawatz
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22065
Mountains. The southeastern edge of the
historical range is bordered by the
Mojave River with the exception of one
locality east of the Mojave River in the
Lucerne Valley. The historical range of
the Mohave ground squirrel is assumed
to have included that area of the
Antelope Valley west of the
communities of Palmdale, Lancaster,
Rosamond, and Mojave, although there
are no records of the species being
sighted or captured there.
The current range of the Mohave
ground squirrel is similar to the
historical range, except it excludes the
western portion of the Antelope Valley
in Los Angeles and Kern Counties and
possibly some of the area from
Victorville to the south and southeast to
Lucerne Valley in San Bernardino
County. Urban and agricultural
development in these areas has resulted
in the loss or modification of Mohave
ground squirrel habitat. The Mohave
ground squirrel has the smallest range of
any ground squirrel species in the
United States. Gustafson (1993, p. 8)
states the geographic range of the
Mohave ground squirrel encompasses
approximately 1,968,000 hectares (ha)
(4,863,000 acres (ac)).
Activity Patterns, Movements, and
Home Range
The active season for the Mohave
ground squirrel is short, generally from
early March to August (Bartholomew
and Hudson 1960, p. 194), but may
begin as early as mid-January to late
February. Initiation depends on
temperature and elevation (Gustafson
1993, p. 19). During this time, Mohave
ground squirrels must mate, gather
enough nutrition to produce and sustain
a litter, and ensure nutritional reserves
to last during the inactive season.
During the inactive season, Mohave
ground squirrels exist in their burrows
in a state of torpor (a state of reduced
physiological activity or sluggishness) to
conserve their reserves of energy and
water.
The length of the active season varies
by sex, age, and availability of food
resources. In dry years, which are often
non-reproductive years, Mohave ground
squirrels may enter their state of torpor
as early as spring (Leitner et al. 1995, p.
83). The active season for an adult is
shorter than for a juvenile as adults do
not need to acquire as much energy for
the inactive season as juveniles do. The
active season for an adult female is
generally longer than for a male because
females need to acquire additional
energy for litter production and
lactation (Leitner et al. 1997, pp. 114115).
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
22066
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Mohave ground squirrels are diurnal;
they spend much of the day above
ground (Recht 1977, p. 56). As
temperatures increase into the spring
and early summer, Mohave ground
squirrels will spend more time in the
shade of shrubs or briefly use their
burrows. Burrows are usually located
beneath large shrubs. Mohave ground
squirrels may use several burrows at
night throughout a season; they also use
other burrows for predator avoidance
and temperature regulation. The burrow
used for the inactive season is dug
specifically for that period (Recht 1977,
p. 9).
Mohave ground squirrels exhibit a
behavior called natal dispersal. Upon
dispersing from the burrow where they
were born, some males will move and
take up residence at least 1,009 meters
(m) (3,280 feet (ft)) from the natal
burrow while females move a shorter
distance of 200 to 300 m (650 to 980 ft)
from their natal burrows (Leitner and
Leitner 1998, p. 34; Harris and Leitner
2005, p. 191).
The home range of the Mohave
ground squirrel varies among years and
between sexes during the mating season.
The mean home range is 0.74 ha (1.83
ac) for mating females and 6.73 ha
(16.63 ac) for males. Outside the
breeding season, the mean home range
size is 1.20 ha (2.96 ac) for females and
1.24 ha (3.06 ac) for males (Harris and
Leitner 2004, pp. 520-521).
Population Demographics
The behavioral characteristics of the
Mohave ground squirrel, as discussed
above, make it difficult to determine or
estimate population status and trends
because the species spends much of the
year underground and populations
appear to be sensitive to both seasonal
and annual rainfall patterns. That is, in
dry years or dry fall seasons,
reproduction during the following
spring season may be unsuccessful and
population size may contract (Leitner
and Leitner 1998, pp. 29-31).
Survey results suggest that the
Mohave ground squirrel has a patchy
distribution throughout its range (Hoyt
1972, p. 7; Gustafson 1993, p. viii). Most
reported information describes the
number of animals trapped or number
trapped as compared to the trapping
effort. We are aware of only one location
where information on population trend
was available (Leitner 2005, p. 3). In the
northwest portion of the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel, trapping
results are available for the Coso Range
within China Lake Naval Air Weapons
Station (NAWS). The surveys span 1992
to 1996 and 2001 to 2005. The total
number of Mohave ground squirrels
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
captured during the first survey period
was more than twice that of the second
(Leitner 2005, p. 3).
Brooks and Matchett (2002) analyzed
the data from all known Mohave ground
squirrel studies. Forty-nine percent of
the sites were identified from observing
or trapping only one animal.
Habitat and Life History Requirements
The habitat requirements of the
Mohave ground squirrel are varied. The
species has been found in a variety of
vegetative communities including
Mojave Creosote Scrub, Desert Saltbush
Scrub, Desert Sink Scrub, Desert
Greasewood Scrub, Shadscale Scrub,
and Joshua Tree (Yucca brevifolia)
Woodland (Gustafson 1993, pp. ix, 81).
Creosote Bush Scrub is the vegetation
community in which the Mohave
ground squirrel is most often found.
Mohave ground squirrels usually
inhabit flat to moderately sloping
terrain. They prefer deep rather than
shallow soils and gravelly soils rather
than sandy soils (Aardahl and Roush
1985, p. 23). Soil characteristics are
important as the Mohave ground
squirrel constructs burrows for
temperature regulation, predator
avoidance, and inactive season use.
The food habits of the Mohave ground
squirrel are diverse. Recht (1977, p. 80)
called the Mohave ground squirrel a
facultative specialist; its foraging
strategy falls between that of a specialist
and a generalist. The Mohave ground
squirrel specializes in foraging on
certain plant species over short periods
of time. As the availability of forage
species changes throughout the active
season, the Mohave ground squirrel
adapts its foraging strategy to maximize
energy intake in a changing
environment. Observations and fecal
analysis indicate that Mohave ground
squirrels consume a variety of annual
and perennial plants and arthropods
(Leitner and Leitner 1992, p. 12;
Gustafson 1993, pp. 77-83). At one
study site, the leaves of three shrub
species made up 60 percent of the
Mohave ground squirrel diet based on
fecal analysis (Leitner and Leitner 1998,
p. 34). In a study by Leitner and Leitner
(1992) in the northern part of its range,
the Mohave ground squirrel was found
to consume leaves of annual and
perennial plants, their fruits and seeds,
fungi, and butterfly larvae. Mohave
ground squirrels appear to exploit food
sources that are available on an
intermittent basis. They may also select
particular food items over others
because of higher water content. Leitner
and Leitner (1992, p. 25) concluded that
the Mohave ground squirrel is flexible
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in exploiting high-quality food
resources.
Predation and Mortality
There is little documentation on the
natural predators of the Mohave ground
squirrel. There is circumstantial
evidence of predation by coyotes (Canis
latrans), prairie falcons (Falco
mexicanus), and common ravens
(Corvus corax) (Leitner et al. 1997, p.
49; J. Harris, personal communication,
as cited in the petition, p. 15). There
may be other natural predators of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
Mortality is high for the Mohave
ground squirrel during the first year and
appears to be skewed toward males
(Brylski et al. 1994, p. 64; Leitner and
Leitner 1998, p. 28). Mortality may also
be caused by extended periods of low
amounts of fall and winter rainfall,
which results in reduced availability of
forage and water, and can increase
vulnerability to disease.
