Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Six Sand Dune Beetles as Endangered or Threatened, 47123-47133 [2011-19743]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
B. Comment Filing Procedures
64. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments in
response to this Second Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking on or before the
dates indicated on the first page of this
document. Comments may be filed
using the Commission’s Electronic
Comment Filing System (ECFS). See
Electronic Filing of Documents in
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121
(1998).
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
• Paper Filers: Parties that choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in
the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for
each additional docket or rulemaking
number.
Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St., SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries
must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes
must be disposed of before entering the
building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Accessible Formats
65. To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an e-mail to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–
418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty).
D. Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
66. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, see 5 U.S.C. 604,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
the Commission has prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
of the possible significant economic
impact on small entities of the policies
and rules addressed in this document.
Written public comments are requested
in the IRFA. These comments must be
filed in accordance with the same filing
deadlines as comments filed in response
to this Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking as set forth on the
first page of this document, and have a
separate and distinct heading
designating them as responses to the
IRFA.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
68. The Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking contain proposed
new information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general
public and OMB to comment on the
information collection requirements
contained in this document, as required
by PRA. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, we seek specific comment on how
we might ‘‘further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.’’
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–19718 Filed 8–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0041; MO–
92210–0–0008]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List Six Sand Dune Beetles
as Endangered or Threatened
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and
initiation of status reviews.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list six
sand dune beetles as endangered or
threatened and to designate critical
habitat under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on
our review, we find that the petition
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47123
does not present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing two of the six species [Hardy’s
aegialian scarab (Aegialia hardyi) and
Sand Mountain serican scarab (Serica
psammobunus)] may be warranted.
However, we find that the petition
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing may be warranted for four of the
six species [Crescent Dunes aegialian
scarab (A. crescenta), Crescent Dunes
serican scarab (S. ammomenisco), large
aegialian scarab (A. magnifica), and
Giuliani’s dune scarab (Pseudocotalpa
giuliani)]. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are
initiating a review of the status of these
species to determine if listing these four
species is warranted. To ensure that the
status reviews are comprehensive, we
are requesting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding
these four species. Based on the status
reviews, we will issue 12-month
findings on these four species, which
will address whether the petitioned
actions are warranted, as provided in
the Act.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct the status reviews, we request
that we receive information on or before
October 3, 2011. Please note that if you
are using the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below),
the deadline for submitting an
electronic comment is 11:59 p.m.
Eastern 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 [FWS–R8–ES–2011–0041]. 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: [FWS–R8–
ES–2011–0041]; 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 October 3, 2011, you must
submit information directly to the Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
47124
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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: Jill
Ralston, Acting State Supervisor, by
U.S. mail at Nevada Fish and Wildlife
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1340 Financial Blvd, Suite 234, Reno,
NV 89502, by telephone at 775–861–
6300, or by facsimile at 775–861–6301.
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), please call the
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 reviews to be complete and based
on the best available scientific and
commercial information, we request
information on the Crescent Dunes
aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes serican
scarab, large aegialian scarab, and
Giuliani’s dune scarab from
governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, and any other
interested parties. For each of these
species, 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.
(2) The factors that are the basis for
making a listing, delisting, or
downlisting 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.
If, after the status reviews, we
determine that listing any of the four
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
sand dune beetle species 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 each of the four sand dune beetle
species, 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 are 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
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 these status reviews 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
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Nevada 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
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 February 2, 2010, we received a
petition dated January 29, 2010, from
WildEarth Guardians (hereinafter
referred to as the petitioner), requesting
that we list six species of sand dune
beetles in Nevada as endangered or
threatened with critical habitat under
the Act. The petition clearly identified
itself as a petition and included the
appropriate identification information
for the petitioner, as required in 50 CFR
424.14(a).
In a March 12, 2010, letter to the
petitioner, we acknowledged receipt of
the petition, and 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 necessary. We also
stated that we anticipated making an
initial finding in Fiscal Year 2010. This
finding addresses the petition.
Previous Federal Actions
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab
(Aegialia crescenta), Hardy’s aegialian
scarab (A. hardyi), large aegialian scarab
(A. magnifica), Crescent Dunes serican
scarab (Serica ammomenisco), Sand
Mountain serican scarab (S.
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
47125
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
psammobunus), and Giuliani’s dune
scarab (Pseudocotalpa giuliani) were all
previously designated by the Service as
category 2 candidate species, then
defined as taxa for which the Service
had on hand information indicating that
proposing to list as endangered or
threatened was possibly appropriate,
but for which persuasive data on
biological vulnerability and threats were
not available to support proposed rules
(59 FR 58982; November 15, 1994). In
the February 28, 1996, Candidate Notice
of Review (CNOR) (61 FR 7595), we
adopted a single category of candidate
species defined as follows: ‘‘Those
species for which the Service has on file
sufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support
issuance of a proposed rule to list but
issuance of the proposed rule is
precluded.’’ In previous CNORs, species
matching this definition were known as
category 1 candidates for listing. Thus,
the Service no longer considered
category 2 species as candidates and did
not include them in the 1996 list or any
subsequent CNORs. The decision to stop
considering category 2 species as
candidates was designed to reduce
confusion about the status of these
species and to clarify that we no longer
regarded these species as candidates for
listing.
The Service proposed to list Giuliani’s
dune scarab as endangered or
threatened in 1978 (43 FR 35636;
August 10, 1978), citing the effect of offroad vehicle (ORV) use. The Service
stated that ORV use compacts dead
organic matter accumulated on dune
slopes and prevents its buildup, thereby
destroying the larval habitat of the
beetle. The proposal to list also found
that there was a lack of State or Federal
laws protecting the species. Included in
the proposed rule was a proposal to
designate critical habitat at Big Dune,
Nye County, Nevada, at the time the
only known location for the species.
The Service withdrew the proposal to
list Giuliani’s dune scarab after a
temporary 2-year period mandated by
Congress for proposed rules to be
finalized had expired (45 FR 65137;
October 1, 1980).
Species Information
The six species of sand dune beetles
included in the petition and evaluated
in this finding are endemic, terrestrial
invertebrates of Great Basin and Mojave
Desert sand dunes of Nevada (Table 1).
All of the petitioned species are from
the phylum Arthropoda, class Insecta,
order Coleoptera, and family
Scarabaeidae. Three of the species are in
the genus Aegialia, two are in the genus
Serica, and one is in the genus
Pseudocotalpa (Table 1). There are three
distinct sand dune beetle and dune
system groupings (Sand Mountain/
Blowsand Mountains; Crescent Dunes;
and Big Dune/Lava Dune) (Table 1;
WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 5). Both
in the petition and in our files, there is
little to no information on population
sizes or population trends for any of
these sand dune beetle species.
The petition provided information
regarding the six species’ ranking
according to NatureServe (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, pp. 3–4). The
petitioned sand dune beetles are all
ranked as critically impaired at the
global, national, or State level
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, pp. 3–4).
While the petition states that the
‘‘definition of ‘critically impaired’ is at
least equivalent to definitions of
‘endangered’ or ‘threatened’ under the
ESA [Endangered Species Act],’’ this is
not an appropriate comparison.
According to its own Web site,
NatureServe’s assessment of any species
‘‘does not constitute a recommendation
by NatureServe for listing’’ under the
Act (https://www.natureserve.org/
explorer/ranking.htm). In addition,
NatureServe’s assessment procedures
include ‘‘different criteria, evidence
requirements, purposes and taxonomic
coverage than government lists of
endangered and threatened species, and
therefore these two types of lists should
not be expected to coincide’’ (https://
www.natureserve.org/explorer/
ranking.htm).
TABLE 1—NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF SIX SAND DUNE BEETLE SPECIES INCLUDED IN THIS FINDING
Common name
Scientific name
Sand dune system(s)
Nevada county
Species for Which Substantial Information Indicating Listing May Be Warranted Was Not Presented in the Petition or in Service Files:
Hardy’s aegialian scarab .......................................................
Sand Mountain serican scarab ..............................................
Aegialia hardyi ......................
Serica psammobunus ...........
Sand Mountain ......................
Blowsand Mountains .............
Churchill.
Species for Which Substantial Information Indicating Listing May Be Warranted Was Presented in the Petition or in Service Files:
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab ..........................................
Crescent Dunes serican scarab ............................................
Large aegialian scarab ..........................................................
Giuliani’s dune scarab ...........................................................
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab occur only at
Sand Mountain and the nearby
Blowsand Mountains dune systems,
Churchill County, Nevada (Gordon and
Cartwright 1977, p. 47; Bechtel et al.
1983, p. 476; Hardy and Andrews 1987,
p. 174; The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
(2004, pp. 23, 26). These two dune
systems are located approximately 30
miles (mi) (48.3 kilometer (km)) eastsoutheast of Fallon, Churchill County,
Nevada. Sand Mountain is a star dune
(roughly star-shaped) and ranges from
3,895 to 4,650 feet (ft) (1,187.2 to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
Aegialia crescenta .................
Serica ammomenisco ...........
Aegialia magnifica .................
Pseudocotalpa giuliani ..........
Crescent Dunes ....................
Nye.
Big Dune ...............................
Lava Dune .............................
Nye.
1,417.3 meters (m)) in elevation. It
occupies approximately 12 square miles
(sq. mi) (32 sq. km) on mostly Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) lands,
though a portion of the dune may also
occur on State and private lands
(Bechtel et al. 1983, p. 477; Nevada
Natural Heritage Program 2006, p. 43).
Blowsand Mountains is a complex of
star and linear dunes occurring partially
on Fallon Naval Air Station (NAS) lands
and BLM lands about 15.6 mi (25 km)
southwest of Sand Mountain (Bechtel et
al. 1983, p. 477; Nachlinger et al. 2001,
pp. A12–1, A12–11). Blowsand
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Mountains rise to an elevation of 4,593
ft (1,400 m) and occupy 3.6 sq. mi (9.2
sq km) (Bechtel et al. 1983, p. 477).
During a 1981 arthropod survey,
Hardy’s aegialian scarab was found to be
common in sand around the perennial
shrub vegetation at the base of Sand
Mountain, but less common in similar
habitat at Blowsand Mountains, which
the surveyor suspected was due to the
limited area to which he had access
(Rust 1981, pp. 13, 29). An undescribed
species of Serica, subsequently named
S. psammobunus (Sand Mountain
serican scarab) (Hardy and Andrews
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
47126
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
1987, p. 174), was found to be very
common on both dune systems (Rust
1981, p. 14).
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab
and Crescent Dunes serican scarab are
known to occur only at Crescent Dunes
northwest of Tonopah, Nye County,
Nevada (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p.
45; Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 173).
The Crescent Dunes are a small complex
of crescent-shaped dunes (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 8). The highest dune
rises to 5,000 ft (1,524 m) in elevation
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 8). These
dunes occur on BLM lands and are
managed by the agency’s Battle
Mountain District, Tonopah Resource
Area (BLM 1997, p. 21).
The petition provided no information,
and we have no information in our files,
on the population sizes or population
trends of the Crescent Dunes aegialian
scarab or the Crescent Dunes serican
scarab.
The large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani’s dune scarab occur only at Big
Dune and Lava Dune in the Amargosa
Desert, Nye County, Nevada (Gordon
and Cartwright 1977, p. 43; Rust 1985,
p. 105). These dunes are located about
4 mi (6.4 km) apart (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 15). Big Dune is a
complex star dune that reaches 2,731 ft
(832.4 m) in elevation and extends
across approximately 1.5 sq mi (3.9 sq
km). Lava Dune is sand that is trapped
at the base of a cinder cone, has an
elevation of 2,800 ft (853.4 m), and
covers about 1.0 sq mi (2.6 sq km)
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 15). Both
dunes are managed by the BLM
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 15).
