Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Spot-Tailed Earless Lizard as Endangered or Threatened, 30082-30087 [2011-12752]
Download as PDF
30082
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923;
3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
Dated: May 10, 2011.
James Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2011–12766 Filed 5–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2011–0017; MO
92210–0–0008B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Spot-Tailed Earless
Lizard as Endangered or Threatened
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and
initiation of status review.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia
lacerata) as endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act), and to
designate critical habitat. Based on our
review, we find that the petition
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing this species may be warranted.
Therefore, with the publication of this
notice, we are initiating a review of the
status of the species to determine if
listing the spot-tailed earless lizard is
warranted. To ensure that this status
review is comprehensive, we are
requesting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding the
spot-tailed earless lizard, including its
two subspecies (Holbrookia lacerata
lacerata and Holbrookia lacerata
subcaudalis). 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.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that we
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
receive information on or before July 25,
2011. Please note that if you are using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES section, below), the deadline
for submitting an electronic comment is
Eastern Daylight Time on this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the box that
reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the
Docket number for this finding, which
is [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2011–0017].
Check the box that reads ‘‘Open for
Comment/Submission,’’ and then click
the Search button. You should then see
an icon that reads ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’
Please ensure that you have found the
correct rulemaking before submitting
your comment.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: [Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2011–0017]; Division of
Policy and Directives Management; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N.
Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM;
Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information we
receive on https://www.regulations.gov.
This generally means that we will post
any personal information you provide
us (see the Request for Information
section below for more details).
After July 25, 2011, you must submit
information directly to the Field Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section below). Please note that we
might not be able to address or
incorporate information that we receive
after the above requested date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor,
Austin Ecological Services Field Office;
by U.S. mail at 10711 Burnet Road,
Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; by
telephone (512–490–0057); or by
facsimile (512–490–0974). If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Information
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 spot-tailed earless
lizard from governmental agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, and any other
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
interested parties. We seek information
on:
(1) The biology, range, and population
trends of the species and of both its
subspecies, 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.
(2) The factors that are the basis for
making a listing determination for a
species under section 4(a) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
which are:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of 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. (3)
Information related to the specific
threats to the spot-tailed earless lizard
and both subspecies of the spot-tailed
earless lizard.
If, after the status review,we
determine that listing the spot-tailed
earless lizard or either of its subspecies
is warranted, we will propose critical
habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A)
of the Act), under 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 spot-tailed earless lizard, 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.
In addition, we request data and
information on ‘‘specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the
species’’ that are ‘‘essential to 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 requirements of section 4 of the Act.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as scientific
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
journal articles or other publications) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
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 status review 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 Web site. 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 review.
However, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy submissions on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting
documentation that we received and
used in preparing this finding is
available for you to review at https://
www.regulations.gov, or you may make
an appointment during normal business
hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) 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
the 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
commercial information was presented,
we are required to promptly conduct a
species status review, which we
subsequently summarize in our
12-month finding.
Petition History
On January 21, 2010, we received a
petition dated January 13, 2010, from
Wild Earth Guardians, requesting that
the spot-tailed earless lizard be listed as
threatened or endangered and that
critical habitat be designated under the
Act. The petition clearly identified itself
as such and included the requisite
identification information for the
petitioner, as required by 50 CFR
424.14(a). In a July 19, 2010, letter to the
petitioner, we responded that we
reviewed the information presented in
the petition and determined that issuing
an emergency regulation temporarily
listing the species under section 4(b)(7)
of the Act was not warranted. This
finding addresses the petition.
Previous Federal Action
There have been no previous Federal
actions related to this species.
Species Information
The spot-tailed earless lizard
(Holbrookia lacerata) is a small lizard
that averages 11.5 to 15.2 centimeters
(cm) (4.5 to 6.0 inches (in)) from the
nose to the end of the tail, and has been
described as the most conspicuously
spotted of all earless lizards (Conant and
Collins 1991, p. 101).
The spot-tailed earless lizard is
divided into two distinct subspecies,
based on morphological (physical)
differences and geographic separation
(Conant and Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon
2000, p. 27). The northern spot-tailed
earless lizard subspecies, Holbrookia
laceratalacerata, has two rows of dark
blotches down each side of its back. The
dark blotches are often so close together
that they appear to be two dark rows
down each side of the lizard’s back.
This subspecies has on average 13
femoral pores, which are openings
containing a wax-like material found on
the underside of the thighs and are used
to leave a scent trail when they rub their
legs on the ground. The southern spottailed earless lizard, Holbrookia
laceratasubcaudalis, has 2 distinct rows
of dark blotches down each side of its
back and an average of 16 femoral pores
under each hind leg.
We accept the characterization of
Holbrookia lacerata lacerate and
Holbrookia laceratasubcaudalis as
subspecies of the petitioned species, H.
lacerata, because they were properly
described in peer-reviewed literature
and are recognized as subspecies by
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30083
knowledgeable herpetologists: H. l.
lacerata since 1880, and H. l.
subcaudata since 1956 (ITIS 2009, p. 1).
In addition to the two subspecies
having distinct morphological
characteristics (Dixon 2000, p. 27), they
are separated geographically along the
Balcones Escarpment, which is a
geologic fault zone in central Texas
(Axtell 1968, p. 56.1). It seems that the
Balcones Escarpment serves as a barrier
to genetic exchange (Axtell 1968, p.