Evaluation of Information for This
Finding
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and implementing regulations at 50 CFR
424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to, or removing a species from,
the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A
species may be determined to be an
endangered or threatened species due to
one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
In making this 90–day finding, we
evaluated whether information on
threats to the Mohave ground squirrel,
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.
A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species’ Habitat or
Range
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
The petitioners presented information
regarding threats to the Mohave ground
squirrel from reduced range and habitat
destruction, including: urban and rural
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
development on private and public
lands; agricultural development;
military activities; livestock grazing;
transportation; energy development; and
that the cumulative impacts of drought,
habitat destruction, habitat
fragmentation, and decrease in
precipitation with climate change pose
a threat greater than the drought
episodes to which the Mohave ground
squirrel is adapted.
The range of the Mohave ground
squirrel is the smallest of all ground
squirrels in the United States. Based on
information provided by the petitioners,
the Mohave ground squirrel appears to
have been nearly extirpated from the
southern portion of its range, which
represents approximately 20 percent of
its range (Leitner as cited in the petition,
p. 8). This assertion is based on the
results of surveys conducted for the
Mohave ground squirrel from 2002 to
2004 (Leitner 2004 as cited in the
petition, p. 17). The portion of the
recently reduced range includes an area
south of State Highway 58 in the
Palmdale-Lancaster area and the
Victorville to Lucerne Valley area.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Private Lands
On private lands, which comprise
about 31 percent of the current range of
the Mohave ground squirrel, the
petitioners claim 2.8 percent of the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel has
been lost to urban and rural
development and approximately 2
percent (37,000 ha (92,000 ac)) to
agricultural fields. The information on
impacts to the Mohave ground squirrel
from agricultural development was
derived from Hoyt (1972, p. 8), Aardahl
and Roush (1985, p. 2), and Gustafson
(1993, pp. 23-24). The petitioners also
stated that they have no updated data to
quantify the extent or intensity of this
threat. We have no information in our
files to dispute the figures presented by
the petitioners; however, we currently
do not have information to determine
whether a 2.8 percent loss to urban and
rural development and a 2 percent loss
to agricultural development is
biologically significant to the Mohave
ground squirrel.
Public Lands
Public lands managed by the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) account for
about 31.8 percent of the species’ range.
The petitioners stated that BLM’s land
management plan for the West Mojave
Desert (West Mojave Plan) would allow
new development throughout much of
the range of the Mohave ground squirrel
and would not protect the four Mohave
ground squirrel ‘‘core areas’’ (see
petition, p. 17). ‘‘Core areas’’ are defined
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
by the petitioners as locations where
Mohave ground squirrels have been
reliably captured over time, or where
there are thriving populations. The
petitioners stated that activities that
result in the loss of habitat in these
‘‘core areas’’ or prevent dispersal among
these ‘‘core areas’’ will impede and
eventually prohibit conservation of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
Public land managed by the
Department of Defense accounts for
about 34.5 percent of the species’
current range. The petitioners stated
that current military training at Fort
Irwin threatens Mohave ground
squirrels by crushing animals,
compacting and otherwise disturbing
soils, collapsing burrows, destroying
shrubs used for cover, and reducing
spring annual plants used by Mohave
ground squirrels for forage (Bury et al.
1977, pp. 16, 18). According to the
petitioners, Fort Irwin’s training
currently affects 7.4 percent of the range
of the Mohave ground squirrel, and the
proposed expansion of Fort Irwin will
affect additional lands within the range
of the Mohave ground squirrel and will
fragment one of the four Mohave ground
squirrel ‘‘core areas’’ as identified by the
petitioners.
Additionally, 2.7 percent of the
current range of the Mohave ground
squirrel occurs on other public
‘protected lands’ (see petition, p. 40)
including; federally designated
wilderness areas, State park land,
California Department of Fish and Game
land, and the Desert Tortoise Natural
Area.
Livestock Grazing
The petitioners stated that livestock
grazing has the potential to degrade
Mohave ground squirrel habitat through
changes in soil structure, including
accelerated erosion and collapsing
burrows, changes in vegetative
structure, reduced availability of native
forage species (Laabs 2002, p. 5;
Campbell 1988, pp. 569, 574), and direct
competition with Mohave ground
squirrels for limited quality and
quantity of forage (Leitner and Leitner
1998; pp. 29, A6, A7, A15, and A23).
According to the petitioners’ GIS
analysis, 27 percent of the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel has been
impacted by livestock grazing.
Aardahl and Roush (1985, p. 23), as
cited in the petition, stated that ‘‘land
uses which affect the availability of
forbs and grasses have the potential to
influence the long-term population of
the Mohave ground squirrel,’’ but this
does not ‘‘mean that properly managed
livestock grazing will cause a significant
negative impact on the Mohave ground
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22067
squirrel.’’ Twenty-one of 22 study sites
surveyed were grazed by sheep or cattle
in varying degrees; the study site with
the highest total adjusted captures of
Mohave ground squirrels showed
considerable signs of grazing (Aardahl
and Roush 1985, p. 23). The petitioners
did not provide information, and we
have no information in our files, on the
extent or magnitude of the impacts of
livestock grazing on the Mohave ground
squirrel.
Transportation
The petitioners identified the
extensive network of highways and
roads in the range of the Mohave ground
squirrel as a threat. The petitioners
claim impacts from highway and road
establishment and vehicle use include
habitat loss, fragmentation, and
degradation, and direct mortality from
vehicle strikes (Gustafson 1993, pp. 23,
26; BLM 2003, p. 30; Leitner as cited in
the petition, p. 22). The petitioners
stated that there is evidence of surface
disturbance to roadsides up to 400 m
(1,312 ft) away from the road, and that
37 percent of transects conducted by the
BLM in the West Mojave Desert were
bisected by roads. The petitioners
calculated that the total area of the
network of roads and highways affected
65,964 ha (163,000 ac) or 3.3 percent of
the range of the Mohave ground
squirrel. The petitioners provided
additional information that impacts
from roads on the desert tortoise have
been documented more than 3,962 m
(13,000 ft) from the highest level traffic
road (Hoff and Marlow 2002, p. 454)
and that similar impacts likely occur to
the Mohave ground squirrel.
We do not agree that impacts to the
desert tortoise from roads that have been
measured more than 3,962 m (13,000 ft)
from the highest traffic roads are the
same as those to the Mohave ground
squirrel. The Hoff and Marlow study
(2002, p. 454) reported on the
abundance of desert tortoise sign at
intervals from roads. This study was
specific to the desert tortoise. It did not
examine the effects of roads on the
Mohave ground squirrel. Therefore, any
application of the results from this
research to the Mohave ground squirrel
is inferred and is not supported by the
data. However, we agree with the
petitioners that roads and highways
result in direct mortality to Mohave
grounds squirrels from vehicle
collisions and habitat loss and
degradation.