The petition provided no information
on the population sizes or trends of the
large aegialian scarab or the Giuliani’s
dune scarab. We have anecdotal
information that these two beetle
species occurred in ‘‘huge’’ numbers at
Big Dune as recently as 2007 (Murphy
2007, p. 1). We have no information in
our files on the population trends of
either species.
There is limited life history
information for the six petitioned sand
dune beetle species available in the
petition, references cited in the petition,
and in our files. Many genera of
Scarabaeidae in North American
deserts, including species of the genera
Aegialia and Serica, are found in sand
dunes (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p.
42; Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 178).
Sand dunes supply the necessary
requirements of an easily penetrable
substrate that provides ready access to
higher levels of moisture and protection
from temperature extremes; sand is
easily penetrable by both larvae and
adults, and wet sand levels are generally
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
no more than 1.6 to 3.3 ft (0.5 to 1.0 m)
beneath the surface (Hardy and
Andrews 1987, p. 175). Plant roots on
more stable dunes provide food for
some Scarabaeidae, while detritus
collected and buried in pockets by the
wind provides food for detritivores
(beetles and other animals that feed on
decomposing organic matter) (Hardy
and Andrews 1987, p. 175). Many
genera of Scarabaeidae using dune areas
seem to be unable to survive elsewhere
in desert areas, including some species
of Aegialia and Serica (Hardy and
Andrews 1987, p. 175).
The six beetles vary in their dispersal
abilities. The three aegialian scarabs
(Crescent Dunes, Hardy’s, and large) are
all flightless, a characteristic that may
have facilitated population isolation and
resulting speciation (formation of a new
species) (Rust and Hanks 1982, p. 319;
Porter and Rust 1996, p. 717; Porter and
Rust 1997, p. 306). Giuliani’s dune
scarab is capable of flight (Hardy 1976,
p. 301). We have no information on the
dispersal abilities of the two serican
scarabs (Crescent Dunes and Sand
Mountain) in our files, nor was any
provided in the petition.
Hardy’s aegialian scarab is a flightless
detritivore that is active in winter at
Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains; both adults and larvae are
active in months having a mean
monthly temperature near or below 50
°F (10 °C) (Rust 1981, pp. 13, 27; Rust
and Hanks 1982, p. 324). The Sand
Mountain serican scarab is active in
early summer on both dune systems
(Rust 1981, p. 14; Hardy and Andrews
1987, p. 174).
Giuliani’s dune scarab is restricted to
the vegetated sandy areas around the
base of the major dune at Big Dune (43
FR 35639; August 10, 1978). Larrea
tridentata (creosote bush) and Petalonyx
thurberi (sandpaper plant), common
shrubs found here, accumulate plant
debris at their bases. This accumulated
plant debris is an important food source
and is the larval habitat of the beetle.
Adults of Giuliani’s dune scarab emerge
in late spring and fly nightly, hovering
over dune shrubs, and mate on the sand
surface; the adults do not feed and
larvae are found beneath dune shrubs
(Rust 1985, p. 109).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 six sand dune
beetle species, 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.
Summary of Common Threats
The petition identified a few threats
as common to many of the six
petitioned sand dune beetles. The
petition identified the following as
threats to all six sand dune beetle
species: Loss, degradation, and
fragmentation of habitat due to ORV
recreation and potential construction of
solar facility projects; inadequate
existing regulatory mechanisms due to
the lack of Federal or State regulatory
protection; and increased vulnerability
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
to extinction due to isolated populations
and limited habitat (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, pp. 6–8, 11, 18, 19).
These are described as general threats in
the petition, but there is little or no
information in the petition that
associates the threats with existing or
probable impacts on the individual sand
dune beetle species.
For two species, Hardy’s aegialian
scarab and Sand Mountain serican
scarab, both of which are endemic to
Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains in Churchill County, we
have information in our files on ORV
use and existing regulatory mechanisms.
Due to the three distinct geographic
groupings of the six petitioned species,
where appropriate, threats are assessed
below by dune system: Sand Mountain
and Blowsand Mountains, Crescent
Dunes, and Big Dune and Lava Dune.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Factor A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
In general, the petition identifies ORV
use as the most serious threat to the six
sand dune beetles (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 6). The petition notes that ORV
recreation has increased substantially
over the past few decades, that it
accounted for over 400,000 visitor days
on lands administered by the BLM in
2000 alone, and that the conditions of
sand dune habitats in Nevada are
influenced mostly by ORV use (Wildlife
Action Plan Team (WAPT) 2006, p.
238).
The petition states that the six beetles
depend on vegetation around the bases
of the sand dunes for adult or larval
forage, mating sites, and protective
cover (Hardy 1976, pp. 301–302; Rust
1985, pp. 108–109; Hardy and Andrews
1986, p. 136; Hardy and Andrews 1987,
pp. 175–176, 178). The petition cites
several scientific studies that have
documented the severe negative impacts
that ORVs can have on insects in the
Order Coleoptera (Van Dam and Van
Dam 2008, p. 411). Heavy use by ORVs
can destroy dune vegetation
(Luckenbach and Bury 1983, p. 280;
WAPT 2006, pp. 238–239), eliminating
and fragmenting beetle habitat and
reactivate sand dune movement (Wiggs
et al. 1995, as cited by Van Dam and
Van Dam 2008, p. 411). In addition,
ORV use may disrupt beetle mating
activity (Luckenbach and Bury 1983, p.
277), may potentially kill individual
beetles (Van Dam and Van Dam 2008, p.
416), and may facilitate the spread of
invasive plant species (WAPT 2006, p.
238). Sand dune systems are dynamic,
and the establishment of invasive plant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
species can stabilize dunes, preventing
sand movement and altering habitat
functions. Invasive plant species may
also displace preferred vegetation used
by beetles. Research also suggests that
areas unprotected from ORV use contain
much smaller populations of
Coleopterans than in protected areas
(Van Dam and Van Dam 2008, p. 415).
The petition also noted that a solar
energy facility has been proposed on
BLM lands near Crescent Dunes
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 11). The
BLM is also currently reviewing a
proposal to develop solar energy on
public land near the Big Dune Area of
Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 18). The
petition claims that, if the two solar
facilities are approved, the increased
activity from their construction and
maintenance may disturb beetles and
their habitat (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 18). As noted above, these
threats are discussed below by dune
system.
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and in Our Files
Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab occur only at
Sand Mountain and the nearby
Blowsand Mountains, Churchill County.
The petition provided information on
possible threats to these species from
ORV recreation at Sand Mountain and
Blowsand Mountains. In addition, we
have information in our files regarding
potential impacts from the use of
Blowsand Mountains as a military
bombing range. We discuss these
potential threats below.
ORV Recreation
The petition indicates that Sand
Mountain is a 4,795-ac (1,941-ha)
designated Special Recreation
Management Area (SRMA) managed by
the Stillwater Field Office of the BLM
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14). The
petition states that ORV use can be
intense at times and that BLM has
‘‘closed’’ some areas to ORV use (BLM
2001, pp. REC–3, REC–4; WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 14). The petition
also states from an anonymous source
that ‘‘some’’ users ignore restrictions
and ride into areas that were closed in
2001 (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14).
The petition does not provide additional
information pertaining to the number of
or frequency with which these users
violate restrictions and ride into closed
areas.
Information in our files indicates that
recreational ORV use is currently
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47127
restricted to a designated trail system
that prohibits ORV use of vegetated
areas (72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007). Most
arthropods found during a survey at
Sand Mountain occurred in association
with perennial shrub vegetation at the
base of the dune and, except while
traveling, no species were found to
inhabit open sand (Rust 1981, p. 2). On
December 12, 2006, BLM implemented
an emergency restriction on motorized
use on 3,985 ac (1,612 ha) of land to
prevent adverse effects to the habitat of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(Euphilotes pallescens arenamontana)
(72 FR 12187; March 15, 2007). These
restrictions reduce the route system
within and outside of the SRMA from
an estimated 200 mi (320 km) to 21.5 mi
(34.4 km) (72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007).
This returns the length of the route
system to about the length of the system
in 1980. The emergency restriction will
remain in effect until the Resource
Management Plan has been updated or
until the Field Office Manager
determines it is no longer needed (72 FR
12187; March 15, 2007). The Service has
found that implementation of this
closure in 2006 effectively reduces the
threat posed by ORVs to the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly’s habitat and
ensures that further habitat destruction
is prevented and will ensure natural
shrub regeneration over the long-term
(72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007). The
reduction of this ORV threat also
applies to Hardy’s aegialian scarab and
Sand Mountain serican scarab habitat at
Sand Mountain. Thus, the extent and
magnitude of potential impacts to
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab from ORV use
have decreased since the petition’s 2001
citation and are likely to remain so. In
addition, the petition’s statement of
closed areas as referenced in BLM
(2001) is incorrect. The BLM document
(BLM 2001, p. REC–4) cites a Federal
Register Notice published on September
15, 1988 (53 FR 35917). This Federal
Register Notice does not indicate closed
areas to ORV use at Sand Mountain
Recreation Area but indicates their use
is limited in vegetated areas. We do not
have information in our files on
potential violations of the 2006 ORV
restrictions. Therefore, we believe the
petition’s information regarding ORV
threats to these species’ habitat at Sand
Mountain is outdated and inaccurate.
We discuss the adequacy of BLM’s
regulation of this trail system in
protecting the habitat of the dune
beetles at Sand Mountain under Factor
D below.
As indicated above, Blowsand
Mountains occur partially on Fallon
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
47128
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
NAS lands and partially on BLM lands
(Nachlinger et al. 2001, pp. A12–1,
A12–11). The petition does not provide
specific information related to ORV use
at Blowsand Mountains.
According to information in our files,
the Blowsand Mountains occur within
the Fallon Range Training Complex
Military Operation Area, a 26-millionacre (ac) (10.5-million hectare (ha)) area
used by the Naval Strike and Air
Warfare Center (TNC 2004, p. 11).
Because a portion of the Blowsand
Mountains dune system is used for inert
and live air-to-ground ordnance drops
by the military, much of the area is not
open to public access and therefore is
not used for ORV recreation (TNC 2004,
p. 12). According to TNC (2004, p. 48),
‘‘The only activities that take place on
this dune system are those related to the
military training mission of NAS
Fallon.’’ Therefore, the petition’s
assertions regarding ORV use at
Blowsand Mountains impacting Hardy’s
aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain
serican scarab are not supported.
Bombing Range
Our files indicate, as noted above, that
much of the Blowsand Mountains dune
system is within an active practice
bombing range. A conservation
assessment of the Blowsand Mountains
dune system has been completed by a
team comprised of individuals from the
BLM, Fallon NAS, TNC, Fallon Paiute
Shoshone Tribe, and Walker River
Paiute Tribe (TNC 2004). Threats
identified to the Blowsand Mountains
dune system by the assessment team
were related to ordnance drops,
detonation of unexploded ordnance,
and invasive weed transport during the
removal of ordnance (TNC 2004, p. viii).