56.1; Hammerson et al. 2007, p. 4). The
northern subspecies historically
occurred throughout the Edwards
Plateau (a geographic region in westcentral Texas), while the southern
subspecies historically occurred through
south Texas into parts of Mexico’s
States of Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and
Tamaulipas (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1;
Conant and Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon
2000, p. 73; Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department (TPWD) 2005a, p. 1;
Hammerson et al. 2007, p. 2). In central
and southern Texas, the spot-tailed
earless lizard occurs across 75 counties
(TPWD 2005a, p. 1). The TPWD’s
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy (2005b, pp. 1093–1094)
suggests that the spot-tailed earless
lizard is declining in Texas, especially
along the periphery of its range, but
does not refer to any specific studies or
surveys. Also, the petitioner did not
provide any information, and we could
not find any readily available in our
files, regarding the current species’
status or distribution in Mexico.
Because population and distribution
information is limited throughout the
species’ range, research is needed to
verify the suggested decline in Texas
and to determine the species’ current
distribution.
The spot-tailed earless lizard is found
in a variety of habitats, but typically
they use habitat with sparse vegetation
or bare ground (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1).
Spot-tailed earless lizards inhabit flat
and open prairies or meadows, sand
dunes, chaparral-shrubland, mixed
woodland areas, and graded roads in
Texas (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1; TPWD
2005b, p. 1093), as well as the desert
habitats of northern Mexico (Axtell
1968, p. 56.1). The lizard tends to
burrow in soil, fallen logs, and other
ground debris, and avoid obstructions,
such as waterways, buildings, and
pavement (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1).
The TPWD (2005a, p. 1093) described
differences in habitat associations
between the two spot-tailed lizard
subspecies. The northern spot-tailed
earless lizard apparently prefers caliche
soils (hardened deposit of calcium
carbonate found in arid regions that
cements together other materials,
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
30084
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
including gravel, sand, clay, and silt) of
the Edwards Plateau in moderately open
prairie-brushland, oak-juniper
woodlands, and mesquite associations.
The southern spot-tailed earless lizard is
most often found in flatter areas in
association with dark clay, clay-loam
soils, and in mesquite-prickly-pear
associations.
In conclusion, the spot-tailed earless
lizard’s present population status is
largely unknown. The TPWD suggests
that the species may be declining along
the periphery of its range, but more
surveys are needed to determine the
species’ current distribution. To ensure
that the status review is comprehensive
and up to date, we are soliciting
information on the species’ status and
distribution throughout its range.
Evaluation of Information for This
Finding
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR 424 set forth the procedures for
adding a 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 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
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.
In making this 90-day finding, we
evaluated whether information
regarding threats to the spot-tailed
earless lizard, as presented in the
petition and documented in 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 Its Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the
conversion of native habitat to cropland
and nonnative grasses for livestock, as
well as habitat fragmentation by road
construction and development, are
threats to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In support of the conversion of native
habitat to cropland and nonnative
grasses for livestock, the petitioner cited
NatureServe (2009, pp. 1–2) and
TPWD’s Conservation Wildlife Strategy
(2005a, p. 1094), which mentioned that
the eastern portion of the species’
historical range is now used for
agricultural production.
Also, in support of its assertion that
the species is threatened by habitat
fragmentation from road construction
and development, the petitioner
presented data adapted from the U.S.
Census Bureau showing that the total
human population of the counties
included within the spot-tailed earless
lizard’s historical range increased by 33
percent between 1990 and 2008, to over
6.2 million people (U.S. Census Bureau
2009). Additionally, the petitioner
stated that 5 counties in Texas
(Williamson, Hays, Comal, Kendall, and
Guadalupe) within the lizard’s historical
range are among the 100 fastest growing
counties in the United States (U.S.
Census Bureau 2009, pp. 1–5).
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
In reference to the petitioner’s claims
concerning the conversion of native
habitat to cropland and nonnative
grasses for livestock, the information
presented appears to be reliable.The
petitioner cited TPWD’s Comprehensive
Wildlife Conservation Strategy, which
noted that the spread of nonnative
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
grasses is a problem in Texas (TPWD
2005b, p. 88). However, the petitioner
provided no information indicating how
the spread of nonnative grasses may be
acting on the species. Also, the
petitioner provided no information on
the conversion of native habitat to
cropland, the extent to which this may
be occurring within the range of the
species, or how this might impact the
spot-tailed earless lizard. Therefore, the
petitioner has not provided substantial
information indicating that conversion
of native habitat to cropland or
nonnative grasses for livestock may be
a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard,
and our files do not contain any
information to support the petitioner’s
claims.
In reference to the petitioner’s claim
that habitat fragmentation by road
construction and development is a
threat to the species, the information
appears reliable. The petitioner
referenced human population growth in
conjunction with habitat fragmentation
by road construction, but provided no
information indicating how this
potential threat may be acting on the
species. Also, we have no information
available in our files indicating that the
spot-tailed earless lizard’s movements
are inhibited by roads or that roads are
acting as barriers to the lizard. Based on
the above, the petitioner has not
provided substantial information
indicating that habitat fragmentation by
road construction and development may
be a threat to the spot-tailed earless
lizard.
We believe that crossing highways
may result in mortality to individual
lizards; however, there is no evidence
indicating that road-related mortalities
are having an impact on the
species’status. We believe the impact of
road-related mortality is minimal
because of the species’ small home
range size. In a similar species, Jones
and Droge (1980, pp. 127–132) found
that the mean home range of the lesser
earless lizard (Holbrookia maculata)
was less than 1 acre (0.4 hectare).