Energy Development
According to the petitioners,
geothermal exploration and
development and the construction of
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
22068
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
range and habitat destruction,
including: urban and rural development
on private and public lands; agricultural
development; military activities;
livestock grazing; transportation; and
energy development. We found the
petition and information in our files
presents substantial information that
these activities may have contributed to
a recent range contraction in the
southern portion of the Mohave ground
squirrel’s range, and may threaten the
Mohave ground squirrel across its
current range by removing shrubs
needed for cover and forage, disturbing
soil, or removing or degrading other
habitat features necessary for Mohave
ground squirrel life history
requirements. Additionally, one or more
of these activities may threaten what the
petitioners identify as ‘‘core areas’’ for
Cumulative Impacts of Habitat
the Mohave ground squirrel by
Destruction, Fragmentation, and
removing habitat, fragmenting the
Decreased Precipitation
habitat, and preventing dispersal among
The petitioners provided information
the ‘‘core areas.’’ However, we
that indicates the reproduction and
determined the petition does not
survival of the Mohave ground squirrel
present substantial information
is ultimately linked to rainfall (Harris
indicating that climate change may be a
and Leitner 2004, pp. 517, 518). Mohave threat to the species. Additionally,
ground squirrels may fail to persist in
information on the subject of climate
certain areas during drought episodes
change in our files is not specific to the
(Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 31). The
Mohave ground squirrel. We will
petitioners assert the cumulative
evaluate the effects of climate change,
impacts of habitat destruction, habitat
including reduced precipitation and any
fragmentation, and overall decrease in
cumulative effects of habitat
precipitation due to climate change are
fragmentation or loss on the Mohave
a greater threat to the Mohave ground
ground squirrel, when we conduct our
squirrel than the periods of low rainfall
status review.
and drought episodes with which the
On the basis of our evaluation of the
Mohave ground squirrel evolved.
information in the petition and
Based on information from the
information in our files, we determined
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
that the petition presents substantial
Change (Watson et al. 2002, pp. 8, 9), we information indicating that listing the
acknowledge temperatures in southern
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered
California are likely to increase and
may be warranted due to destruction,
precipitation is likely to decrease in the modification, or curtailment of the
future. With hotter, drier conditions and species’ habitat or range.
more extreme weather patterns in
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
southern California than those with
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
which the Mohave ground squirrel
Purposes
evolved, the species may be negatively
The petitioners did not provide
affected. However, we believe that
information or list any threats to the
climate change models that are
currently available are not yet capable of Mohave ground squirrel from
overutilization for commercial,
making meaningful predictions of
recreational, or educational purposes.
climate change for specific, local areas
such as the range of the Mohave ground The petitioners stated that the
utilization of the Mohave ground
squirrel (Parmesan and Matthews 2005,
squirrel for scientific purposes is strictly
p. 354). We are not currently aware of
controlled by the California Department
models that predict how climate in the
of Fish and Game.
range of the Mohave ground squirrel
will change, and we do not know how
Summary of Factor B
any change may alter the range of, or
On the basis of our evaluation, we
otherwise threaten, the species.
determined that the petition does not
Summary of Factor A
present substantial information
In summary, the petitioners presented indicating that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel as endangered may be
information regarding threats to the
warranted due to the overutilization for
Mohave ground squirrel from reduced
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
solar energy plants in the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel have caused,
and will likely cause, adverse impacts to
the Mohave ground squirrel and loss or
degradation of habitat (Leitner and
Leitner 1989, p. 2). The petitioners did
not quantify the amount of habitat
affected. We acknowledge that energy
development for geothermal and solar
energy has occurred within the range of
the Mohave ground squirrel and that
this development can result in the
degradation or loss of habitat used by
the Mohave ground squirrel. The
petitioners do not provide information,
and we do not have information in our
files, on the extent of this loss or
degradation and how it will affect the
conservation of the Mohave ground
squirrel.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes. Additionally, we
do not have substantial information in
our files to suggest that overutilization
for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes may threaten
the Mohave ground squirrel. However,
we will evaluate all factors, including
threats from overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes, when we conduct
our status review.
C. Disease or Predation
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
The petitioners did not provide
information or list any threat to the
Mohave ground squirrel from disease,
and we do not have information in our
files regarding potential threats to this
species due to disease.
The petitioners stated that there is
little documentation of the Mohave
ground squirrel’s natural predators, but
claimed that predation by coyotes,
common ravens, house cats, domestic
dogs, and feral dogs is a concern.
Although the petitioners stated that cats
prey on small mammals and dogs dig up
rodent burrows, they did not present
any information on the level of
mortality or population impacts from
predation for Mohave ground squirrels,
any other ground squirrel species, or
any small mammal species. The
petitioners noted that the numbers of
common ravens and coyotes, known
predators of the Mohave ground
squirrel, have increased, posing an
increased predation risk to Mohave
ground squirrel populations. However,
there is no information provided that
the numbers of cats, dogs, common
ravens, or coyotes have increased in the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel,
and there is no evidence to indicate that
there is increased predation by these
predators on the Mohave ground
squirrel. We do not have information in
our files to indicate that predation is a
threat to the survival of the Mohave
ground squirrel.
Summary of Factor C
On the basis of our evaluation, we
determined that the petition does not
present substantial information
indicating that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel as endangered may be
warranted due to disease or predation.
Additionally, we do not have
substantial information in our files to
suggest that disease or predation
threaten the Mohave ground squirrel.
However, we will evaluate all factors,
including threats from disease and
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
predation, when we conduct our status
review.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
The petitioners stated that current
regulations have proven inadequate to
conserve the Mohave ground squirrel;
that only 9 percent of the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel has any kind of
protected status; and that, although the
Mohave ground squirrel is a State-listed
species, this listing provides no
conservation assurances for the Mohave
ground squirrel on Federal lands.
The California Endangered Species
Act provides protection for the Mohave
ground squirrel on private and Stateowned land, and on Federal lands in
relation to activities carried out by nonFederal entities that are required to
obtain a State permit or authorization.
The major military installations
within the range of the Mohave ground
squirrel have implemented Integrated
Natural Resources Management Plans
that cover the Mohave ground squirrel
and implement actions to manage for
the species. In their management plan
for the West Mojave Desert, the BLM
considers the Mohave ground squirrel
an umbrella species, a species whose
habitat requirements include those of
many other species and whose
conservation should automatically
conserve a host of other species. BLM
has implemented a plan that establishes
a Mohave ground squirrel Conservation
Area that contains 35 percent of the
species’ historical range on BLM land.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Summary of Factor D
On the basis of our evaluation, we
determined that the petition does not
present substantial information
indicating that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel as endangered may be
warranted due to the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms.
Additionally, we do not have
substantial information in our files to
suggest that existing regulatory
mechanisms are inadequate and thus
threaten the Mohave ground squirrel.
However, we will evaluate all factors,
including threats from the inadequacy
of existing regulatory mechanisms,
when we conduct our status review.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
The petitioners stated that pesticide
use may adversely affect the Mohave
ground squirrel. According to the
petitioners, Mohave ground squirrels
live in native vegetative communities
adjacent to agricultural fields and other
areas where rodenticides are used.
Mohave ground squirrels use these areas
for forage and shelter. The petitioners
claim that if rodenticides are used on
agricultural fields, Mohave ground
squirrels could be adversely affected, or
they could be exterminated by the State
Rodent Program. In the early part of the
20th century, the Los Angeles
Agricultural Commission used poison
grain to target and eliminate ground
squirrels in the Antelope Valley, which
includes the historical range of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
Although we are aware that
rodenticides, such as those that include
strychnine as the active ingredient, may
be used to kill ground squirrels, there is
no information in the petition or our
files to indicate that rodenticides are
used to specifically target Mohave
ground squirrels or that any
rodenticides currently used within the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel are
adversely affecting the status of this
species.
Summary of Factor E
On the basis of our evaluation, we
determined that the petition does not
present substantial information
indicating that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel as endangered may be
warranted due to other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. Additionally, we do not have
substantial information in our files to
suggest that other natural or manmade
factors threaten the Mohave ground
squirrel. However, we will evaluate all
factors, including threats from other
natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence, when we conduct
our status review.