As part of the conservation assessment,
the stressors at the Blowsand Mountains
dune system (habitat for Hardy’s
aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain
serican scarab) were evaluated. Only
direct mortality to dune biota from
ordnance drops was rated as a highseverity threat, but because it was of
small geographic scope, the overall
stress ranking was determined to be low
(TNC 2004, p. 48). The assessment team
also evaluated the viability of the
Blowsand Mountains dune system
based on its size outside of the heavyeffect bombing area, its condition based
on invasive species, and its connection
to a current source of sand. The
assessment team determined it to have
an overall viability score of ‘‘good’’
based on size and condition of the
system and its landscape context (TNC
2004, p. 32). Because the stress ranking
from the conservation assessment was
considered low for ordnance drops and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
the overall viability of Blowsand
Mountains was determined to be good,
potential impacts to populations of
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab from bombing
practice at Blowsand Mountains are
considered low.
Based on the information available in
the petition and our files, we have
determined that there is not substantial
information to indicate that listing
Hardy’s aegialian scarab or the Sand
Mountain serican scarab located at Sand
Mountain and Blowsand Mountains
may be warranted due to the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of their habitat or range.
Crescent Dunes
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab
and Crescent Dunes serican scarab occur
only at Crescent Dunes, Nye County
(Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 44;
Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 173). The
petition provided information on
possible threats from ORV use at
Crescent Dunes. In addition, the petition
provided information related to
potential impacts from a solar facility
proposed near the dunes. We discuss
these potential threats below.
ORV Recreation
According to the petition, Crescent
Dunes is a designated SRMA on 3,000
ac (1,214 ha) of public lands
administered by the Tonopah Field
Office of the BLM (BLM 1997, p. 21).
The SRMA is open to ORV use yearround (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p.
11). Though no part of the dunes is
reserved for the protection of sensitive
species, ORVs are required to stay on
roads, trails, and unvegetated dunes
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 11). The
petition does not provide any specific
information regarding impacts to the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and
Crescent Dunes serican scarab from
ORV use. However, the petition
provided information regarding an
opinion from The Nature Conservancy
that recreation appeared to be a high
priority at Crescent Dunes with no
regard given to protection of the unique
animals of the dune system and no
analysis of the impacts of ORVs to these
species or their habitat (BLM 1994, p. 5–
116). We are unaware of any
management plans or emergency
restrictions being placed on motorized
use at Crescent Dunes to protect the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the
Crescent Dunes serican scarab or their
habitat. The adequacy of BLM’s
regulations regarding this trail system in
protecting the habitat of the dune
beetles at Crescent Dunes is discussed
under Factor D below.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
We have no additional information in
our files related to this potential threat.
Solar Energy Development
According to the petition, Tonopah
Solar Energy, LLC submitted a right-ofway application and a plan of
development to the BLM’s Tonopah
Field Office for the construction and
operation of a solar power generation
facility (Crescent Dunes Solar Energy
Project), associated transmission
facilities to the Anaconda Substation
located 6 mi (9.7 km) north of the
project area, and access roads (74 FR
61364; November 24, 2009). This facility
would have a generating capacity of up
to 160 megawatts (MW) of electricity
based on concentrating solar power
technology. The proposed plant,
including the heliostat array, power
block, and associated facilities, would
use approximately 1,600 ac (648 ha) of
BLM-managed lands northwest of
Tonopah, Nevada. This project is
considered a ‘‘fast-track’’ project.
According to the BLM Nevada State
Office Web site, fast-track projects are
those where the companies involved
have demonstrated to BLM that they
have made sufficient progress to
formally start the environmental review
and public participation process.
Projects that were cleared for approval
by the Department of the Interior by
December 2010 are eligible for economic
stimulus funding under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(Pub. L. 111–5). All renewable energy
projects proposed for BLM-managed
lands receive full environmental
reviews required by the National
Environmental Policy Act, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (BLM 2010a, p.
1). The scoping period for this project
closed on December 24, 2009 (74 FR
61364; November 24, 2009). The
petition claims that increased activity
from construction and maintenance of
the proposed solar array, which would
be located adjacent to the sand dunes,
may disturb beetles and their habitat.
We have no additional information in
our files on this potential threat other
than that a draft environmental impact
statement is currently being prepared
(BLM 2010b, p. 8).
Based on the information available in
the petition and our files, we have
determined that there is substantial
information to indicate that listing the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and
Crescent Dunes serican scarab located at
Crescent Dunes may be warranted due
to the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of their
habitat or range.
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Big Dune and Lava Dune
Solar Energy Development
The large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani’s dune scarab occur only at Big
Dune and Lava Dune, Nye County
(Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 43;
BLM 1998a, p. 3–41), which are
managed by the Southern Nevada
District Office of the BLM. The petition
provided information on possible
threats from ORV use at Big Dune and
Lava Dune. In addition, the petition
provided information related to
potential impacts from a solar facility
proposed near the dunes. We discuss
these potential threats below.
According to the petition, Pacific
Solar Investments, Inc., submitted a
right-of-way application and plan of
development to the BLM’s Southern
Nevada District Office for the
construction, operation, maintenance,
and termination of a solar power
generation facility (Amargosa North
Solar Project), transmission substation,
and switchyard facilities (74 FR 66146;
December 14, 2009). This facility would
have a generating capacity of about 150
MW of electricity based on
concentrating solar power technology
and would be located on about 7,500 ac
(3,035 ha) of BLM-managed lands in the
Amargosa Valley, Nye County. A
portion of Big Dune lies within the
proposed project area. All renewable
energy projects proposed for BLMmanaged lands receive full
environmental reviews required by the
National Environmental Policy Act. The
scoping period for this project closed on
February 12, 2010 (74 FR 66146;
December 14, 2009).
According to information in our files,
the reconnaissance-level biological
survey completed for the plan of
development states that ‘‘due to the
proximity of the endemic beetles ACEC,
it will be important to address the
potential affect [sic] of any adjacent
development to the continued habitat
function and viability of this ACEC’’
(CH2MHILL 2008, p. 3–1). We have no
additional information in our files on
this potential threat to the large
aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s dune
scarab at Big Dune.
Based on the information available in
the petition and our files, we have
determined that there is substantial
information to indicate that listing the
large aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s
dune scarab at Big Dune and Lava Dune
may be warranted due to the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of their habitat or range.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
ORV Recreation
According to information provided by
the petition, there is an 11,600-ac
(4,694-ha) Big Dune SRMA, which
includes a 1,920-ac (777-ha) ACEC at
Big Dune (BLM 1998b, pp. 7, 23;
WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 18). The
objective of the SRMA is to provide for
moderate, casual ORV use; camping;
and other casual recreation
opportunities. The ACEC was
established in 1998 to protect beetle
habitat, but only 200 ac (81 ha) of the
1,920 ac (777 ha) ACEC were set aside
specifically as beetle habitat (BLM
1998b, p. 23). This is considered
inadequate by the petitioner when
compared to the Service’s previous
proposal to list Giuliani’s dune scarab
and designate critical habitat over the
entire dune in 1978 (43 FR 35636;
August 10, 1978) (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 18). In addition, ORV use is
allowed on the designated route system
within the 200 ac (81 ha) specified as
beetle habitat (BLM 1998b, p. 23).
Within the entire 1,920-ac (777-ha)
ACEC, speed-based, competitive ORV
events are prohibited (BLM 1998b, p.
23). Because nonvegetated portions of
the Big Dune SRMA outside of
designated beetle habitat are managed as
open to ORV use, the petition indicates
that heavy ORV use occurs over large
areas of the rest of Big Dune and the
immediate surrounding area (BLM
1998b, p. 24; WildEarth Guardians 2010,
p. 18). Lava Dune has no special
management designation. The petition
does not provide any specific
information regarding impacts to the
large aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s
dune scarab from ORV use at Lava
Dune. The adequacy of BLM’s
regulations regarding ORV use at Big
Dune and Lava Dune is discussed under
Factor D.
We have no additional information in
our files related to this potential threat.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
Summary of Factor A
We find that the petition and
information in our files provide
substantial information that ORV
recreation is a potential threat to the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and
Crescent Dunes serican scarab that
occur at Crescent Dunes and to the large
aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s dune
scarab that occur at Big Dune and Lava
Dune. We also find that the petition
provides substantial information that
solar energy development may be a
threat to the Crescent Dunes aegialian
scarab, Crescent Dunes serican scarab,
large aegialian scarab, and Giuliani’s
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47129
dune scarab at Crescent Dunes and Big
Dune.
While ORV use occurs at Sand
Mountain, we find that the
comprehensive, mandatory route
restrictions put in place in 2006 (72 FR
12187; March 15, 2007; 72 FR 24253;
May 2, 2007) to protect the shrub habitat
used by the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly also protects the two dune
beetles (Hardy’s aegialian scarab and
Sand Mountain serican scarab) as they
also depend upon this shrub habitat (see
also Factor D discussion). We do not
have information indicating that
violations of the 2006 ORV restrictions
occur, or occur frequently enough to
impact the shrub habitat at Sand
Mountain. Off Road Vehicle recreation
does not occur throughout much of the
Blowsand Mountains’ dune system
because much of this area is not open
to public access due to its location
within the Fallon Range Training
Complex Military Operation Area, an
active practice bombing range. The
bombing operations at the Blowsand
Mountains are of limited geographic
scope, and therefore have been ranked
as a low stress by an interagency
assessment team. For these reasons, we
do not find that the petition provides
substantial information indicating that
the Hardy’s aegialian scarab or Sand
Mountain serican scarab may be
warranted for listing under Factor A, the
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of their
habitat or range.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of
the information available in the petition
and our files, we find that the petition
does not present substantial information
to indicate that listing Hardy’s aegialian
scarab and the Sand Mountain serican
scarab may be warranted, but the
information available in the petition and
in our files does present substantial
information to indicate that listing may
be warranted for the Crescent Dunes
aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes serican
scarab, the large aegialian scarab, and
Giuliani’s dune scarab due to the
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of their
habitat or range.
Factor B. Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition notes that collection of
individuals for scientific purposes has
occurred over the years, but does not
provide information about whether this
constitutes a threat to any of the six
sand dune beetle species (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 7).
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
47130
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and in Our Files
of the six sand dune beetles may be
warranted due to disease or predation.
The petition does not provide
information that overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes has negatively
impacted any of the six petitioned
beetle species. We have no information
in our files to indicate that
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes is a threat to any of the six
species.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of
the information provided in the
petition, we do not consider the petition
or information in our files to provide
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing of
any of the six petitioned beetles may be
warranted due to overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
According to information provided by
the petition, nighthawks (Chordeiles
minor) were observed preying on
Andrew’s dune scarab (Pseudocotalpa
andrewsi) at Algodones Dunes in
southern California (Hardy and
Andrews 1986, p. 137), a dune system
similar to those used by the petitioned
beetles (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p.
7). Foxes (Vulpes macrotis) and coyotes
(Canis latrans) may also prey on sand
dune beetles (Hardy and Andrews 1986,
p. 137). Rust (1985, p. 109) stated that
no predation of Guiliani’s dune scarab
was observed at Big Dune or Lava Dune
although many potential predators were
observed.
The petition states that disease is not
known to be a threat to any of the six
petitioned beetles (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 7).