Therefore, it’s likely that the spot-tailed
earless lizard would have to be living
right next to a road for the possibility of
a road-related mortality to occur. We
have no information readily available in
our files and the petitioner provided no
information indicating that road-related
mortalities may have an impact on the
species’ overall status. Based on the
above, the petitioner has not provided
substantial information indicating that
road-related mortalities may be a threat
to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In summary, we find that the petition,
along with information readily available
in our files, has not presented
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
substantial information that the spottailed earless lizard may warrant listing
due to the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that the extent of
impacts due to this factor is currently
unknown and suggests that the Service
should investigate whether collection of
the spot-tailed earless lizard for
scientific purposes or for the pet trade
is a threat to this species.
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
We currently have no information
readily available in our files that
suggests that overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes may be a threat to
this species.Therefore, we find that the
petition, along with information
available in our files, has not presented
substantial information that the spottailed earless lizard may warrant listing
due to this factor.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the
redimported fire ant (Solenopsisinvicta)
(fire ant), a nonnative species, is a threat
to the spot-tailed earless lizard. In
support of this threat, the petitioner
cited Hammerson et al. (2007, p. 6),
which stated that the existence of fire
ants in the spot-tailed earless lizard’s
habitat is a threat to the species. Also,
the petitioner provided a map showing
that the current range of the fire ant
covers the entire current spot-tailed
earless lizard rangein Texas (USDA
2006, p. 1).The petitioner states that fire
ants prey on reptiles and their eggs, and
are reportedly contributing to the
decline of native species (Reagan et al.
2000, pp. 475–478; Allen et al. 2004, pp.
88–103). Fire ants also prey on
hatchlings and adult animals (Wojcik et
al. 2001, pp. 16–23).
Additionally, the petitioner noted that
habitat disturbances can lead to
invasions by fire ants across specific
locations (Zettler et al. 2004, p. 517).
Fire ant colonies multiply in disturbed
and early-succession areas, such as
woody debris in clearcut areas (Todd et
al. 2008, p. 540). Thus, clear cutting in
spot-tailed earless lizard woodland
habitat could trigger fire ant invasions.
Further, the petitioner provided support
by citing Todd et al. (2008, p. 540),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
which noted that spot-tailed earless
lizards burrow into fallen logs and other
ground debris, and use these substrates
as escape habitat or cover in harsh
environmental conditions, but these
habitats can function as a trap for the
lizards in areas where fire ants have
invaded.
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
In reference to the petitioner’s claims
that the fire ant is a threat to the spottailed earless lizard, the petitioner
provided no information and we have
none readily available in our files
concerning the spread of the fire ant
over the spot-tailed earless lizard’s
range in Mexico. However, information
readily available in our files supports
the petitioner’s claim that the current
range of the fire ant covers the entire
current spot-tailed earless lizard range
in Texas.
Information in our files also indicates
that fire ant predation may be a factor
that is negatively impacting the overall
status of the spot-tailed earless lizard.
The fire ant is an aggressive and
indiscriminate predator that can have
devastating and longlasting impacts on
native populations and communities
(Vinson and Sorenson 1986, p. 17;
Porter and Savignano 1990, p. 2095).
The petitioner provided references that
support the claim that fire ants predate
on eggs, hatchlings, and adults of a
variety of species, including lizards
(Wojcik et al. 2001, pp. 19–20).
Although there is no direct information
on the decline of the spot-tailed earless
lizard due to fire ant predation, the
information presented about other
reptiles, in addition to the aggressive
and indiscriminate predatory nature of
the fire ant, leads us to believe there
may be negative impacts to the spottailed earless lizard. It is likely that fire
ants are preying on adults, hatchlings,
and eggs of spot-tailed earless lizards.
Therefore, information provided by the
petitioner and readily available in our
files constitutes substantial information
indicating that fire ants may be a threat
to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
Regarding the petitioner’s claim that
habitat disturbances can lead to
invasions by fire ants across specific
locations, the information provided
appears reliable. A study by Todd et al.
(2008, pp. 542–545) found that fire ant
abundance increases with disturbances
to native species habitat. Porter et al.
(1988, p. 916) reported that the invasion
of fire ants is known to be aided by any
disturbance that clears a site of heavy
vegetation and disrupts the native ant
community. Therefore, it is likely that
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30085
disturbances such as a clear cutting can
trigger fire ant invasions.
In summary, there is substantial
information on the adverse effects of fire
ants on native fauna in general,
including reptiles, and substantial
information that fire ants may pose a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard
through direct predation on adults,
hatchlings, and eggs. In addition, there
is substantial information that fire ants
occur across a large part of the spottailed earless lizard’s range. Therefore,
we find that the information provided in
the petition, along with information
readily available in our files, has
presented substantial information
indicating that the species may warrant
listing due to predation, primarily by
the fire ant.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the spottailed earless lizard has no regulatory
protection. Yet, the petitioner also cites
NatureServe (2009, p. 2) and states that
one to two spot-tailed earless lizard
populations are appropriately protected
and managed. Other citations provided
by the petitioner include the IUCN’s
Red List Ranks (Hammerson et al. 2007)
and TPWD’s Wildlife Conservation
Strategy (TPWD 2005b).
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
In reference to the petitioner’s claim
that the lack of regulatory protection is
a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard,
the petitioner provided no information
indicating how this potential impact
may be acting on the species. We have
identified the fire ant as a potential
threat, but we are not aware of any
regulatory mechanism that would
address this potential threat. Therefore,
we find that neither the petition nor
information readily available in our files
presented substantial information that
the species may warrant listing due to
the inadequacy of existing regulator
mechanisms.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting Its Continued Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that pollutants,
obstructions to movement, and climate
change are threats to the spot-tailed
earless lizard. In support of pollutants
being a threat, the petitioner stated that
the most severe threat to the spot-tailed
earless lizard’s survival is the use of
agricultural pesticides and herbicides
(NatureServe 2009, p. 1). Also, the
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
30086
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
petitioner pointed out that
environmental pollutants are likely
major threats to reptiles around the
globe and gave examples of the adverse
effects of carbaryl (a chemical in the
carbonate family used chiefly as an
insecticide) on locomotion, energy use,
and overall fitness of terrestrial lizards
(DuRant 2006, pp. 39–41; DuRant et al.