Finding
The petition and supporting
information have identified numerous
factors affecting the Mohave ground
squirrel, including: reduced range,
urban and rural development,
agricultural development, military
activities, livestock grazing,
transportation and energy development,
and cumulative impacts of habitat
destruction, fragmentation, and
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22069
decreased precipitation (Factor A);
predation (Factor C); the lack of
regulatory mechanisms protecting the
species and its habitat (Factor D); and
pesticide use (Factor E).
On the basis of our evaluation under
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have
determined that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered
may be warranted. This finding is based
on information provided by the
petitioners and in our files for Factor A.
In particular, there is substantial
information to indicate habitat based
threats under Factor A may remove
shrubs needed for cover and forage,
disturb soil, or remove or degrade other
habitat features necessary for Mohave
ground squirrel life history
requirements across its current range.
The information provided by the
petitioners and in our files for Factors
B, C, D, and E was not substantial. In
considering what factors might
constitute threats, we must look beyond
the mere exposure of the species to the
factor to determine whether the species
responds to the factor in a way that
causes actual impacts to the species. If
there is exposure to a factor, but no
response, or only a positive response,
that factor is not a threat. If there is
exposure and the species responds
negatively, the factor may be a threat
and we then attempt to determine how
significant a threat it is. If the threat is
significant, it may drive or contribute to
the risk of extinction of the species such
that the species may warrant listing as
threatened or endangered as those terms
are defined by the Act. This does not
necessarily require empirical proof of a
threat. The combination of exposure and
some corroborating evidence of how the
species is likely impacted could suffice.
The mere identification of factors that
could impact a species negatively may
not be sufficient to compel a finding
that listing may be warranted. The
information shall contain evidence
sufficient to suggest that these factors
may be operative threats that act on the
species to the point that the species may
meet the definition of threatened or
endangered under the Act.
Because we have found that the
petition presents substantial
information that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel may be warranted, we
are initiating a status review to
determine whether listing the Mohave
ground squirrel under the Act is
warranted. We will issue a 12–month
finding as to whether the petitioned
action is warranted.
The ‘‘substantial information’’
standard for a 90–day finding differs
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
22070
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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 finding.
The petitioners also requested that we
designate critical habitat for the Mohave
ground squirrel. If we determine in our
12–month finding that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel is warranted,
we will address the designation of
critical habitat at the time of the
proposed rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
is available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are
staff members of the Ventura Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section above).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: April 12, 2010
Signed: Daniel M. Ashe
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
[FR Doc. 2010–9377 Filed 4–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
[Docket No. 0911201413–0182–01]
RIN 0648–AY38
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Guided Sport
Charter Vessel Fishery for Halibut;
Recordkeeping and Reporting
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:07 Apr 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to
amend the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for the Pacific halibut
guided sport fishery in International
Pacific Halibut Commission Regulatory
Area 2C (Southeast Alaska) and Area 3A
(Central Gulf of Alaska). If approved,
these regulations would revise federal
requirements regarding the location and
time period for submission of Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Saltwater
Sport Fishing Charter Trip Logbook data
sheets and modify logbook recording
requirements. This action is necessary
because NMFS relies on the state
logbook data for managing halibut and
to improve consistency between federal
and State of Alaska requirements for the
submission of the logbook data sheets
and the logbook reporting format. This
action is intended to achieve the halibut
fishery management goals of the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
and to support the conservation and
management provisions of the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than May 12, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue
Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. You may submit
comments, identified by RIN 0648–
AY38, by any one of the following
methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov;
• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802;
• Fax: (907) 586–7557; or
• Hand delivery to the Federal
Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room
420A, Juneau, AK.
All comments received are a part of
the public record. No comments will be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov for
public viewing until after the comment
period has closed. Comments will
generally be posted without change. All
Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information.
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter N/A in the required
fields, if you wish to remain
anonymous). You may submit
attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Electronic copies of the Categorical
Exclusion, the Regulatory Impact
Review, and the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis prepared for this
action may be obtained from https://
www.regulations.gov or from the Alaska
Region website at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection of information
requirements contained in this rule may
be submitted to NMFS at the above
address, e-mailed to
DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov or faxed
to (202) 395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gabrielle Aberle, (907) 586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Need for Action
The International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC) and National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
manage fishing for Pacific halibut
(Hippoglossus stenolepis) through
regulations established under authority
of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of
1982 (Halibut Act). The IPHC
promulgates regulations governing the
Pacific halibut fishery under the
Convention between the United States
and Canada for the Preservation of the
Halibut Fishery of the North Pacific
Ocean and Bering Sea (Convention),
signed at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 2,
1953, as amended by a Protocol
Amending the Convention (signed at
Washington, D.C., on March 29, 1979).
Regulations developed by the IPHC
are subject to approval by the Secretary
of State with concurrence of the
Secretary of Commerce (Secretary).
After approval by the Secretary of State
and the Secretary, the IPHC regulations
are published in the Federal Register as
annual management measures pursuant
to 50 CFR 300.62. The current IPHC
annual management measures were
published on March 19, 2009 (74 FR
11681). IPHC regulations affecting sport
fishing for halibut and charter vessels in
Areas 2C (Southeast Alaska) and 3A
(Central Gulf of Alaska) may be found
in sections 3, 25, and 28 (74 FR 11681;
March 19, 2009).
The Halibut Act also provides
regulatory authority to the Secretary and
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council). The Secretary, under
16 U.S.C. 773c(a) and (b), has the
general responsibility to carry out the
Convention and the Halibut Act. In
adopting regulations that may be
necessary to carry out the purposes and
objectives of the Convention and the
Halibut Act, the Secretary is directed to
consult with the Secretary of the
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 27, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22063-22070]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9377]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2010-0006]
[MO 92210-0-0008 B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-day Finding on
a Petition to List the Mohave Ground Squirrel as Endangered with
Critical Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the Mohave ground squirrel
(Xerospermophilus mohavensis) as an endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review,
we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the Mohave ground squirrel may be
warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this notice, we are
initiating a status review of the species to determine if listing the
species is warranted. To ensure that this status review is
comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and
other information regarding this species. Based on the status review,
we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, which will address
whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. We will make a determination on critical habitat
for this species, which was also requested in the petition, if and when
we initiate a listing action.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request
that we receive information on or before June 28, 2010. After this
date, you must submit information directly to the Ventura Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below).
Please note that we may not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the date noted above.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Search for docket FWS-R8-ES-2010-0006 and then follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2010-0006; 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 information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael McCrary, Listing and Recovery
Coordinator, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2593 Portola Road, Suite
B, Ventura, CA 93003; telephone (805) 644-1766; facsimile (805) 644-
3958. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), 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 review the status of the species (status review).
For the status review to be complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we request information on the
Mohave ground squirrel from government agencies, Native American
Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested
parties. We seek information on:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
[[Page 22064]]
(2) Historical and current survey information on the Mohave ground
squirrel, including survey methods and design, time of year, weather
information, time of day, site selection method, and descriptions of
physical characteristics of landscapes, soil, and vegetation.
(3) The factors that are the basis for making a listing
determination for a species under section 4(a) of the 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.
(4) Information on management programs for the conservation of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
(5) Information on current or expected future development within
the range of the Mohave ground squirrel, including but not limited to:
the extent or magnitude of habitat loss, degradation, or fragmentation
from development for energy, transportation, agriculture, military
training; land management prescriptions; or recreation, and how they
may affect the conservation of the Mohave ground squirrel.