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and in Our Files
The petition does not provide specific
information that predation or disease
has negatively impacted the six
petitioned sand dune beetles. While
predation of the sand dune beetles
would be a common occurrence, it is
unknown whether predation may be
occurring at such a level that it is
negatively affecting these species. We
do not have information in our files to
indicate that predation or disease is a
potential threat to any of these species.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of
the information in the petition and in
our files, we have determined that the
petition does not provide substantial
information to indicate that listing any
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioned dune beetles occur on
Federal lands managed either by the
BLM or the Department of Defense. The
populations on BLM lands all occur
within or adjacent to areas managed
primarily for ORV use and designated as
SRMAs. The petition states that none of
the six petitioned sand dune beetle
species has legal protection (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, pp. 7–18). All six
petitioned species are listed as BLM
sensitive species (BLM 2007, pp. J–3, J–
35). According to information in our
files, BLM sensitive species are defined
as ‘‘species that require special
management or considerations to avoid
potential future listing’’ (BLM 2008,
Glossary p. 5). The stated objective for
sensitive species is to initiate proactive
conservation measures that reduce or
eliminate threats to minimize the
likelihood of and need for listing (BLM
2008, Section 6840.02). Conservation, as
it applies to BLM sensitive species, is
defined as ‘‘the use of programs, plans,
and management practices to reduce or
eliminate threats affecting the status of
the species, or improve the condition of
the species’ habitat on BLMadministered lands’’ (BLM 2008,
Glossary p. 2).
The petition also notes that although
some of the petitioned beetles may
occur at ‘‘preliminary focal areas’’
identified in the Nevada Wildlife Action
Plan, this plan does not prescribe
conservation measures for sensitive
invertebrates in Nevada (WAPT 2006).
Moreover, the petition points out that
Nevada Revised Statute 501.110
provides only for the protection of
invertebrates classified as either
mollusks or crustaceans, and not other
invertebrates. Under current statute,
therefore, beetles cannot be provided
State protection (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 7).
The petition provides some
information on the Federal management
of the three SRMAs at which the dune
beetles occur (WildEarth Guardians
2010, pp. 11, 14–15, 18–19). Each of the
SRMAs includes habitat for only two of
the six petitioned species and none of
these species occur at more than one
SRMA, although some of the six
petitioned beetles also occur at other
nearby dune systems. In addition, each
of the three SRMAs has specific
management restrictions. For these
reasons, existing regulatory mechanisms
are more easily assessed for the pairs of
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
species that are unique to each SRMA.
Occurrences outside of the SRMAs are
discussed within this framework.
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and in Our Files
Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab are known only
from Sand Mountain and nearby
Blowsand Mountains. Sand Mountain is
a designated SRMA managed by the
BLM Stillwater Field Office that extends
over 4,795 ac (1,941 ha). The petition
states that the BLM has closed some
areas to ORV use (BLM 2001, pp. REC–
3 and REC–4; WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 14). The petition also cites a
2009 anonymous source who stated that
some ORV users have ignored these
2001 restrictions and ride in closed
areas (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14).
We have information in our files that
the ORV restrictions mentioned in the
2001 Carson City Field Office Resource
Management Plan (CCRMP) (BLM 2001)
cited by the petition have been
superseded by more comprehensive
ORV restrictions implemented in 2006
to prevent adverse effects to the habitat
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (72
FR 12187; March 15, 2007). The Service
has previously found that
implementation of this closure, which
includes a designated ORV route system
throughout the vegetated portions of the
SRMA, effectively reduces the threat
posed by ORVs to the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly’s habitat and ensures that
further habitat destruction is prevented
and will ensure, over the long-term,
natural shrub regeneration (72 FR
24253; May 2, 2007). The reduction of
this ORV threat to the butterfly’s habitat
also applies to this shared habitat with
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab since these two
beetles occupy similar habitat as the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
The Blowsand Mountains dune
system is under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense and is within a
practice bombing range used by the
Fallon NAS. The petition provides no
information on the management of the
Blowsand Mountains. As previously
noted under Factor A, information in
our files states that because of its use for
military bombing training operations,
much of the area is not open to public
access and therefore is not used for ORV
recreation (TNC 2004, p. 12). An
interagency assessment team concluded
that while direct mortality to dune biota
from bomb drops can be severe, it was
of small geographic scope within the
Blowsand Mountains and, therefore, its
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
overall stress ranking was considered
low (TNC 2004, p. 48).
Therefore, based on the information
provided in the petition and available in
our files, we have determined that the
petition does not present substantial
information to indicate that listing the
Hardy’s aegialian scarab or the Sand
Mountain serican scarab may be
warranted due to the inadequacies of
existing regulatory mechanisms.
Crescent Dunes
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab
and Crescent Dunes serican scarab are
known only from the Crescent Dunes,
where a total of 3,000 ac (1,214 ha) has
been designated as the Crescent Sand
Dunes SRMA in the Tonopah Resource
Management Plan (TRMP) (BLM 1997,
p. 21). The petition provides no
information, nor do we have any
information in our files, regarding
whether either of these species occurs
outside of the designated SRMA
boundary. The Record of Decision
(ROD) for the TRMP states that vehicle
use within the SRMA will be limited to
existing roads and trails, although ORV
use on unvegetated areas may be
allowed provided that such vehicle use
is compatible with the area’s values
(BLM 1997, p. 21). The Crescent Dunes
SRMA is closed to competitive
recreational events to protect sensitive
resource values (BLM 1997, p. 20). Fluid
mineral leasing is allowed, subject to a
no-surface-occupancy stipulation (BLM
1997, p. 21). The TRMP does not
specifically address management of
renewable resources such as solar
energy (BLM 1997). No specific mention
is made of either beetle species in the
TRMP, although it states that Nevada
BLM Sensitive Species will be managed
to maintain or increase current
population levels (BLM 1997, p. 9). We
are not aware of any specific
conservation actions or plans for either
the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab or
the Crescent Dunes serican scarab.
The petition noted that during the
public participation process for the
proposed TRMP, the BLM received a
letter from the Nevada Outdoor
Recreation Association, Inc. urging them
to designate the Crescent Dunes as an
ACEC to protect endemic species,
including the Crescent Dunes aegialian
scarab (BLM 1994, pp. 5–12). The BLM
responded that a 14,000-ac (5,666 ha)
area at Crescent Dunes was examined
for ACEC potential and determined not
to meet the importance criterion as
defined in BLM policy (BLM 1994, pp.
5–125); no further explanation was
provided. In the ROD for the TRMP, the
BLM stated that as a result of several
points of protest concerning ACECs that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
were found to be valid, decisions to
designate ACECs were withheld and
that an ACEC Plan Amendment would
be prepared over the next 2 years to
address these points of protest (BLM
1997, p. 3); we have no information in
our files regarding whether this plan
amendment was ever prepared. Another
commenter, The Nature Conservancy,
expressed the opinion that recreation
appeared to be high priority at Crescent
Dunes with no regard given to
protection of the unique animals of the
dune system and no analysis of the
impacts of ORVs to these species or
their habitat (BLM 1994, pp. 5–116).
The BLM responded that impacts to
sensitive species would be addressed in
the SRMA plan (BLM 1994, pp. 5–159).
According to the petition, no
management plan has been prepared for
the SRMA (WildEarth Guardians 2010,
p. 11). We are unaware of any other
restrictions being placed on motorized
use at Crescent Dunes to protect the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the
Crescent Dunes serican scarab or their
habitat as was done at Sand Mountain
to protect the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly and its habitat.
Therefore, based on the information
provided in the petition and available in
our files, we have determined that the
petition does present substantial
information to indicate that listing the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the
Crescent Dunes serican scarab may be
warranted due to the inadequacies of
existing regulatory mechanisms.
Big Dune and Lava Dune
The large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani’s dune scarab are known only
from Big Dune and Lava Dune.
According to the petition, in the Las
Vegas Resource Management Plan
(LVRMP), the BLM designated an
11,600-ac (4,694-ha) SRMA, which
includes a 1,920-ac (777-ha) ACEC at
Big Dune (BLM 1998b, pp. 7, 23). The
objective of the SRMA is to provide for
moderate, casual ORV use; camping;
and other casual recreation
opportunities. The ACEC was
established to protect beetle habitat. The
management direction is to prohibit
ORV use within 200 ac (81 ha) of dune
beetle habitat within the ACEC, except
on the designated route through it, to
ensure continued survival of the native
beetle population. Speed-based
competitive ORV events within the
ACEC are also prohibited (BLM 1998b,
p. 23). Other commercial activities and
permitted events are allowed on a caseby-case basis. The management
direction stipulates that long-term
recreation management within the
dunes be based on the minimum habitat
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47131
requirements of the beetles (BLM 1998b,
p. 23). Lands within the ACEC are
designated as a rights-of-way exclusion
area and are closed to locatable mineral,
salable mineral, and solid leasable
mineral entry; fluid mineral leasing is
allowed, subject to a no-surfaceoccupancy stipulation (BLM 1998b, p.
7). The LVRMP does not specifically
address management of renewable
resources such as solar energy (BLM
1998b). There is no livestock grazing
within the ACEC. A BLM brochure
states that a 5-ac (2-ha) area within the
ACEC on the east side of the dunes has
been set aside specifically for the
protection of beetle habitat (BLM 2010c,
p. 1). We have no information in our
files that explains the discrepancy
between the 200 ac (81 ha) protected
area identified in the LVRMP and the 5
ac (2 ha) area described in the brochure.
In our files, we have correspondence
that indicates that a study of the
distribution of the beetles and their
ecological requirements was initiated at
Big Dune in 2007 (Murphy 2007, p. 1).
This correspondence includes a
statement that the researchers were
successful in locating both endemic
scarab beetles in ‘‘huge’’ numbers
although ORV activities were having
impacts (Murphy 2007, p. 1). This
survey information, however, is
anecdotal, and we lack sufficient details
or a written report to evaluate this
claim. We have no information on the
status of the beetles at the nearby Lava
Dune, which has no special
management designations.
Therefore, based on the information
provided in the petition and available in
our files, we have determined that the
petition does present substantial
information to indicate that listing the
large aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s
dune scarab may be warranted due to
the inadequacies of existing regulatory
mechanisms.
Summary of Factor D
We find that the petition provides
substantial information that there may
be inadequate existing regulatory
mechanisms related to ORV use and
solar facility siting and, therefore, a
potential threat to the Crescent Dunes
aegialian scarab and the Crescent Dunes
serican scarab that occur at Crescent
Dunes, and to the large aegialian scarab
and Giuliani’s dune scarab that occur at
Big Dune and Lava Dune.
While ORV use also occurs at Sand
Mountain (see also Factor A discussion),
we believe that the mandatory route
restrictions in place since 2006 protect
the shrub habitat on which the two
dune beetles that occur there depend.
We do not have information indicating
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
47132
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
that violations of the 2006 restrictions
occur, or occur frequently enough to
impact the dune beetles’ shrub habitat.