2007a, pp. 446–447; DuRant et al.
2007b, pp. 20–23) and atrazine’s (an
organic compound used as an herbicide)
possible effect as an endocrine disruptor
in reptiles (Deb 2005, p. 401).
In support of obstructions to
movement being a threat, the petitioner
asserted that spot-tailed earless lizards
that try to cross highways usually do not
survive (NatureServe 2009, p. 1). In
addition, the petitioner alleges that
buildings, pavement, human structures,
rivers, ponds, and lakes are barriers to
the lizard’s movement, but no other
evidence or references are provided to
indicate whether the spot-tailed earless
lizard is exposed to the barriers or
whether the species responds to these
barriers in a way that causes actual
impacts to the species.
In regards to climate change being a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard,
the petitioner cited studies on the
potential adverse effects of climate
change. For example, the petitioner
claims that climate change is expected
to cause more extreme and frequent
weather events that include droughts,
heavy rainfall, and heat waves (Karl et
al. 2009, p. 126). The petitioner further
states that climate-driven changes are
likely to combine with other humaninduced stresses to increase the
vulnerability of natural ecosystems to
pests, invasive species, and loss of
native species (Karl et al. 2009, p. 126).
Fischlin et al. (2007, pp. 224–226)
proposed that the productivity,
structure, and carbon balance of
grassland ecosystems are extremely
sensitive to climatic shifts. Root and
Schneider (2002, pp. 29–30) addressed
how climate is likely to affect animals
with habitat associations in particular
vegetation types. The ranges of animals
relying on plant communities could
become compressed, and in some
instances, both the plants and the
animals could become extinct (Root and
Schneider 2002, pp. 29–30).
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and Available in Service
Files
In reference to the petitioner’s claim
that pollutants may be a threat to the
spot-tailed earless lizard, the
information appears reliable. References
cited in the petition on the effects of
carbonate are studies on the western
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
fence lizard (Sceloporusoccidentalis),
which is in the same family as the spottailed earless lizard (DuRant 2006, pp.
39–41; DuRant et al. 2007a, pp. 446–
447; DuRant et al. 2007b, pp. 20–23).
Because the lizards are in the same
family, it is plausible to assume that if
the spot-tailed earless lizard is exposed
to carbonate pollutants, similar results
to exposure to the pesticides would
likely occur. Also, the reference to
atrazine is only a very general reference
to reptiles (Deb 2005, p. 401), but it does
suggest that the pesticide could act as an
endocrine disruptor in the spot-tailed
earless lizard. However, the petition
does not provide information on the
current or historical use of these
pesticides or any other agricultural
pesticides within the spot-tailed earless
lizard’s range, and we have no
information readily available in our files
indicating the extent of use of these
pollutants in the species’ range, or if
these pollutants may be having an
impact on the spot-tailed earless lizard.
Consequently, the petitioner has not
provided substantial information
indicating that pollutants may be a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In reference to the petitioner’s claim
that obstruction to movements is a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard,
the petitioner did not provide reliable
data to support their claim. We
previously addressed the petitioner’s
claims regarding roads as a threat under
Factor A above. Concerning other
barriers to movement, the petitioner
provided no information indicating how
these potential impacts may be acting
on the species. Therefore, the petitioner
has not provided substantial
information indicating that obstruction
to movement may be a threat to the
species.
In reference to the petitioner’s claim
that climate change is a threat to the
spot-tailed earless lizard, the
information appears to be reliable.
However, the petitioner provided
references to studies that discussed
climate change in general terms, that
discussed the potential impacts of
climate change in areas outside of the
spot-tailed earless lizard’s range, and
that discussed the potential impacts of
climate change on unrelated species. No
information was provided by the
petitioner indicating whether the spottailed earless lizard might be sensitive
to environmental changes resulting from
climate change, and no information was
provided regarding the extent of
potential exposure of the spot-tailed
earless lizard to climate change impacts.
The petitioner cited Root and Schneider
(2002, pp. 29–30) who addressed how
climate is likely to affect animals with
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
habitat associations in particular
vegetation types. However, the spottailed earless lizard is found in a variety
of habitats across a broad geographic
range (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1; Conant and
Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon 2000, p. 73;
TPWD 2005a, p. 1; Hammerson et al.
2007, p. 2). Also, it is hypothesized that
plant and animal communities are
generally expected to shift toward the
poles or increase in altitude with
increasing global temperatures and
drought conditions (Parmesan et al.
2000, p. 443; Cameron and Scheel 2001,
p. 676; Root and Schneider 2002, pp.
22–23; Karl et al. 2009, pp. 72, 132). We
believe that increasing global
temperatures and drought conditions
may have little impact on spot-tailed
earless lizards, because the species is
physiologically and behaviorally well
adapted to warm, arid landscapes.
Therefore, based on the above
information, the petitioner has not
provided substantial information
indicating that the environmental
changes associated with climate change
may be a threat to the spot-tailed earless
lizard.
In summary, we find that the petition,
along with information readily available
in our files, did not present substantial
information that the spot-tailed earless
lizard may warrant listing due to other
natural or manmade factors.