(6) Information on the population status of predators of the Mohave
ground squirrel, including information on the occurrence and extent/
severity of predation by coyotes, house cats, common ravens, domestic
dogs, and feral dogs on the Mohave ground squirrel, and the effect of
this predation on the Mohave ground squirrel's long-term survival.
(7) Information on morphological, behavioral, genetic, or
ecological variability in the Mohave ground squirrel, and any change in
that variability.
(8) Information on environmental change within the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
(9) Information on the importance of certain areas or populations
to the long-term conservation of the Mohave ground squirrel that may
help us identify potentially significant portions of the species'
range. This may include information that demonstrates the following
factors are important to a portion of the Mohave ground squirrel's
range:
(a) The quality, quantity, and distribution of habitat relative to
the biological requirements of the species;
(b) The historical values of the habitat to the species;
(c) The frequency of use of the habitat; and
(d) The uniqueness or importance of the habitat for other reasons,
such as breeding, feeding, seasonal movements, wintering, or
suitability for population expansion, or for genetic diversity.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
full references) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial
information you include.
If, after the status review, we determine that listing the Mohave
ground squirrel is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see
definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), in accordance with section 4
of the Act, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time
we propose to list the species. Therefore, within the geographical
range currently occupied by the Mohave ground squirrel, we request data
and information on:
(1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species'';
(2) Where these features are currently found; and
(3) Whether any of these features may require special management
considerations or protection, including managing for the potential
effects of climate change.
In addition, we request data and information on ``specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species'' that are
``essential for the conservation of the species.'' Please provide
specific comments and information as to what, if any, critical habitat
you think we should propose for designation if the species is proposed
for listing, and why such habitat meets the definition of critical
habitat in section 3 of the Act and the requirements of section 4 of
the Act.
Submissions 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. Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.''
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 you
submit a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document that we withhold this personal
identifying information from public view. 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 supporting documentation that we received and used
in preparing this finding, will be available for public inspection at
https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
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 indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided 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 our 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 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 review of the status of the species, which is
subsequently summarized in our 12-month finding.
Petition History
On September 5, 2005, we received a petition, dated August 30,
2005, from Defenders of Wildlife and Dr. Glenn R. Stewart to list the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered, and to designate critical habitat
concurrently with the listing. The petition identified the scientific
name for Mohave ground squirrel as Spermophilus mohavensis; however,
the name was changed in 2009 to Xerospermophilus mohavensis (Helgen et
al. 2009, p. 273), and we refer to it in this petition finding by its
current name. The petition clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification information for the petitioners,
as required in 50
[[Page 22065]]
CFR 424.14(a). The petition contained detailed information on the
natural history and biology of the Mohave ground squirrel, and the
current status and distribution of the species. It also contained
information on what the petitioners reported as potential threats to
the species. In a March 28, 2006, letter to the petitioners, we
informed them that we would not be able to address their petition at
that time because further action on the petition was precluded by court
orders and settlement agreements for other listing actions that
required us to use nearly all of our listing funds for fiscal year
2006. We also stated our initial review of the petition did not
indicate that an emergency situation existed and that emergency listing
was not necessary.
Previous Federal Actions
On December 13, 1993, the Service received a petition dated
December 6, 1993, from Dr. Glenn R. Stewart of California Polytechnic
State University, Pomona, California, requesting the Service to list
the Mohave ground squirrel as a threatened species. At that time, the
species was a category 2 candidate (November 15, 1994; 59 FR 58988),
and was first included in this category on September 18, 1985. Category
2 included taxa for which information in the Service's possession
indicated that listing the species as endangered or threatened was
possibly appropriate, but for which sufficient data on biological
vulnerability and threats were not available to support a proposed
listing rule. On September 7, 1995, we published our 90-day petition
finding, which determined that the 1993 petition did not present
substantial information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted (60 FR 46569).
Species Information
The Mohave ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus mohavensis) is a
distinct, full species with no recognized subspecies. The petitioners
presented sufficient, reliable information related to the taxonomic
status of the Mohave ground squirrel. It was discovered in 1886 by F.
Stephens and described as a distinct monotypic species by Merriam
(1889, p. 15). The type locality is near Rabbit Springs in the Lucerne
Valley, San Bernardino County, California.
The Mohave ground squirrel is a medium-sized squirrel. Total length
is approximately 23 centimeters (cm) (9 inches (in)) with a tail length
of 6.4 cm (2.5 in). The upper body is grayish brown, pinkish gray,
cinnamon gray, and pinkish cinnamon without stripes or flecking. The
underparts of the body and the tail are white (Ingles 1965, p. 171).
The skin is darkly pigmented and dorsal hair tips are multi-banded.
The closest relative of the Mohave ground squirrel is the round-
tailed ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus tereticaudus). It has a
contiguous, but not overlapping, geographic range with the Mohave
ground squirrel.
Mating and Reproduction
The Mohave ground squirrel mating season occurs from mid-February
to mid-March (Harris and Leitner 2004, p. 1). Recht (c.f. Gustafson
1993, p. 83) reported that male Mohave ground squirrels are territorial
during the mating season. Females may enter male Mohave ground squirrel
territory and remain for 1 or 2 days. After copulation, the females
establish their own home ranges. John Harris (personal communication,
Mills College, Oakland, CA, as cited in the petition, p. 14) observed
male Mohave ground squirrels staking out the overwintering sites of
females to mate with them when they emerged.
Gestation is about 30 days with litter size ranging from four to
nine (Best 1995, p. 3). Parental care continues through mid-May, with
juvenile Mohave ground squirrels emerging above ground between 10 days
to 2 weeks later (Gustafson 1993, p. 84). Mortality for juveniles is
high during the first year with more male Mohave ground squirrels lost
than females. Female Mohave ground squirrels can breed at 1 year of age
if environmental conditions are favorable (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p.
28).
The reproductive success of the Mohave ground squirrel is dependent
on the amount of fall and winter precipitation. Leitner and Leitner
(1998, p. 20) found a positive correlation between fall and winter
rainfall and recruitment of juvenile squirrels the following year. In a
low rainfall year, Mohave ground squirrels may forego breeding, or the
low availability of food due to low rainfall may cause reproductive
failure (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 29).
Range and Distribution
The presumed historical range of the Mohave ground squirrel, which
is based on the current range and historical locations of suitable
habitat, is the northwest portion of the Mojave Desert in parts of
Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties, California. This
area is bounded on the south and west by the San Gabriel, Tehachapi,
and Sierra Nevada ranges, and on the northeast by the Owens Lake and
Coso, Slate, Quail, Granite, and Avawatz Mountains. The southeastern
edge of the historical range is bordered by the Mojave River with the
exception of one locality east of the Mojave River in the Lucerne
Valley. The historical range of the Mohave ground squirrel is assumed
to have included that area of the Antelope Valley west of the
communities of Palmdale, Lancaster, Rosamond, and Mojave, although
there are no records of the species being sighted or captured there.
The current range of the Mohave ground squirrel is similar to the
historical range, except it excludes the western portion of the
Antelope Valley in Los Angeles and Kern Counties and possibly some of
the area from Victorville to the south and southeast to Lucerne Valley
in San Bernardino County. Urban and agricultural development in these
areas has resulted in the loss or modification of Mohave ground
squirrel habitat. The Mohave ground squirrel has the smallest range of
any ground squirrel species in the United States. Gustafson (1993, p.
8) states the geographic range of the Mohave ground squirrel
encompasses approximately 1,968,000 hectares (ha) (4,863,000 acres
(ac)).