Off Road Vehicle recreation does not
occur throughout much of the Blowsand
Mountains’ dune system because much
of it is not open to public access. The
bombing operations at the Blowsand
Mountains are of limited geographic
scope and, therefore, direct mortality to
dune biota was given a low stress
ranking by an interagency assessment
team. Solar facilities are not being
proposed at or near Sand Mountain or
Blowsand Mountains. For these reasons,
we do not consider the petition to
provide substantial information that
listing Hardy’s aegialian scarab or the
Sand Mountain serican scarab, endemic
to Sand Mountain and the Blowsand
Mountains, may be warranted due to the
inadequacies of existing regulatory
mechanisms.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of
the information available in the petition
and our files, we have determined that
the petition does not present substantial
information to indicate that listing
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab may be
warranted, but the information available
in the petition and our files does present
substantial information to indicate that
listing may be warranted for the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab,
Crescent Dunes serican scarab, large
aegialian scarab, and Giuliani’s dune
scarab, due to the inadequacies of
existing regulatory mechanisms.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade
Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that the six
petitioned sand dune beetles have
limited distribution and apparently
small populations, increasing the
likelihood of extinction (WildEarth
Guadians 2010, p. 8). In support of this
claim, the petition cites Service status
assessments for a ground-dwelling snail
[Sisi (Ostodes strigatus)], and for
Langford’s tree snail (Partula
langfordii), in which the Service found
that the small number of individuals or
the small number of extant populations
made these species more vulnerable to
extinction (Service 2009a, pp. 4–5;
2009b, pp. 5–6). These assessments
differ substantially, however, from our
current considerations for the six
petitioned sand dune beetles. The total
population of Sisi was estimated at
fewer than 50 individuals in the early
1990s (Service 2009a, p. 3). In the case
of Langford’s tree snail, there is a record
of historical declines in population
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
estimates from hundreds of individuals
documented in 1970 to only a few
individuals by the early 1990s; no live
snails have been located in recent
surveys (Service 2009a, p. 4). The
petition notes that, in the case of
Langford’s tree snail, the Service relied
on citations not specific to this species
that state that small populations are
particularly vulnerable to reduced
reproductive vigor caused by inbreeding
depression, and may suffer a loss of
genetic variability over time due to
random genetic drift (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 8). The petition also
states that many species in the Great
Basin and Mojave Deserts, especially
species adapted to specialized habitats
such as sand dunes, have evolved and
continue to persist in isolation with
limited distribution (Brussard et al.
1998, pp. 514–520).
Evaluation of Information Provided in
the Petition and in Our Files
The petition provided no population
estimates or trends for any of the six
petitioned species, nor do we have
definitive population estimates or
trends for any of these beetles in our
files. We do have anecdotal information
in our files that indicates that ‘‘huge’’
populations of two scarab beetles (large
aegialian scarab and Giuliani’s dune
scarab) were present as recently as 2007
at Big Dune (Murphy 2007, p. 1).
In a genetics study of five species of
Aegialia, researchers found that three
flightless species, which included
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the large
aegialian scarab, had low genetic
distance measures but relatively high
estimates of gene flow (Porter and Rust
1996, p. 719). They suggested that
flightless Aegialia populations within
Great Basin dune systems may be
extremely large and have levels of gene
flow high enough to maintain high
genetic similarity, and therefore low
genetic distances (Porter and Rust 1996,
p. 719).
Neither the petition, nor the
information in our files, provides
information that directly indicates that
limited distribution, in and of itself, is
a substantial threat to the petitioned
dune beetle species. The petition does
not provide information on chance
events or other threats to the six species
and connect such threats to small
population numbers or restricted range
or the potential for such threats to occur
in occupied habitats in the future.
Limited distribution and small
population numbers or sizes are
considered in determining whether the
petition provides substantial
information regarding natural or
anthropogenic threat, or a combination
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of threats, that may be affecting a
particular species. However, in the
absence of information identifying
chance events or other threats and the
potential for such chance events to
occur in occupied habitats, and
connecting them to a restricted
geographic range of a species, we do not
consider chance events, restricted
geographic range, or rarity by
themselves to be threats to a species.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of
the information provided in the petition
and our files, we have determined that
the petition does not present substantial
information to indicate that listing any
of the six sand dune beetle species may
be warranted due to other natural or
manmade factors affecting these species’
continued existence.
Finding
On the basis of our determination
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we
find that the petition does not present
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing
Hardy’s aegialian scarab and the Sand
Mountain serican scarab throughout
their entire range may be warranted. 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 that listing the Crescent
Dunes aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes
serican scarab, large aegialian scarab,
and Giuliani’s dune scarab throughout
their entire range may be warranted.
The petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab may be
warranted due to Factors A and D. The
petition does not present substantial
information indicating that listing the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab may be
warranted due to Factors B, C, or E.
The petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
Crescent Dunes serican scarab may be
warranted due to Factors A and D. The
petition does not present substantial
information indicating that listing the
Crescent Dunes serican scarab may be
warranted due to Factors B, C, or E.
The petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
large aegialian scarab may be warranted
due to Factors A and D. The petition
does not present substantial information
indicating that listing the large aegialian
scarab may be warranted due to Factors
B, C, or E.
The petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing
Giuliani’s dune scarab may be
warranted due to Factors A and D. The
petition does not present substantial
information indicating that listing
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Giuliani’s dune scarab may be
warranted due to Factors B, C, or E.
Because we have found that the
petition presents substantial
information that listing four of the six
species may be warranted, we are
initiating status reviews (12-month
findings) to determine whether listing
these four species 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 12-month
findings, we determine whether a
petitioned action is warranted after we
have completed thorough status reviews
of the species, which are conducted
following substantial 90-day findings.
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 a 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 Nevada Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this document
are the staff members of the Nevada Fish
and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: July 21, 2011.
Gregory E. Siekaniec,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–19743 Filed 8–3–11; 8:45 am]
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Aug 03, 2011
Jkt 223001
47133
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
as listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
Fish and Wildlife Service
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2011–0045; MO
92210–0–0008–B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding and
12-Month Determination on a Petition
To Revise Critical Habitat for the
Leatherback Sea Turtle
Dave Hankla, Field Supervisor, North
Florida Ecological Services Office, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Attn:
Leatherback CH Review; by mail at 7915
Baymeadows Way, Suite 200,
Jacksonville, FL 32256; by telephone
(904–731–3336); by facsimile (904–731–
3045); or by e-mail at
northflorida@fws.gov. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and notice of 12-month
determination.
Background
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce our
90-day finding and 12-month
determination on how to proceed in
response to a petition to revise critical
habitat for the leatherback sea turtle
(Dermochelys coriacea) pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). The petition asks the
Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) (Services) to
revise the existing critical habitat
designation for the leatherback sea turtle
by adding the coastline and offshore
waters of the Northeast Ecological
Corridor of Puerto Rico to the critical
habitat designation. Our 90-day finding
is that the petition, in conjunction with
the information readily available in our
files, presents substantial scientific
information indicating that the
requested revision may be warranted.
Our 12-month determination is that we
intend to proceed with processing the
petition by assessing critical habitat
during the future planned status review
for the leatherback sea turtle.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on August 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: This finding is available on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket Number
FWS–R4–ES–2011–0045. Information
and supporting documentation that we
received and used in preparing this
finding is available for public inspection
by appointment, during normal business
hours at the North Florida Ecological
Services Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite
200, Jacksonville, FL 32256 and at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Caribbean Ecological Services Field
´
Office, Road 301, Km. 5.1, Boqueron,
Puerto Rico 00622. Please submit any
new information, materials, comments,
or questions concerning this finding to
the above mailing address or the contact
Section 4(b)(3)(D) of the Act of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to revise critical
habitat for a species presents substantial
scientific information indicating that the
revision may be warranted. In
determining whether substantial
information exists, we take into account
several factors, including information
submitted with, and referenced in, the
petition and all other information
readily available in our files. Our listing
regulations at 50 CFR 424.14(c)(2)
further require that, in making a finding
on a petition to revise critical habitat,
we consider whether the petition
contains information indicating that
areas petitioned to be added to critical
habitat contain the physical and
biological features essential to, and that
may require special management to
provide for, the conservation of the
species; or information indicating that
areas currently designated as critical
habitat do not contain resources
essential to, or do not require special
management to provide for, the
conservation of the species involved.
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. 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. If we find that a petition
presents substantial information
indicating that the revision may be
warranted, we are required to determine
how we intend to proceed with the
requested revision within 12 months
after receiving the petition and
promptly publish notice of such
intention in the Federal Register.
Critical habitat is defined under
section 3(5)(A) of the Act as:
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 150 (Thursday, August 4, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47123-47133]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19743]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2011-0041; MO-92210-0-0008]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List Six Sand Dune Beetles as Endangered or Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list six sand dune beetles as
endangered or threatened and to designate critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review,
we find that the petition does not present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing two of the six species
[Hardy's aegialian scarab (Aegialia hardyi) and Sand Mountain serican
scarab (Serica psammobunus)] may be warranted. However, we find that
the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing may be warranted for four of the six species
[Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab (A. crescenta), Crescent Dunes serican
scarab (S. ammomenisco), large aegialian scarab (A. magnifica), and
Giuliani's dune scarab (Pseudocotalpa giuliani)]. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the status of
these species to determine if listing these four species is warranted.
To ensure that the status reviews are comprehensive, we are requesting
scientific and commercial data and other information regarding these
four species. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month
findings on these four species, which will address whether the
petitioned actions are warranted, as provided in the Act.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct the status reviews, we
request that we receive information on or before October 3, 2011.
Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES section, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic
comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern 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 [FWS-R8-ES-2011-0041]. 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: [FWS-R8-ES-2011-0041]; 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 October 3, 2011, you must submit information directly to the
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
[[Page 47124]]
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: Jill Ralston, Acting State Supervisor,
by U.S. mail at Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1340 Financial Blvd, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502, by telephone
at 775-861-6300, or by facsimile at 775-861-6301. 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 reviews to be complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we request information on the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes serican scarab, large
aegialian scarab, and Giuliani's dune scarab from governmental
agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry,
and any other interested parties. For each of these species, 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.
(2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing, delisting,
or downlisting 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.
If, after the status reviews, we determine that listing any of the
four sand dune beetle species 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 each of the four sand dune beetle species,
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 are 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 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 these status reviews 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, Nevada 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 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 February 2, 2010, we received a petition dated January 29, 2010,
from WildEarth Guardians (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner),
requesting that we list six species of sand dune beetles in Nevada as
endangered or threatened with critical habitat under the Act. The
petition clearly identified itself as a petition and included the
appropriate identification information for the petitioner, as required
in 50 CFR 424.14(a).
In a March 12, 2010, letter to the petitioner, we acknowledged
receipt of the petition, and 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 necessary. We also stated that we anticipated making an
initial finding in Fiscal Year 2010. This finding addresses the
petition.
Previous Federal Actions
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab (Aegialia crescenta), Hardy's
aegialian scarab (A. hardyi), large aegialian scarab (A. magnifica),
Crescent Dunes serican scarab (Serica ammomenisco), Sand Mountain
serican scarab (S.
[[Page 47125]]
psammobunus), and Giuliani's dune scarab (Pseudocotalpa giuliani) were
all previously designated by the Service as category 2 candidate
species, then defined as taxa for which the Service had on hand
information indicating that proposing to list as endangered or
threatened was possibly appropriate, but for which persuasive data on
biological vulnerability and threats were not available to support
proposed rules (59 FR 58982; November 15, 1994). In the February 28,
1996, Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) (61 FR 7595), we adopted a
single category of candidate species defined as follows: ``Those
species for which the Service has on file sufficient information on
biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support issuance of a
proposed rule to list but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded.''
In previous CNORs, species matching this definition were known as
category 1 candidates for listing. Thus, the Service no longer
considered category 2 species as candidates and did not include them in
the 1996 list or any subsequent CNORs. The decision to stop considering
category 2 species as candidates was designed to reduce confusion about
the status of these species and to clarify that we no longer regarded
these species as candidates for listing.