Finding
On the basis of our determination
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we
have determined that the petition
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing both the northern and southern
subspecies of the spot-tailed earless
lizard throughout their entire ranges
may be warranted. This finding is based
on information provided under factor C,
the potential threat from fire ant
predation.
Because we have found that the
petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
spot-tailed earless lizard may be
warranted, we are initiating a status
review to determine whether listing the
spot-tailed earless lizard under the Act
is warranted.
The ‘‘substantial information’’
standard for a 90-day finding differs
from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and
commercial data’’ standard that applies
to a status review to determine whether
a petitioned action is warranted. A 90day 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
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
conducted following a substantial 90day 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.
References Cited
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A complete list of references cited is
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 May 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
from the Austin Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are
staff members of the Austin Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
PO 00000
30087
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Dated: May 17, 2011.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–12752 Filed 5–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30082-30087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12752]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2011-0017; MO 92210-0-0008B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Spot-Tailed Earless Lizard as Endangered or
Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the spot-tailed earless lizard
(Holbrookia lacerata) as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), and to designate critical
habitat. Based on our review, we find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that
listing this species may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication
of this notice, we are initiating a review of the status of the species
to determine if listing the spot-tailed earless lizard is warranted. To
ensure that this status review is comprehensive, we are requesting
scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the
spot-tailed earless lizard, including its two subspecies (Holbrookia
lacerata lacerata and Holbrookia lacerata subcaudalis). 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.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request
that we receive information on or before July 25, 2011. Please note
that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES
section, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic comment is
Eastern Daylight Time on this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In
the box that reads ``Enter Keyword or ID,'' enter the Docket number for
this finding, which is [Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2011-0017]. Check the box
that reads ``Open for Comment/Submission,'' and then click the Search
button. You should then see an icon that reads ``Submit a Comment.''
Please ensure that you have found the correct rulemaking before
submitting your comment.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: [Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2011-0017]; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information we receive on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information
section below for more details).
After July 25, 2011, you must submit information directly to the
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below).
Please note that we might not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the above requested date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor,
Austin Ecological Services Field Office; by U.S. mail at 10711 Burnet
Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; by telephone (512-490-0057); or by
facsimile (512-490-0974). If you use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Information
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
spot-tailed earless lizard from governmental agencies, Native American
Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested
parties. We seek information on:
(1) The biology, range, and population trends of the species and of
both its subspecies, 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.
(2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing
determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which
are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of 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. (3) Information related to the specific threats to the spot-
tailed earless lizard and both subspecies of the spot-tailed earless
lizard.
If, after the status review,we determine that listing the spot-
tailed earless lizard or either of its subspecies is warranted, we will
propose critical habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) of the
Act), under 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 spot-tailed
earless lizard, 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.
In addition, we request data and information on ``specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species'' that are
``essential to 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 requirements of section 4
of the Act.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific
[[Page 30083]]
journal articles or other publications) to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information you include.
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 status review 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
Web site. 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 review.
However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will
post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting documentation that we received and used
in preparing this finding is available for you to review at https://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal
business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) 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 the 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 conduct a species status review, which we subsequently
summarize in our 12-month finding.
Petition History
On January 21, 2010, we received a petition dated January 13, 2010,
from Wild Earth Guardians, requesting that the spot-tailed earless
lizard be listed as threatened or endangered and that critical habitat
be designated under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as
such and included the requisite identification information for the
petitioner, as required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a July 19, 2010, letter
to the petitioner, we responded that we reviewed the information
presented in the petition and determined that issuing an emergency
regulation temporarily listing the species under section 4(b)(7) of the
Act was not warranted. This finding addresses the petition.
Previous Federal Action
There have been no previous Federal actions related to this
species.
Species Information
The spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia lacerata) is a small
lizard that averages 11.5 to 15.2 centimeters (cm) (4.5 to 6.0 inches
(in)) from the nose to the end of the tail, and has been described as
the most conspicuously spotted of all earless lizards (Conant and
Collins 1991, p. 101).
The spot-tailed earless lizard is divided into two distinct
subspecies, based on morphological (physical) differences and
geographic separation (Conant and Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon 2000, p.
27). The northern spot-tailed earless lizard subspecies, Holbrookia
laceratalacerata, has two rows of dark blotches down each side of its
back. The dark blotches are often so close together that they appear to
be two dark rows down each side of the lizard's back. This subspecies
has on average 13 femoral pores, which are openings containing a wax-
like material found on the underside of the thighs and are used to
leave a scent trail when they rub their legs on the ground. The
southern spot-tailed earless lizard, Holbrookia laceratasubcaudalis,
has 2 distinct rows of dark blotches down each side of its back and an
average of 16 femoral pores under each hind leg.
We accept the characterization of Holbrookia lacerata lacerate and
Holbrookia laceratasubcaudalis as subspecies of the petitioned species,
H. lacerata, because they were properly described in peer-reviewed
literature and are recognized as subspecies by knowledgeable
herpetologists: H. l. lacerata since 1880, and H. l. subcaudata since
1956 (ITIS 2009, p. 1).
In addition to the two subspecies having distinct morphological
characteristics (Dixon 2000, p. 27), they are separated geographically
along the Balcones Escarpment, which is a geologic fault zone in
central Texas (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1). It seems that the Balcones
Escarpment serves as a barrier to genetic exchange (Axtell 1968, p.