Activity Patterns, Movements, and Home Range
The active season for the Mohave ground squirrel is short,
generally from early March to August (Bartholomew and Hudson 1960, p.
194), but may begin as early as mid-January to late February.
Initiation depends on temperature and elevation (Gustafson 1993, p.
19). During this time, Mohave ground squirrels must mate, gather enough
nutrition to produce and sustain a litter, and ensure nutritional
reserves to last during the inactive season. During the inactive
season, Mohave ground squirrels exist in their burrows in a state of
torpor (a state of reduced physiological activity or sluggishness) to
conserve their reserves of energy and water.
The length of the active season varies by sex, age, and
availability of food resources. In dry years, which are often non-
reproductive years, Mohave ground squirrels may enter their state of
torpor as early as spring (Leitner et al. 1995, p. 83). The active
season for an adult is shorter than for a juvenile as adults do not
need to acquire as much energy for the inactive season as juveniles do.
The active season for an adult female is generally longer than for a
male because females need to acquire additional energy for litter
production and lactation (Leitner et al. 1997, pp. 114-115).
[[Page 22066]]
Mohave ground squirrels are diurnal; they spend much of the day
above ground (Recht 1977, p. 56). As temperatures increase into the
spring and early summer, Mohave ground squirrels will spend more time
in the shade of shrubs or briefly use their burrows. Burrows are
usually located beneath large shrubs. Mohave ground squirrels may use
several burrows at night throughout a season; they also use other
burrows for predator avoidance and temperature regulation. The burrow
used for the inactive season is dug specifically for that period (Recht
1977, p. 9).
Mohave ground squirrels exhibit a behavior called natal dispersal.
Upon dispersing from the burrow where they were born, some males will
move and take up residence at least 1,009 meters (m) (3,280 feet (ft))
from the natal burrow while females move a shorter distance of 200 to
300 m (650 to 980 ft) from their natal burrows (Leitner and Leitner
1998, p. 34; Harris and Leitner 2005, p. 191).
The home range of the Mohave ground squirrel varies among years and
between sexes during the mating season. The mean home range is 0.74 ha
(1.83 ac) for mating females and 6.73 ha (16.63 ac) for males. Outside
the breeding season, the mean home range size is 1.20 ha (2.96 ac) for
females and 1.24 ha (3.06 ac) for males (Harris and Leitner 2004, pp.
520-521).
Population Demographics
The behavioral characteristics of the Mohave ground squirrel, as
discussed above, make it difficult to determine or estimate population
status and trends because the species spends much of the year
underground and populations appear to be sensitive to both seasonal and
annual rainfall patterns. That is, in dry years or dry fall seasons,
reproduction during the following spring season may be unsuccessful and
population size may contract (Leitner and Leitner 1998, pp. 29-31).
Survey results suggest that the Mohave ground squirrel has a patchy
distribution throughout its range (Hoyt 1972, p. 7; Gustafson 1993, p.
viii). Most reported information describes the number of animals
trapped or number trapped as compared to the trapping effort. We are
aware of only one location where information on population trend was
available (Leitner 2005, p. 3). In the northwest portion of the range
of the Mohave ground squirrel, trapping results are available for the
Coso Range within China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS). The
surveys span 1992 to 1996 and 2001 to 2005. The total number of Mohave
ground squirrels captured during the first survey period was more than
twice that of the second (Leitner 2005, p. 3).
Brooks and Matchett (2002) analyzed the data from all known Mohave
ground squirrel studies. Forty-nine percent of the sites were
identified from observing or trapping only one animal.
Habitat and Life History Requirements
The habitat requirements of the Mohave ground squirrel are varied.
The species has been found in a variety of vegetative communities
including Mojave Creosote Scrub, Desert Saltbush Scrub, Desert Sink
Scrub, Desert Greasewood Scrub, Shadscale Scrub, and Joshua Tree (Yucca
brevifolia) Woodland (Gustafson 1993, pp. ix, 81). Creosote Bush Scrub
is the vegetation community in which the Mohave ground squirrel is most
often found. Mohave ground squirrels usually inhabit flat to moderately
sloping terrain. They prefer deep rather than shallow soils and
gravelly soils rather than sandy soils (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 23).
Soil characteristics are important as the Mohave ground squirrel
constructs burrows for temperature regulation, predator avoidance, and
inactive season use.
The food habits of the Mohave ground squirrel are diverse. Recht
(1977, p. 80) called the Mohave ground squirrel a facultative
specialist; its foraging strategy falls between that of a specialist
and a generalist. The Mohave ground squirrel specializes in foraging on
certain plant species over short periods of time. As the availability
of forage species changes throughout the active season, the Mohave
ground squirrel adapts its foraging strategy to maximize energy intake
in a changing environment. Observations and fecal analysis indicate
that Mohave ground squirrels consume a variety of annual and perennial
plants and arthropods (Leitner and Leitner 1992, p. 12; Gustafson 1993,
pp. 77-83). At one study site, the leaves of three shrub species made
up 60 percent of the Mohave ground squirrel diet based on fecal
analysis (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 34). In a study by Leitner and
Leitner (1992) in the northern part of its range, the Mohave ground
squirrel was found to consume leaves of annual and perennial plants,
their fruits and seeds, fungi, and butterfly larvae. Mohave ground
squirrels appear to exploit food sources that are available on an
intermittent basis. They may also select particular food items over
others because of higher water content. Leitner and Leitner (1992, p.
25) concluded that the Mohave ground squirrel is flexible in exploiting
high-quality food resources.
Predation and Mortality
There is little documentation on the natural predators of the
Mohave ground squirrel. There is circumstantial evidence of predation
by coyotes (Canis latrans), prairie falcons (Falco mexicanus), and
common ravens (Corvus corax) (Leitner et al. 1997, p. 49; J. Harris,
personal communication, as cited in the petition, p. 15). There may be
other natural predators of the Mohave ground squirrel.
Mortality is high for the Mohave ground squirrel during the first
year and appears to be skewed toward males (Brylski et al. 1994, p. 64;
Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 28). Mortality may also be caused by
extended periods of low amounts of fall and winter rainfall, which
results in reduced availability of forage and water, and can increase
vulnerability to disease.
Evaluation of Information for This Finding
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to, or
removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an endangered or
threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information on
threats to the Mohave ground squirrel, 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.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of the Species' Habitat or Range
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
The petitioners presented information regarding threats to the
Mohave ground squirrel from reduced range and habitat destruction,
including: urban and rural
[[Page 22067]]
development on private and public lands; agricultural development;
military activities; livestock grazing; transportation; energy
development; and that the cumulative impacts of drought, habitat
destruction, habitat fragmentation, and decrease in precipitation with
climate change pose a threat greater than the drought episodes to which
the Mohave ground squirrel is adapted.
The range of the Mohave ground squirrel is the smallest of all
ground squirrels in the United States. Based on information provided by
the petitioners, the Mohave ground squirrel appears to have been nearly
extirpated from the southern portion of its range, which represents
approximately 20 percent of its range (Leitner as cited in the
petition, p. 8). This assertion is based on the results of surveys
conducted for the Mohave ground squirrel from 2002 to 2004 (Leitner
2004 as cited in the petition, p. 17). The portion of the recently
reduced range includes an area south of State Highway 58 in the
Palmdale-Lancaster area and the Victorville to Lucerne Valley area.