The Service proposed to list Giuliani's dune scarab as endangered
or threatened in 1978 (43 FR 35636; August 10, 1978), citing the effect
of off-road vehicle (ORV) use. The Service stated that ORV use compacts
dead organic matter accumulated on dune slopes and prevents its
buildup, thereby destroying the larval habitat of the beetle. The
proposal to list also found that there was a lack of State or Federal
laws protecting the species. Included in the proposed rule was a
proposal to designate critical habitat at Big Dune, Nye County, Nevada,
at the time the only known location for the species. The Service
withdrew the proposal to list Giuliani's dune scarab after a temporary
2-year period mandated by Congress for proposed rules to be finalized
had expired (45 FR 65137; October 1, 1980).
Species Information
The six species of sand dune beetles included in the petition and
evaluated in this finding are endemic, terrestrial invertebrates of
Great Basin and Mojave Desert sand dunes of Nevada (Table 1). All of
the petitioned species are from the phylum Arthropoda, class Insecta,
order Coleoptera, and family Scarabaeidae. Three of the species are in
the genus Aegialia, two are in the genus Serica, and one is in the
genus Pseudocotalpa (Table 1). There are three distinct sand dune
beetle and dune system groupings (Sand Mountain/Blowsand Mountains;
Crescent Dunes; and Big Dune/Lava Dune) (Table 1; WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 5). Both in the petition and in our files, there is little to
no information on population sizes or population trends for any of
these sand dune beetle species.
The petition provided information regarding the six species'
ranking according to NatureServe (WildEarth Guardians 2010, pp. 3-4).
The petitioned sand dune beetles are all ranked as critically impaired
at the global, national, or State level (WildEarth Guardians 2010, pp.
3-4). While the petition states that the ``definition of `critically
impaired' is at least equivalent to definitions of `endangered' or
`threatened' under the ESA [Endangered Species Act],'' this is not an
appropriate comparison. According to its own Web site, NatureServe's
assessment of any species ``does not constitute a recommendation by
NatureServe for listing'' under the Act (https://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm). In addition, NatureServe's assessment procedures
include ``different criteria, evidence requirements, purposes and
taxonomic coverage than government lists of endangered and threatened
species, and therefore these two types of lists should not be expected
to coincide'' (https://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm).
Table 1--Names and Locations of Six Sand Dune Beetle Species Included in This Finding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common name Scientific name Sand dune system(s) Nevada county
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species for Which Substantial Information Indicating Listing May Be Warranted Was Not Presented in the Petition
or in Service Files:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardy's aegialian scarab........... Aegialia hardyi....... Sand Mountain........ Churchill.
Sand Mountain serican scarab....... Serica psammobunus.... Blowsand Mountains...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species for Which Substantial Information Indicating Listing May Be Warranted Was Presented in the Petition or
in Service Files:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab.... Aegialia crescenta.... Crescent Dunes....... Nye.
Crescent Dunes serican scarab...... Serica ammomenisco....
Large aegialian scarab............. Aegialia magnifica.... Big Dune............. Nye.
Giuliani's dune scarab............. Pseudocotalpa giuliani Lava Dune............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab occur
only at Sand Mountain and the nearby Blowsand Mountains dune systems,
Churchill County, Nevada (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 47; Bechtel et
al. 1983, p. 476; Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 174; The Nature
Conservancy (TNC) (2004, pp. 23, 26). These two dune systems are
located approximately 30 miles (mi) (48.3 kilometer (km)) east-
southeast of Fallon, Churchill County, Nevada. Sand Mountain is a star
dune (roughly star-shaped) and ranges from 3,895 to 4,650 feet (ft)
(1,187.2 to 1,417.3 meters (m)) in elevation. It occupies approximately
12 square miles (sq. mi) (32 sq. km) on mostly Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) lands, though a portion of the dune may also occur on
State and private lands (Bechtel et al. 1983, p. 477; Nevada Natural
Heritage Program 2006, p. 43). Blowsand Mountains is a complex of star
and linear dunes occurring partially on Fallon Naval Air Station (NAS)
lands and BLM lands about 15.6 mi (25 km) southwest of Sand Mountain
(Bechtel et al. 1983, p. 477; Nachlinger et al. 2001, pp. A12-1, A12-
11). Blowsand Mountains rise to an elevation of 4,593 ft (1,400 m) and
occupy 3.6 sq. mi (9.2 sq km) (Bechtel et al. 1983, p. 477).
During a 1981 arthropod survey, Hardy's aegialian scarab was found
to be common in sand around the perennial shrub vegetation at the base
of Sand Mountain, but less common in similar habitat at Blowsand
Mountains, which the surveyor suspected was due to the limited area to
which he had access (Rust 1981, pp. 13, 29). An undescribed species of
Serica, subsequently named S. psammobunus (Sand Mountain serican
scarab) (Hardy and Andrews
[[Page 47126]]
1987, p. 174), was found to be very common on both dune systems (Rust
1981, p. 14).
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent Dunes serican
scarab are known to occur only at Crescent Dunes northwest of Tonopah,
Nye County, Nevada (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 45; Hardy and
Andrews 1987, p. 173). The Crescent Dunes are a small complex of
crescent-shaped dunes (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 8). The highest
dune rises to 5,000 ft (1,524 m) in elevation (WildEarth Guardians
2010, p. 8). These dunes occur on BLM lands and are managed by the
agency's Battle Mountain District, Tonopah Resource Area (BLM 1997, p.
21).
The petition provided no information, and we have no information in
our files, on the population sizes or population trends of the Crescent
Dunes aegialian scarab or the Crescent Dunes serican scarab.
The large aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab occur only at
Big Dune and Lava Dune in the Amargosa Desert, Nye County, Nevada
(Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 43; Rust 1985, p. 105). These dunes are
located about 4 mi (6.4 km) apart (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 15).
Big Dune is a complex star dune that reaches 2,731 ft (832.4 m) in
elevation and extends across approximately 1.5 sq mi (3.9 sq km). Lava
Dune is sand that is trapped at the base of a cinder cone, has an
elevation of 2,800 ft (853.4 m), and covers about 1.0 sq mi (2.6 sq km)
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 15). Both dunes are managed by the BLM
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 15).
The petition provided no information on the population sizes or
trends of the large aegialian scarab or the Giuliani's dune scarab. We
have anecdotal information that these two beetle species occurred in
``huge'' numbers at Big Dune as recently as 2007 (Murphy 2007, p. 1).
We have no information in our files on the population trends of either
species.
There is limited life history information for the six petitioned
sand dune beetle species available in the petition, references cited in
the petition, and in our files. Many genera of Scarabaeidae in North
American deserts, including species of the genera Aegialia and Serica,
are found in sand dunes (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 42; Hardy and
Andrews 1987, p. 178). Sand dunes supply the necessary requirements of
an easily penetrable substrate that provides ready access to higher
levels of moisture and protection from temperature extremes; sand is
easily penetrable by both larvae and adults, and wet sand levels are
generally no more than 1.6 to 3.3 ft (0.5 to 1.0 m) beneath the surface
(Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 175). Plant roots on more stable dunes
provide food for some Scarabaeidae, while detritus collected and buried
in pockets by the wind provides food for detritivores (beetles and
other animals that feed on decomposing organic matter) (Hardy and
Andrews 1987, p. 175). Many genera of Scarabaeidae using dune areas
seem to be unable to survive elsewhere in desert areas, including some
species of Aegialia and Serica (Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 175).
The six beetles vary in their dispersal abilities. The three
aegialian scarabs (Crescent Dunes, Hardy's, and large) are all
flightless, a characteristic that may have facilitated population
isolation and resulting speciation (formation of a new species) (Rust
and Hanks 1982, p. 319; Porter and Rust 1996, p. 717; Porter and Rust
1997, p. 306). Giuliani's dune scarab is capable of flight (Hardy 1976,
p. 301). We have no information on the dispersal abilities of the two
serican scarabs (Crescent Dunes and Sand Mountain) in our files, nor
was any provided in the petition.
Hardy's aegialian scarab is a flightless detritivore that is active
in winter at Sand Mountain and Blowsand Mountains; both adults and
larvae are active in months having a mean monthly temperature near or
below 50 [deg]F (10 [deg]C) (Rust 1981, pp. 13, 27; Rust and Hanks
1982, p. 324). The Sand Mountain serican scarab is active in early
summer on both dune systems (Rust 1981, p. 14; Hardy and Andrews 1987,
p. 174).
Giuliani's dune scarab is restricted to the vegetated sandy areas
around the base of the major dune at Big Dune (43 FR 35639; August 10,
1978). Larrea tridentata (creosote bush) and Petalonyx thurberi
(sandpaper plant), common shrubs found here, accumulate plant debris at
their bases. This accumulated plant debris is an important food source
and is the larval habitat of the beetle. Adults of Giuliani's dune
scarab emerge in late spring and fly nightly, hovering over dune
shrubs, and mate on the sand surface; the adults do not feed and larvae
are found beneath dune shrubs (Rust 1985, p. 109).
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 six sand dune beetle species, 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.
Summary of Common Threats
The petition identified a few threats as common to many of the six
petitioned sand dune beetles. The petition identified the following as
threats to all six sand dune beetle species: Loss, degradation, and
fragmentation of habitat due to ORV recreation and potential
construction of solar facility projects; inadequate existing regulatory
mechanisms due to the lack of Federal or State regulatory protection;
and increased vulnerability
[[Page 47127]]
to extinction due to isolated populations and limited habitat
(WildEarth Guardians 2010, pp. 6-8, 11, 18, 19). These are described as
general threats in the petition, but there is little or no information
in the petition that associates the threats with existing or probable
impacts on the individual sand dune beetle species.
For two species, Hardy's aegialian scarab and Sand Mountain serican
scarab, both of which are endemic to Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains in Churchill County, we have information in our files on ORV
use and existing regulatory mechanisms. Due to the three distinct
geographic groupings of the six petitioned species, where appropriate,
threats are assessed below by dune system: Sand Mountain and Blowsand
Mountains, Crescent Dunes, and Big Dune and Lava Dune.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
In general, the petition identifies ORV use as the most serious
threat to the six sand dune beetles (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 6).
The petition notes that ORV recreation has increased substantially over
the past few decades, that it accounted for over 400,000 visitor days
on lands administered by the BLM in 2000 alone, and that the conditions
of sand dune habitats in Nevada are influenced mostly by ORV use
(Wildlife Action Plan Team (WAPT) 2006, p. 238).
The petition states that the six beetles depend on vegetation
around the bases of the sand dunes for adult or larval forage, mating
sites, and protective cover (Hardy 1976, pp. 301-302; Rust 1985, pp.
108-109; Hardy and Andrews 1986, p. 136; Hardy and Andrews 1987, pp.
175-176, 178). The petition cites several scientific studies that have
documented the severe negative impacts that ORVs can have on insects in
the Order Coleoptera (Van Dam and Van Dam 2008, p. 411). Heavy use by
ORVs can destroy dune vegetation (Luckenbach and Bury 1983, p. 280;
WAPT 2006, pp. 238-239), eliminating and fragmenting beetle habitat and
reactivate sand dune movement (Wiggs et al. 1995, as cited by Van Dam
and Van Dam 2008, p. 411). In addition, ORV use may disrupt beetle
mating activity (Luckenbach and Bury 1983, p. 277), may potentially
kill individual beetles (Van Dam and Van Dam 2008, p. 416), and may
facilitate the spread of invasive plant species (WAPT 2006, p. 238).
Sand dune systems are dynamic, and the establishment of invasive plant
species can stabilize dunes, preventing sand movement and altering
habitat functions. Invasive plant species may also displace preferred
vegetation used by beetles. Research also suggests that areas
unprotected from ORV use contain much smaller populations of
Coleopterans than in protected areas (Van Dam and Van Dam 2008, p.