56.1; Hammerson et al. 2007, p. 4). The northern subspecies
historically occurred throughout the Edwards Plateau (a geographic
region in west-central Texas), while the southern subspecies
historically occurred through south Texas into parts of Mexico's States
of Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1; Conant
and Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon 2000, p. 73; Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department (TPWD) 2005a, p. 1; Hammerson et al. 2007, p. 2). In central
and southern Texas, the spot-tailed earless lizard occurs across 75
counties (TPWD 2005a, p. 1). The TPWD's Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy (2005b, pp. 1093-1094) suggests that the spot-
tailed earless lizard is declining in Texas, especially along the
periphery of its range, but does not refer to any specific studies or
surveys. Also, the petitioner did not provide any information, and we
could not find any readily available in our files, regarding the
current species' status or distribution in Mexico. Because population
and distribution information is limited throughout the species' range,
research is needed to verify the suggested decline in Texas and to
determine the species' current distribution.
The spot-tailed earless lizard is found in a variety of habitats,
but typically they use habitat with sparse vegetation or bare ground
(Axtell 1968, p. 56.1). Spot-tailed earless lizards inhabit flat and
open prairies or meadows, sand dunes, chaparral-shrubland, mixed
woodland areas, and graded roads in Texas (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1; TPWD
2005b, p. 1093), as well as the desert habitats of northern Mexico
(Axtell 1968, p. 56.1). The lizard tends to burrow in soil, fallen
logs, and other ground debris, and avoid obstructions, such as
waterways, buildings, and pavement (Axtell 1968, p. 56.1).
The TPWD (2005a, p. 1093) described differences in habitat
associations between the two spot-tailed lizard subspecies. The
northern spot-tailed earless lizard apparently prefers caliche soils
(hardened deposit of calcium carbonate found in arid regions that
cements together other materials,
[[Page 30084]]
including gravel, sand, clay, and silt) of the Edwards Plateau in
moderately open prairie-brushland, oak-juniper woodlands, and mesquite
associations. The southern spot-tailed earless lizard is most often
found in flatter areas in association with dark clay, clay-loam soils,
and in mesquite-prickly-pear associations.
In conclusion, the spot-tailed earless lizard's present population
status is largely unknown. The TPWD suggests that the species may be
declining along the periphery of its range, but more surveys are needed
to determine the species' current distribution. To ensure that the
status review is comprehensive and up to date, we are soliciting
information on the species' status and distribution throughout its
range.
Evaluation of Information for This Finding
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a 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 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.
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information
regarding threats to the spot-tailed earless lizard, as presented in
the petition and documented in 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 Its Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the conversion of native habitat to
cropland and nonnative grasses for livestock, as well as habitat
fragmentation by road construction and development, are threats to the
spot-tailed earless lizard.
In support of the conversion of native habitat to cropland and
nonnative grasses for livestock, the petitioner cited NatureServe
(2009, pp. 1-2) and TPWD's Conservation Wildlife Strategy (2005a, p.
1094), which mentioned that the eastern portion of the species'
historical range is now used for agricultural production.
Also, in support of its assertion that the species is threatened by
habitat fragmentation from road construction and development, the
petitioner presented data adapted from the U.S. Census Bureau showing
that the total human population of the counties included within the
spot-tailed earless lizard's historical range increased by 33 percent
between 1990 and 2008, to over 6.2 million people (U.S. Census Bureau
2009). Additionally, the petitioner stated that 5 counties in Texas
(Williamson, Hays, Comal, Kendall, and Guadalupe) within the lizard's
historical range are among the 100 fastest growing counties in the
United States (U.S. Census Bureau 2009, pp. 1-5).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
In reference to the petitioner's claims concerning the conversion
of native habitat to cropland and nonnative grasses for livestock, the
information presented appears to be reliable.The petitioner cited
TPWD's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, which noted that
the spread of nonnative grasses is a problem in Texas (TPWD 2005b, p.
88). However, the petitioner provided no information indicating how the
spread of nonnative grasses may be acting on the species. Also, the
petitioner provided no information on the conversion of native habitat
to cropland, the extent to which this may be occurring within the range
of the species, or how this might impact the spot-tailed earless
lizard. Therefore, the petitioner has not provided substantial
information indicating that conversion of native habitat to cropland or
nonnative grasses for livestock may be a threat to the spot-tailed
earless lizard, and our files do not contain any information to support
the petitioner's claims.
In reference to the petitioner's claim that habitat fragmentation
by road construction and development is a threat to the species, the
information appears reliable. The petitioner referenced human
population growth in conjunction with habitat fragmentation by road
construction, but provided no information indicating how this potential
threat may be acting on the species. Also, we have no information
available in our files indicating that the spot-tailed earless lizard's
movements are inhibited by roads or that roads are acting as barriers
to the lizard. Based on the above, the petitioner has not provided
substantial information indicating that habitat fragmentation by road
construction and development may be a threat to the spot-tailed earless
lizard.
We believe that crossing highways may result in mortality to
individual lizards; however, there is no evidence indicating that road-
related mortalities are having an impact on the species'status. We
believe the impact of road-related mortality is minimal because of the
species' small home range size. In a similar species, Jones and Droge
(1980, pp. 127-132) found that the mean home range of the lesser
earless lizard (Holbrookia maculata) was less than 1 acre (0.4
hectare). Therefore, it's likely that the spot-tailed earless lizard
would have to be living right next to a road for the possibility of a
road-related mortality to occur. We have no information readily
available in our files and the petitioner provided no information
indicating that road-related mortalities may have an impact on the
species' overall status. Based on the above, the petitioner has not
provided substantial information indicating that road-related
mortalities may be a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In summary, we find that the petition, along with information
readily available in our files, has not presented
[[Page 30085]]
substantial information that the spot-tailed earless lizard may warrant
listing due to the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that the extent of impacts due to this factor
is currently unknown and suggests that the Service should investigate
whether collection of the spot-tailed earless lizard for scientific
purposes or for the pet trade is a threat to this species.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
We currently have no information readily available in our files
that suggests that overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes may be a threat to this
species.Therefore, we find that the petition, along with information
available in our files, has not presented substantial information that
the spot-tailed earless lizard may warrant listing due to this factor.