Private Lands
On private lands, which comprise about 31 percent of the current
range of the Mohave ground squirrel, the petitioners claim 2.8 percent
of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel has been lost to urban and
rural development and approximately 2 percent (37,000 ha (92,000 ac))
to agricultural fields. The information on impacts to the Mohave ground
squirrel from agricultural development was derived from Hoyt (1972, p.
8), Aardahl and Roush (1985, p. 2), and Gustafson (1993, pp. 23-24).
The petitioners also stated that they have no updated data to quantify
the extent or intensity of this threat. We have no information in our
files to dispute the figures presented by the petitioners; however, we
currently do not have information to determine whether a 2.8 percent
loss to urban and rural development and a 2 percent loss to
agricultural development is biologically significant to the Mohave
ground squirrel.
Public Lands
Public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) account
for about 31.8 percent of the species' range. The petitioners stated
that BLM's land management plan for the West Mojave Desert (West Mojave
Plan) would allow new development throughout much of the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel and would not protect the four Mohave ground
squirrel ``core areas'' (see petition, p. 17). ``Core areas'' are
defined by the petitioners as locations where Mohave ground squirrels
have been reliably captured over time, or where there are thriving
populations. The petitioners stated that activities that result in the
loss of habitat in these ``core areas'' or prevent dispersal among
these ``core areas'' will impede and eventually prohibit conservation
of the Mohave ground squirrel.
Public land managed by the Department of Defense accounts for about
34.5 percent of the species' current range. The petitioners stated that
current military training at Fort Irwin threatens Mohave ground
squirrels by crushing animals, compacting and otherwise disturbing
soils, collapsing burrows, destroying shrubs used for cover, and
reducing spring annual plants used by Mohave ground squirrels for
forage (Bury et al. 1977, pp. 16, 18). According to the petitioners,
Fort Irwin's training currently affects 7.4 percent of the range of the
Mohave ground squirrel, and the proposed expansion of Fort Irwin will
affect additional lands within the range of the Mohave ground squirrel
and will fragment one of the four Mohave ground squirrel ``core areas''
as identified by the petitioners.
Additionally, 2.7 percent of the current range of the Mohave ground
squirrel occurs on other public `protected lands' (see petition, p. 40)
including; federally designated wilderness areas, State park land,
California Department of Fish and Game land, and the Desert Tortoise
Natural Area.
Livestock Grazing
The petitioners stated that livestock grazing has the potential to
degrade Mohave ground squirrel habitat through changes in soil
structure, including accelerated erosion and collapsing burrows,
changes in vegetative structure, reduced availability of native forage
species (Laabs 2002, p. 5; Campbell 1988, pp. 569, 574), and direct
competition with Mohave ground squirrels for limited quality and
quantity of forage (Leitner and Leitner 1998; pp. 29, A6, A7, A15, and
A23). According to the petitioners' GIS analysis, 27 percent of the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel has been impacted by livestock
grazing.
Aardahl and Roush (1985, p. 23), as cited in the petition, stated
that ``land uses which affect the availability of forbs and grasses
have the potential to influence the long-term population of the Mohave
ground squirrel,'' but this does not ``mean that properly managed
livestock grazing will cause a significant negative impact on the
Mohave ground squirrel.'' Twenty-one of 22 study sites surveyed were
grazed by sheep or cattle in varying degrees; the study site with the
highest total adjusted captures of Mohave ground squirrels showed
considerable signs of grazing (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 23). The
petitioners did not provide information, and we have no information in
our files, on the extent or magnitude of the impacts of livestock
grazing on the Mohave ground squirrel.
Transportation
The petitioners identified the extensive network of highways and
roads in the range of the Mohave ground squirrel as a threat. The
petitioners claim impacts from highway and road establishment and
vehicle use include habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation, and
direct mortality from vehicle strikes (Gustafson 1993, pp. 23, 26; BLM
2003, p. 30; Leitner as cited in the petition, p. 22). The petitioners
stated that there is evidence of surface disturbance to roadsides up to
400 m (1,312 ft) away from the road, and that 37 percent of transects
conducted by the BLM in the West Mojave Desert were bisected by roads.
The petitioners calculated that the total area of the network of roads
and highways affected 65,964 ha (163,000 ac) or 3.3 percent of the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel. The petitioners provided
additional information that impacts from roads on the desert tortoise
have been documented more than 3,962 m (13,000 ft) from the highest
level traffic road (Hoff and Marlow 2002, p. 454) and that similar
impacts likely occur to the Mohave ground squirrel.
We do not agree that impacts to the desert tortoise from roads that
have been measured more than 3,962 m (13,000 ft) from the highest
traffic roads are the same as those to the Mohave ground squirrel. The
Hoff and Marlow study (2002, p. 454) reported on the abundance of
desert tortoise sign at intervals from roads. This study was specific
to the desert tortoise. It did not examine the effects of roads on the
Mohave ground squirrel. Therefore, any application of the results from
this research to the Mohave ground squirrel is inferred and is not
supported by the data. However, we agree with the petitioners that
roads and highways result in direct mortality to Mohave grounds
squirrels from vehicle collisions and habitat loss and degradation.
Energy Development
According to the petitioners, geothermal exploration and
development and the construction of
[[Page 22068]]
solar energy plants in the range of the Mohave ground squirrel have
caused, and will likely cause, adverse impacts to the Mohave ground
squirrel and loss or degradation of habitat (Leitner and Leitner 1989,
p. 2). The petitioners did not quantify the amount of habitat affected.
We acknowledge that energy development for geothermal and solar energy
has occurred within the range of the Mohave ground squirrel and that
this development can result in the degradation or loss of habitat used
by the Mohave ground squirrel. The petitioners do not provide
information, and we do not have information in our files, on the extent
of this loss or degradation and how it will affect the conservation of
the Mohave ground squirrel.
Cumulative Impacts of Habitat Destruction, Fragmentation, and Decreased
Precipitation
The petitioners provided information that indicates the
reproduction and survival of the Mohave ground squirrel is ultimately
linked to rainfall (Harris and Leitner 2004, pp. 517, 518). Mohave
ground squirrels may fail to persist in certain areas during drought
episodes (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 31). The petitioners assert the
cumulative impacts of habitat destruction, habitat fragmentation, and
overall decrease in precipitation due to climate change are a greater
threat to the Mohave ground squirrel than the periods of low rainfall
and drought episodes with which the Mohave ground squirrel evolved.
Based on information from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (Watson et al. 2002, pp. 8, 9), we acknowledge temperatures in
southern California are likely to increase and precipitation is likely
to decrease in the future. With hotter, drier conditions and more
extreme weather patterns in southern California than those with which
the Mohave ground squirrel evolved, the species may be negatively
affected. However, we believe that climate change models that are
currently available are not yet capable of making meaningful
predictions of climate change for specific, local areas such as the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel (Parmesan and Matthews 2005, p.
354). We are not currently aware of models that predict how climate in
the range of the Mohave ground squirrel will change, and we do not know
how any change may alter the range of, or otherwise threaten, the
species.
Summary of Factor A
In summary, the petitioners presented information regarding threats
to the Mohave ground squirrel from reduced range and habitat
destruction, including: urban and rural development on private and
public lands; agricultural development; military activities; livestock
grazing; transportation; and energy development. We found the petition
and information in our files presents substantial information that
these activities may have contributed to a recent range contraction in
the southern portion of the Mohave ground squirrel's range, and may
threaten the Mohave ground squirrel across its current range by
removing shrubs needed for cover and forage, disturbing soil, or
removing or degrading other habitat features necessary for Mohave
ground squirrel life history requirements. Additionally, one or more of
these activities may threaten what the petitioners identify as ``core
areas'' for the Mohave ground squirrel by removing habitat, fragmenting
the habitat, and preventing dispersal among the ``core areas.''