415).
The petition also noted that a solar energy facility has been
proposed on BLM lands near Crescent Dunes (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p.
11). The BLM is also currently reviewing a proposal to develop solar
energy on public land near the Big Dune Area of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC) (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 18). The petition claims
that, if the two solar facilities are approved, the increased activity
from their construction and maintenance may disturb beetles and their
habitat (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 18). As noted above, these
threats are discussed below by dune system.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and in Our Files
Sand Mountain and Blowsand Mountains
Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab occur
only at Sand Mountain and the nearby Blowsand Mountains, Churchill
County. The petition provided information on possible threats to these
species from ORV recreation at Sand Mountain and Blowsand Mountains. In
addition, we have information in our files regarding potential impacts
from the use of Blowsand Mountains as a military bombing range. We
discuss these potential threats below.
ORV Recreation
The petition indicates that Sand Mountain is a 4,795-ac (1,941-ha)
designated Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) managed by the
Stillwater Field Office of the BLM (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14).
The petition states that ORV use can be intense at times and that BLM
has ``closed'' some areas to ORV use (BLM 2001, pp. REC-3, REC-4;
WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14). The petition also states from an
anonymous source that ``some'' users ignore restrictions and ride into
areas that were closed in 2001 (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14). The
petition does not provide additional information pertaining to the
number of or frequency with which these users violate restrictions and
ride into closed areas.
Information in our files indicates that recreational ORV use is
currently restricted to a designated trail system that prohibits ORV
use of vegetated areas (72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007). Most arthropods
found during a survey at Sand Mountain occurred in association with
perennial shrub vegetation at the base of the dune and, except while
traveling, no species were found to inhabit open sand (Rust 1981, p.
2). On December 12, 2006, BLM implemented an emergency restriction on
motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,612 ha) of land to prevent adverse effects
to the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (Euphilotes
pallescens arenamontana) (72 FR 12187; March 15, 2007). These
restrictions reduce the route system within and outside of the SRMA
from an estimated 200 mi (320 km) to 21.5 mi (34.4 km) (72 FR 24253;
May 2, 2007). This returns the length of the route system to about the
length of the system in 1980. The emergency restriction will remain in
effect until the Resource Management Plan has been updated or until the
Field Office Manager determines it is no longer needed (72 FR 12187;
March 15, 2007). The Service has found that implementation of this
closure in 2006 effectively reduces the threat posed by ORVs to the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly's habitat and ensures that further habitat
destruction is prevented and will ensure natural shrub regeneration
over the long-term (72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007). The reduction of this
ORV threat also applies to Hardy's aegialian scarab and Sand Mountain
serican scarab habitat at Sand Mountain. Thus, the extent and magnitude
of potential impacts to Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain
serican scarab from ORV use have decreased since the petition's 2001
citation and are likely to remain so. In addition, the petition's
statement of closed areas as referenced in BLM (2001) is incorrect. The
BLM document (BLM 2001, p. REC-4) cites a Federal Register Notice
published on September 15, 1988 (53 FR 35917). This Federal Register
Notice does not indicate closed areas to ORV use at Sand Mountain
Recreation Area but indicates their use is limited in vegetated areas.
We do not have information in our files on potential violations of the
2006 ORV restrictions. Therefore, we believe the petition's information
regarding ORV threats to these species' habitat at Sand Mountain is
outdated and inaccurate. We discuss the adequacy of BLM's regulation of
this trail system in protecting the habitat of the dune beetles at Sand
Mountain under Factor D below.
As indicated above, Blowsand Mountains occur partially on Fallon
[[Page 47128]]
NAS lands and partially on BLM lands (Nachlinger et al. 2001, pp. A12-
1, A12-11). The petition does not provide specific information related
to ORV use at Blowsand Mountains.
According to information in our files, the Blowsand Mountains occur
within the Fallon Range Training Complex Military Operation Area, a 26-
million-acre (ac) (10.5-million hectare (ha)) area used by the Naval
Strike and Air Warfare Center (TNC 2004, p. 11). Because a portion of
the Blowsand Mountains dune system is used for inert and live air-to-
ground ordnance drops by the military, much of the area is not open to
public access and therefore is not used for ORV recreation (TNC 2004,
p. 12). According to TNC (2004, p. 48), ``The only activities that take
place on this dune system are those related to the military training
mission of NAS Fallon.'' Therefore, the petition's assertions regarding
ORV use at Blowsand Mountains impacting Hardy's aegialian scarab and
the Sand Mountain serican scarab are not supported.
Bombing Range
Our files indicate, as noted above, that much of the Blowsand
Mountains dune system is within an active practice bombing range. A
conservation assessment of the Blowsand Mountains dune system has been
completed by a team comprised of individuals from the BLM, Fallon NAS,
TNC, Fallon Paiute Shoshone Tribe, and Walker River Paiute Tribe (TNC
2004). Threats identified to the Blowsand Mountains dune system by the
assessment team were related to ordnance drops, detonation of
unexploded ordnance, and invasive weed transport during the removal of
ordnance (TNC 2004, p. viii). As part of the conservation assessment,
the stressors at the Blowsand Mountains dune system (habitat for
Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab) were
evaluated. Only direct mortality to dune biota from ordnance drops was
rated as a high-severity threat, but because it was of small geographic
scope, the overall stress ranking was determined to be low (TNC 2004,
p. 48). The assessment team also evaluated the viability of the
Blowsand Mountains dune system based on its size outside of the heavy-
effect bombing area, its condition based on invasive species, and its
connection to a current source of sand. The assessment team determined
it to have an overall viability score of ``good'' based on size and
condition of the system and its landscape context (TNC 2004, p. 32).
Because the stress ranking from the conservation assessment was
considered low for ordnance drops and the overall viability of Blowsand
Mountains was determined to be good, potential impacts to populations
of Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab from
bombing practice at Blowsand Mountains are considered low.
Based on the information available in the petition and our files,
we have determined that there is not substantial information to
indicate that listing Hardy's aegialian scarab or the Sand Mountain
serican scarab located at Sand Mountain and Blowsand Mountains may be
warranted due to the present or threatened destruction, modification,
or curtailment of their habitat or range.
Crescent Dunes
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent Dunes serican
scarab occur only at Crescent Dunes, Nye County (Gordon and Cartwright
1977, p. 44; Hardy and Andrews 1987, p. 173). The petition provided
information on possible threats from ORV use at Crescent Dunes. In
addition, the petition provided information related to potential
impacts from a solar facility proposed near the dunes. We discuss these
potential threats below.
ORV Recreation
According to the petition, Crescent Dunes is a designated SRMA on
3,000 ac (1,214 ha) of public lands administered by the Tonopah Field
Office of the BLM (BLM 1997, p. 21). The SRMA is open to ORV use year-
round (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 11). Though no part of the dunes is
reserved for the protection of sensitive species, ORVs are required to
stay on roads, trails, and unvegetated dunes (WildEarth Guardians 2010,
p. 11). The petition does not provide any specific information
regarding impacts to the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent
Dunes serican scarab from ORV use. However, the petition provided
information regarding an opinion from The Nature Conservancy that
recreation appeared to be a high priority at Crescent Dunes with no
regard given to protection of the unique animals of the dune system and
no analysis of the impacts of ORVs to these species or their habitat
(BLM 1994, p. 5-116). We are unaware of any management plans or
emergency restrictions being placed on motorized use at Crescent Dunes
to protect the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the Crescent Dunes
serican scarab or their habitat. The adequacy of BLM's regulations
regarding this trail system in protecting the habitat of the dune
beetles at Crescent Dunes is discussed under Factor D below.
We have no additional information in our files related to this
potential threat.
Solar Energy Development
According to the petition, Tonopah Solar Energy, LLC submitted a
right-of-way application and a plan of development to the BLM's Tonopah
Field Office for the construction and operation of a solar power
generation facility (Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project), associated
transmission facilities to the Anaconda Substation located 6 mi (9.7
km) north of the project area, and access roads (74 FR 61364; November
24, 2009). This facility would have a generating capacity of up to 160
megawatts (MW) of electricity based on concentrating solar power
technology. The proposed plant, including the heliostat array, power
block, and associated facilities, would use approximately 1,600 ac (648
ha) of BLM-managed lands northwest of Tonopah, Nevada. This project is
considered a ``fast-track'' project. According to the BLM Nevada State
Office Web site, fast-track projects are those where the companies
involved have demonstrated to BLM that they have made sufficient
progress to formally start the environmental review and public
participation process. Projects that were cleared for approval by the
Department of the Interior by December 2010 are eligible for economic
stimulus funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Pub. L. 111-5). All renewable energy projects proposed for BLM-
managed lands receive full environmental reviews required by the
National Environmental Policy Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
(BLM 2010a, p. 1). The scoping period for this project closed on
December 24, 2009 (74 FR 61364; November 24, 2009). The petition claims
that increased activity from construction and maintenance of the
proposed solar array, which would be located adjacent to the sand
dunes, may disturb beetles and their habitat.
We have no additional information in our files on this potential
threat other than that a draft environmental impact statement is
currently being prepared (BLM 2010b, p. 8).
Based on the information available in the petition and our files,
we have determined that there is substantial information to indicate
that listing the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent Dunes
serican scarab located at Crescent Dunes may be warranted due to the
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of
their habitat or range.
[[Page 47129]]
Big Dune and Lava Dune
The large aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab occur only at
Big Dune and Lava Dune, Nye County (Gordon and Cartwright 1977, p. 43;
BLM 1998a, p. 3-41), which are managed by the Southern Nevada District
Office of the BLM. The petition provided information on possible
threats from ORV use at Big Dune and Lava Dune. In addition, the
petition provided information related to potential impacts from a solar
facility proposed near the dunes. We discuss these potential threats
below.
ORV Recreation
According to information provided by the petition, there is an
11,600-ac (4,694-ha) Big Dune SRMA, which includes a 1,920-ac (777-ha)
ACEC at Big Dune (BLM 1998b, pp. 7, 23; WildEarth Guardians 2010, p.
18). The objective of the SRMA is to provide for moderate, casual ORV
use; camping; and other casual recreation opportunities. The ACEC was
established in 1998 to protect beetle habitat, but only 200 ac (81 ha)
of the 1,920 ac (777 ha) ACEC were set aside specifically as beetle
habitat (BLM 1998b, p. 23). This is considered inadequate by the
petitioner when compared to the Service's previous proposal to list
Giuliani's dune scarab and designate critical habitat over the entire
dune in 1978 (43 FR 35636; August 10, 1978) (WildEarth Guardians 2010,
p. 18). In addition, ORV use is allowed on the designated route system
within the 200 ac (81 ha) specified as beetle habitat (BLM 1998b, p.
23). Within the entire 1,920-ac (777-ha) ACEC, speed-based, competitive
ORV events are prohibited (BLM 1998b, p. 23). Because nonvegetated
portions of the Big Dune SRMA outside of designated beetle habitat are
managed as open to ORV use, the petition indicates that heavy ORV use
occurs over large areas of the rest of Big Dune and the immediate
surrounding area (BLM 1998b, p. 24; WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 18).
Lava Dune has no special management designation. The petition does not
provide any specific information regarding impacts to the large
aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab from ORV use at Lava Dune.
The adequacy of BLM's regulations regarding ORV use at Big Dune and
Lava Dune is discussed under Factor D.