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the redimported fire ant
(Solenopsisinvicta) (fire ant), a nonnative species, is a threat to the
spot-tailed earless lizard. In support of this threat, the petitioner
cited Hammerson et al. (2007, p. 6), which stated that the existence of
fire ants in the spot-tailed earless lizard's habitat is a threat to
the species. Also, the petitioner provided a map showing that the
current range of the fire ant covers the entire current spot-tailed
earless lizard rangein Texas (USDA 2006, p. 1).The petitioner states
that fire ants prey on reptiles and their eggs, and are reportedly
contributing to the decline of native species (Reagan et al. 2000, pp.
475-478; Allen et al. 2004, pp. 88-103). Fire ants also prey on
hatchlings and adult animals (Wojcik et al. 2001, pp. 16-23).
Additionally, the petitioner noted that habitat disturbances can
lead to invasions by fire ants across specific locations (Zettler et
al. 2004, p. 517). Fire ant colonies multiply in disturbed and early-
succession areas, such as woody debris in clearcut areas (Todd et al.
2008, p. 540). Thus, clear cutting in spot-tailed earless lizard
woodland habitat could trigger fire ant invasions. Further, the
petitioner provided support by citing Todd et al. (2008, p. 540), which
noted that spot-tailed earless lizards burrow into fallen logs and
other ground debris, and use these substrates as escape habitat or
cover in harsh environmental conditions, but these habitats can
function as a trap for the lizards in areas where fire ants have
invaded.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
In reference to the petitioner's claims that the fire ant is a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard, the petitioner provided no
information and we have none readily available in our files concerning
the spread of the fire ant over the spot-tailed earless lizard's range
in Mexico. However, information readily available in our files supports
the petitioner's claim that the current range of the fire ant covers
the entire current spot-tailed earless lizard range in Texas.
Information in our files also indicates that fire ant predation may
be a factor that is negatively impacting the overall status of the
spot-tailed earless lizard. The fire ant is an aggressive and
indiscriminate predator that can have devastating and longlasting
impacts on native populations and communities (Vinson and Sorenson
1986, p. 17; Porter and Savignano 1990, p. 2095). The petitioner
provided references that support the claim that fire ants predate on
eggs, hatchlings, and adults of a variety of species, including lizards
(Wojcik et al. 2001, pp. 19-20). Although there is no direct
information on the decline of the spot-tailed earless lizard due to
fire ant predation, the information presented about other reptiles, in
addition to the aggressive and indiscriminate predatory nature of the
fire ant, leads us to believe there may be negative impacts to the
spot-tailed earless lizard. It is likely that fire ants are preying on
adults, hatchlings, and eggs of spot-tailed earless lizards. Therefore,
information provided by the petitioner and readily available in our
files constitutes substantial information indicating that fire ants may
be a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
Regarding the petitioner's claim that habitat disturbances can lead
to invasions by fire ants across specific locations, the information
provided appears reliable. A study by Todd et al. (2008, pp. 542-545)
found that fire ant abundance increases with disturbances to native
species habitat. Porter et al. (1988, p. 916) reported that the
invasion of fire ants is known to be aided by any disturbance that
clears a site of heavy vegetation and disrupts the native ant
community. Therefore, it is likely that disturbances such as a clear
cutting can trigger fire ant invasions.
In summary, there is substantial information on the adverse effects
of fire ants on native fauna in general, including reptiles, and
substantial information that fire ants may pose a threat to the spot-
tailed earless lizard through direct predation on adults, hatchlings,
and eggs. In addition, there is substantial information that fire ants
occur across a large part of the spot-tailed earless lizard's range.
Therefore, we find that the information provided in the petition, along
with information readily available in our files, has presented
substantial information indicating that the species may warrant listing
due to predation, primarily by the fire ant.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the spot-tailed earless lizard has no
regulatory protection. Yet, the petitioner also cites NatureServe
(2009, p. 2) and states that one to two spot-tailed earless lizard
populations are appropriately protected and managed. Other citations
provided by the petitioner include the IUCN's Red List Ranks (Hammerson
et al. 2007) and TPWD's Wildlife Conservation Strategy (TPWD 2005b).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
In reference to the petitioner's claim that the lack of regulatory
protection is a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard, the
petitioner provided no information indicating how this potential impact
may be acting on the species. We have identified the fire ant as a
potential threat, but we are not aware of any regulatory mechanism that
would address this potential threat. Therefore, we find that neither
the petition nor information readily available in our files presented
substantial information that the species may warrant listing due to the
inadequacy of existing regulator mechanisms.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that pollutants, obstructions to movement,
and climate change are threats to the spot-tailed earless lizard. In
support of pollutants being a threat, the petitioner stated that the
most severe threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard's survival is the
use of agricultural pesticides and herbicides (NatureServe 2009, p. 1).
Also, the
[[Page 30086]]
petitioner pointed out that environmental pollutants are likely major
threats to reptiles around the globe and gave examples of the adverse
effects of carbaryl (a chemical in the carbonate family used chiefly as
an insecticide) on locomotion, energy use, and overall fitness of
terrestrial lizards (DuRant 2006, pp. 39-41; DuRant et al. 2007a, pp.