However, we determined the petition does not present substantial
information indicating that climate change may be a threat to the
species. Additionally, information on the subject of climate change in
our files is not specific to the Mohave ground squirrel. We will
evaluate the effects of climate change, including reduced precipitation
and any cumulative effects of habitat fragmentation or loss on the
Mohave ground squirrel, when we conduct our status review.
On the basis of our evaluation of the information in the petition
and information in our files, we determined that the petition presents
substantial information indicating that listing the Mohave ground
squirrel as endangered may be warranted due to destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The petitioners did not provide information or list any threats to
the Mohave ground squirrel from overutilization for commercial,
recreational, or educational purposes. The petitioners stated that the
utilization of the Mohave ground squirrel for scientific purposes is
strictly controlled by the California Department of Fish and Game.
Summary of Factor B
On the basis of our evaluation, we determined that the petition
does not present substantial information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered may be warranted due to the
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes. Additionally, we do not have substantial
information in our files to suggest that overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes may
threaten the Mohave ground squirrel. However, we will evaluate all
factors, including threats from overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes, when we conduct our
status review.
C. Disease or Predation
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
The petitioners did not provide information or list any threat to
the Mohave ground squirrel from disease, and we do not have information
in our files regarding potential threats to this species due to
disease.
The petitioners stated that there is little documentation of the
Mohave ground squirrel's natural predators, but claimed that predation
by coyotes, common ravens, house cats, domestic dogs, and feral dogs is
a concern. Although the petitioners stated that cats prey on small
mammals and dogs dig up rodent burrows, they did not present any
information on the level of mortality or population impacts from
predation for Mohave ground squirrels, any other ground squirrel
species, or any small mammal species. The petitioners noted that the
numbers of common ravens and coyotes, known predators of the Mohave
ground squirrel, have increased, posing an increased predation risk to
Mohave ground squirrel populations. However, there is no information
provided that the numbers of cats, dogs, common ravens, or coyotes have
increased in the range of the Mohave ground squirrel, and there is no
evidence to indicate that there is increased predation by these
predators on the Mohave ground squirrel. We do not have information in
our files to indicate that predation is a threat to the survival of the
Mohave ground squirrel.
Summary of Factor C
On the basis of our evaluation, we determined that the petition
does not present substantial information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered may be warranted due to disease or
predation. Additionally, we do not have substantial information in our
files to suggest that disease or predation threaten the Mohave ground
squirrel. However, we will evaluate all factors, including threats from
disease and
[[Page 22069]]
predation, when we conduct our status review.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
The petitioners stated that current regulations have proven
inadequate to conserve the Mohave ground squirrel; that only 9 percent
of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel has any kind of protected
status; and that, although the Mohave ground squirrel is a State-listed
species, this listing provides no conservation assurances for the
Mohave ground squirrel on Federal lands.
The California Endangered Species Act provides protection for the
Mohave ground squirrel on private and State-owned land, and on Federal
lands in relation to activities carried out by non-Federal entities
that are required to obtain a State permit or authorization.
The major military installations within the range of the Mohave
ground squirrel have implemented Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plans that cover the Mohave ground squirrel and implement
actions to manage for the species. In their management plan for the
West Mojave Desert, the BLM considers the Mohave ground squirrel an
umbrella species, a species whose habitat requirements include those of
many other species and whose conservation should automatically conserve
a host of other species. BLM has implemented a plan that establishes a
Mohave ground squirrel Conservation Area that contains 35 percent of
the species' historical range on BLM land.
Summary of Factor D
On the basis of our evaluation, we determined that the petition
does not present substantial information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered may be warranted due to the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Additionally, we do not
have substantial information in our files to suggest that existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate and thus threaten the Mohave
ground squirrel. However, we will evaluate all factors, including
threats from the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, when we
conduct our status review.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
The petitioners stated that pesticide use may adversely affect the
Mohave ground squirrel. According to the petitioners, Mohave ground
squirrels live in native vegetative communities adjacent to
agricultural fields and other areas where rodenticides are used. Mohave
ground squirrels use these areas for forage and shelter. The
petitioners claim that if rodenticides are used on agricultural fields,
Mohave ground squirrels could be adversely affected, or they could be
exterminated by the State Rodent Program. In the early part of the 20th
century, the Los Angeles Agricultural Commission used poison grain to
target and eliminate ground squirrels in the Antelope Valley, which
includes the historical range of the Mohave ground squirrel.
Although we are aware that rodenticides, such as those that include
strychnine as the active ingredient, may be used to kill ground
squirrels, there is no information in the petition or our files to
indicate that rodenticides are used to specifically target Mohave
ground squirrels or that any rodenticides currently used within the
range of the Mohave ground squirrel are adversely affecting the status
of this species.
Summary of Factor E
On the basis of our evaluation, we determined that the petition
does not present substantial information indicating that listing the
Mohave ground squirrel as endangered may be warranted due to other
natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Additionally, we do not have substantial information in our files to
suggest that other natural or manmade factors threaten the Mohave
ground squirrel. However, we will evaluate all factors, including
threats from other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence, when we conduct our status review.
Finding
The petition and supporting information have identified numerous
factors affecting the Mohave ground squirrel, including: reduced range,
urban and rural development, agricultural development, military
activities, livestock grazing, transportation and energy development,
and cumulative impacts of habitat destruction, fragmentation, and
decreased precipitation (Factor A); predation (Factor C); the lack of
regulatory mechanisms protecting the species and its habitat (Factor
D); and pesticide use (Factor E).
On the basis of our evaluation under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act,
we have determined that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing the Mohave ground
squirrel as endangered may be warranted. This finding is based on
information provided by the petitioners and in our files for Factor A.
In particular, there is substantial information to indicate habitat
based threats under Factor A may remove shrubs needed for cover and
forage, disturb soil, or remove or degrade other habitat features
necessary for Mohave ground squirrel life history requirements across
its current range. The information provided by the petitioners and in
our files for Factors B, C, D, and E was not substantial. In
considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look beyond
the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine whether the
species responds to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to
the species. If there is exposure to a factor, but no response, or only
a positive response, that factor is not a threat. If there is exposure
and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and we
then attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. If the threat
is significant, it may drive or contribute to the risk of extinction of
the species such that the species may warrant listing as threatened or
endangered as those terms are defined by the Act. This does not
necessarily require empirical proof of a threat. The combination of
exposure and some corroborating evidence of how the species is likely
impacted could suffice. The mere identification of factors that could
impact a species negatively may not be sufficient to compel a finding
that listing may be warranted. The information shall contain evidence
sufficient to suggest that these factors may be operative threats that
act on the species to the point that the species may meet the
definition of threatened or endangered under the Act.
Because we have found that the petition presents substantial
information that listing the Mohave ground squirrel may be warranted,
we are initiating a status review to determine whether listing the
Mohave ground squirrel under the Act is warranted. We will issue a 12-
month finding as to whether the petitioned action is warranted.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding
differs
[[Page 22070]]
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 finding.
The petitioners also requested that we designate critical habitat
for the Mohave ground squirrel. If we determine in our 12-month finding
that listing the Mohave ground squirrel is warranted, we will address
the designation of critical habitat at the time of the proposed
rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are staff members of the Ventura
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
above).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: April 12, 2010
Signed: Daniel M. Ashe
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[FR Doc. 2010-9377 Filed 4-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S