446-447; DuRant et al. 2007b, pp. 20-23) and atrazine's (an organic
compound used as an herbicide) possible effect as an endocrine
disruptor in reptiles (Deb 2005, p. 401).
In support of obstructions to movement being a threat, the
petitioner asserted that spot-tailed earless lizards that try to cross
highways usually do not survive (NatureServe 2009, p. 1). In addition,
the petitioner alleges that buildings, pavement, human structures,
rivers, ponds, and lakes are barriers to the lizard's movement, but no
other evidence or references are provided to indicate whether the spot-
tailed earless lizard is exposed to the barriers or whether the species
responds to these barriers in a way that causes actual impacts to the
species.
In regards to climate change being a threat to the spot-tailed
earless lizard, the petitioner cited studies on the potential adverse
effects of climate change. For example, the petitioner claims that
climate change is expected to cause more extreme and frequent weather
events that include droughts, heavy rainfall, and heat waves (Karl et
al. 2009, p. 126). The petitioner further states that climate-driven
changes are likely to combine with other human-induced stresses to
increase the vulnerability of natural ecosystems to pests, invasive
species, and loss of native species (Karl et al. 2009, p. 126).
Fischlin et al. (2007, pp. 224-226) proposed that the productivity,
structure, and carbon balance of grassland ecosystems are extremely
sensitive to climatic shifts. Root and Schneider (2002, pp. 29-30)
addressed how climate is likely to affect animals with habitat
associations in particular vegetation types. The ranges of animals
relying on plant communities could become compressed, and in some
instances, both the plants and the animals could become extinct (Root
and Schneider 2002, pp. 29-30).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
In reference to the petitioner's claim that pollutants may be a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard, the information appears
reliable. References cited in the petition on the effects of carbonate
are studies on the western fence lizard (Sceloporusoccidentalis), which
is in the same family as the spot-tailed earless lizard (DuRant 2006,
pp. 39-41; DuRant et al. 2007a, pp. 446-447; DuRant et al. 2007b, pp.
20-23). Because the lizards are in the same family, it is plausible to
assume that if the spot-tailed earless lizard is exposed to carbonate
pollutants, similar results to exposure to the pesticides would likely
occur. Also, the reference to atrazine is only a very general reference
to reptiles (Deb 2005, p. 401), but it does suggest that the pesticide
could act as an endocrine disruptor in the spot-tailed earless lizard.
However, the petition does not provide information on the current or
historical use of these pesticides or any other agricultural pesticides
within the spot-tailed earless lizard's range, and we have no
information readily available in our files indicating the extent of use
of these pollutants in the species' range, or if these pollutants may
be having an impact on the spot-tailed earless lizard. Consequently,
the petitioner has not provided substantial information indicating that
pollutants may be a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In reference to the petitioner's claim that obstruction to
movements is a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard, the petitioner
did not provide reliable data to support their claim. We previously
addressed the petitioner's claims regarding roads as a threat under
Factor A above. Concerning other barriers to movement, the petitioner
provided no information indicating how these potential impacts may be
acting on the species. Therefore, the petitioner has not provided
substantial information indicating that obstruction to movement may be
a threat to the species.
In reference to the petitioner's claim that climate change is a
threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard, the information appears to be
reliable. However, the petitioner provided references to studies that
discussed climate change in general terms, that discussed the potential
impacts of climate change in areas outside of the spot-tailed earless
lizard's range, and that discussed the potential impacts of climate
change on unrelated species. No information was provided by the
petitioner indicating whether the spot-tailed earless lizard might be
sensitive to environmental changes resulting from climate change, and
no information was provided regarding the extent of potential exposure
of the spot-tailed earless lizard to climate change impacts. The
petitioner cited Root and Schneider (2002, pp. 29-30) who addressed how
climate is likely to affect animals with habitat associations in
particular vegetation types. However, the spot-tailed earless lizard is
found in a variety of habitats across a broad geographic range (Axtell
1968, p. 56.1; Conant and Collins 1991, p. 101; Dixon 2000, p. 73; TPWD
2005a, p. 1; Hammerson et al. 2007, p. 2). Also, it is hypothesized
that plant and animal communities are generally expected to shift
toward the poles or increase in altitude with increasing global
temperatures and drought conditions (Parmesan et al. 2000, p. 443;
Cameron and Scheel 2001, p. 676; Root and Schneider 2002, pp. 22-23;
Karl et al. 2009, pp. 72, 132). We believe that increasing global
temperatures and drought conditions may have little impact on spot-
tailed earless lizards, because the species is physiologically and
behaviorally well adapted to warm, arid landscapes. Therefore, based on
the above information, the petitioner has not provided substantial
information indicating that the environmental changes associated with
climate change may be a threat to the spot-tailed earless lizard.
In summary, we find that the petition, along with information
readily available in our files, did not present substantial information
that the spot-tailed earless lizard may warrant listing due to other
natural or manmade factors.
Finding
On the basis of our determination under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Act, we have determined that the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing both the
northern and southern subspecies of the spot-tailed earless lizard
throughout their entire ranges may be warranted. This finding is based
on information provided under factor C, the potential threat from fire
ant predation.
Because we have found that the petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the spot-tailed earless lizard may
be warranted, we are initiating a status review to determine whether
listing the spot-tailed earless lizard under the Act is warranted.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding
differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard
that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status
review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether
a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough
status review of the species, which is
[[Page 30087]]
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.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Austin Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are staff members of the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 17, 2011.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-12752 Filed 5-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P