We have no additional information in our files related to this
potential threat.
Solar Energy Development
According to the petition, Pacific Solar Investments, Inc.,
submitted a right-of-way application and plan of development to the
BLM's Southern Nevada District Office for the construction, operation,
maintenance, and termination of a solar power generation facility
(Amargosa North Solar Project), transmission substation, and switchyard
facilities (74 FR 66146; December 14, 2009). This facility would have a
generating capacity of about 150 MW of electricity based on
concentrating solar power technology and would be located on about
7,500 ac (3,035 ha) of BLM-managed lands in the Amargosa Valley, Nye
County. A portion of Big Dune lies within the proposed project area.
All renewable energy projects proposed for BLM-managed lands receive
full environmental reviews required by the National Environmental
Policy Act. The scoping period for this project closed on February 12,
2010 (74 FR 66146; December 14, 2009).
According to information in our files, the reconnaissance-level
biological survey completed for the plan of development states that
``due to the proximity of the endemic beetles ACEC, it will be
important to address the potential affect [sic] of any adjacent
development to the continued habitat function and viability of this
ACEC'' (CH2MHILL 2008, p. 3-1). We have no additional information in
our files on this potential threat to the large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani's dune scarab at Big Dune.
Based on the information available in the petition and our files,
we have determined that there is substantial information to indicate
that listing the large aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab at
Big Dune and Lava Dune may be warranted due to the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of their habitat
or range.
Summary of Factor A
We find that the petition and information in our files provide
substantial information that ORV recreation is a potential threat to
the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent Dunes serican scarab
that occur at Crescent Dunes and to the large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani's dune scarab that occur at Big Dune and Lava Dune. We also
find that the petition provides substantial information that solar
energy development may be a threat to the Crescent Dunes aegialian
scarab, Crescent Dunes serican scarab, large aegialian scarab, and
Giuliani's dune scarab at Crescent Dunes and Big Dune.
While ORV use occurs at Sand Mountain, we find that the
comprehensive, mandatory route restrictions put in place in 2006 (72 FR
12187; March 15, 2007; 72 FR 24253; May 2, 2007) to protect the shrub
habitat used by the Sand Mountain blue butterfly also protects the two
dune beetles (Hardy's aegialian scarab and Sand Mountain serican
scarab) as they also depend upon this shrub habitat (see also Factor D
discussion). We do not have information indicating that violations of
the 2006 ORV restrictions occur, or occur frequently enough to impact
the shrub habitat at Sand Mountain. Off Road Vehicle recreation does
not occur throughout much of the Blowsand Mountains' dune system
because much of this area is not open to public access due to its
location within the Fallon Range Training Complex Military Operation
Area, an active practice bombing range. The bombing operations at the
Blowsand Mountains are of limited geographic scope, and therefore have
been ranked as a low stress by an interagency assessment team. For
these reasons, we do not find that the petition provides substantial
information indicating that the Hardy's aegialian scarab or Sand
Mountain serican scarab may be warranted for listing under Factor A,
the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of
their habitat or range.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of the information available in
the petition and our files, we find that the petition does not present
substantial information to indicate that listing Hardy's aegialian
scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab may be warranted, but the
information available in the petition and in our files does present
substantial information to indicate that listing may be warranted for
the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes serican scarab, the
large aegialian scarab, and Giuliani's dune scarab due to the present
or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of their
habitat or range.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition notes that collection of individuals for scientific
purposes has occurred over the years, but does not provide information
about whether this constitutes a threat to any of the six sand dune
beetle species (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 7).
[[Page 47130]]
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and in Our Files
The petition does not provide information that overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes has
negatively impacted any of the six petitioned beetle species. We have
no information in our files to indicate that overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is a
threat to any of the six species.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of the information provided in
the petition, we do not consider the petition or information in our
files to provide substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing of any of the six petitioned beetles may be
warranted due to overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
According to information provided by the petition, nighthawks
(Chordeiles minor) were observed preying on Andrew's dune scarab
(Pseudocotalpa andrewsi) at Algodones Dunes in southern California
(Hardy and Andrews 1986, p. 137), a dune system similar to those used
by the petitioned beetles (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 7). Foxes
(Vulpes macrotis) and coyotes (Canis latrans) may also prey on sand
dune beetles (Hardy and Andrews 1986, p. 137). Rust (1985, p. 109)
stated that no predation of Guiliani's dune scarab was observed at Big
Dune or Lava Dune although many potential predators were observed.
The petition states that disease is not known to be a threat to any
of the six petitioned beetles (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 7).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and in Our Files
The petition does not provide specific information that predation
or disease has negatively impacted the six petitioned sand dune
beetles. While predation of the sand dune beetles would be a common
occurrence, it is unknown whether predation may be occurring at such a
level that it is negatively affecting these species. We do not have
information in our files to indicate that predation or disease is a
potential threat to any of these species.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of the information in the
petition and in our files, we have determined that the petition does
not provide substantial information to indicate that listing any of the
six sand dune beetles may be warranted due to disease or predation.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioned dune beetles occur on Federal lands managed either
by the BLM or the Department of Defense. The populations on BLM lands
all occur within or adjacent to areas managed primarily for ORV use and
designated as SRMAs. The petition states that none of the six
petitioned sand dune beetle species has legal protection (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, pp. 7-18). All six petitioned species are listed as BLM
sensitive species (BLM 2007, pp. J-3, J-35). According to information
in our files, BLM sensitive species are defined as ``species that
require special management or considerations to avoid potential future
listing'' (BLM 2008, Glossary p. 5). The stated objective for sensitive
species is to initiate proactive conservation measures that reduce or
eliminate threats to minimize the likelihood of and need for listing
(BLM 2008, Section 6840.02). Conservation, as it applies to BLM
sensitive species, is defined as ``the use of programs, plans, and
management practices to reduce or eliminate threats affecting the
status of the species, or improve the condition of the species' habitat
on BLM-administered lands'' (BLM 2008, Glossary p. 2).
The petition also notes that although some of the petitioned
beetles may occur at ``preliminary focal areas'' identified in the
Nevada Wildlife Action Plan, this plan does not prescribe conservation
measures for sensitive invertebrates in Nevada (WAPT 2006). Moreover,
the petition points out that Nevada Revised Statute 501.110 provides
only for the protection of invertebrates classified as either mollusks
or crustaceans, and not other invertebrates. Under current statute,
therefore, beetles cannot be provided State protection (WildEarth
Guardians 2010, p. 7).
The petition provides some information on the Federal management of
the three SRMAs at which the dune beetles occur (WildEarth Guardians
2010, pp. 11, 14-15, 18-19). Each of the SRMAs includes habitat for
only two of the six petitioned species and none of these species occur
at more than one SRMA, although some of the six petitioned beetles also
occur at other nearby dune systems. In addition, each of the three
SRMAs has specific management restrictions. For these reasons, existing
regulatory mechanisms are more easily assessed for the pairs of species
that are unique to each SRMA. Occurrences outside of the SRMAs are
discussed within this framework.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and in Our Files
Sand Mountain and Blowsand Mountains
Hardy's aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab are
known only from Sand Mountain and nearby Blowsand Mountains. Sand
Mountain is a designated SRMA managed by the BLM Stillwater Field
Office that extends over 4,795 ac (1,941 ha). The petition states that
the BLM has closed some areas to ORV use (BLM 2001, pp. REC-3 and REC-
4; WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 14). The petition also cites a 2009
anonymous source who stated that some ORV users have ignored these 2001
restrictions and ride in closed areas (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p.
14).
We have information in our files that the ORV restrictions
mentioned in the 2001 Carson City Field Office Resource Management Plan
(CCRMP) (BLM 2001) cited by the petition have been superseded by more
comprehensive ORV restrictions implemented in 2006 to prevent adverse
effects to the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (72 FR
12187; March 15, 2007). The Service has previously found that
implementation of this closure, which includes a designated ORV route
system throughout the vegetated portions of the SRMA, effectively
reduces the threat posed by ORVs to the Sand Mountain blue butterfly's
habitat and ensures that further habitat destruction is prevented and
will ensure, over the long-term, natural shrub regeneration (72 FR
24253; May 2, 2007). The reduction of this ORV threat to the
butterfly's habitat also applies to this shared habitat with Hardy's
aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab since these two
beetles occupy similar habitat as the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
The Blowsand Mountains dune system is under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense and is within a practice bombing range used by
the Fallon NAS. The petition provides no information on the management
of the Blowsand Mountains. As previously noted under Factor A,
information in our files states that because of its use for military
bombing training operations, much of the area is not open to public
access and therefore is not used for ORV recreation (TNC 2004, p. 12).
An interagency assessment team concluded that while direct mortality to
dune biota from bomb drops can be severe, it was of small geographic
scope within the Blowsand Mountains and, therefore, its
[[Page 47131]]
overall stress ranking was considered low (TNC 2004, p. 48).
Therefore, based on the information provided in the petition and
available in our files, we have determined that the petition does not
present substantial information to indicate that listing the Hardy's
aegialian scarab or the Sand Mountain serican scarab may be warranted
due to the inadequacies of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Crescent Dunes
The Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and Crescent Dunes serican
scarab are known only from the Crescent Dunes, where a total of 3,000
ac (1,214 ha) has been designated as the Crescent Sand Dunes SRMA in
the Tonopah Resource Management Plan (TRMP) (BLM 1997, p. 21). The
petition provides no information, nor do we have any information in our
files, regarding whether either of these species occurs outside of the
designated SRMA boundary. The Record of Decision (ROD) for the TRMP
states that vehicle use within the SRMA will be limited to existing
roads and trails, although ORV use on unvegetated areas may be allowed
provided that such vehicle use is compatible with the area's values
(BLM 1997, p. 21). The Crescent Dunes SRMA is closed to competitive
recreational events to protect sensitive resource values (BLM 1997, p.
20). Fluid mineral leasing is allowed, subject to a no-surface-
occupancy stipulation (BLM 1997, p. 21). The TRMP does not specifically
address management of renewable resources such as solar energy (BLM
1997). No specific mention is made of either beetle species in the
TRMP, although it states that Nevada BLM Sensitive Species will be
managed to maintain or increase current population levels (BLM 1997, p.
9). We are not aware of any specific conservation actions or plans for
either the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab or the Crescent Dunes
serican scarab.
The petition noted that during the public participation process for
the proposed TRMP, the BLM received a letter from the Nevada Outdoor
Recreation Association, Inc. urging them to designate the Crescent
Dunes as an ACEC to protect endemic species, including the Crescent
Dunes aegialian scarab (BLM 1994, pp. 5-12). The BLM responded that a
14,000-ac (5,666 ha) area at Crescent Dunes was examined for ACEC
potential and determined not to meet the importance criterion as
defined in BLM policy (BLM 1994, pp. 5-125); no further explanation was
provided. In the ROD for the TRMP, the BLM stated that as a result of
several points of protest concerning ACECs that were found to be valid,
decisions to designate ACECs were withheld and that an ACEC Plan
Amendment would be prepared over the next 2 years to address these
points of protest (BLM 1997, p. 3); we have no information in our files
regarding whether this plan amendment was ever prepared. Another
commenter, The Nature Conservancy, expressed the opinion that
recreation appeared to be high priority at Crescent Dunes with no
regard given to protection of the unique animals of the dune system and
no analysis of the impacts of ORVs to these species or their habitat
(BLM 1994, pp. 5-116). The BLM responded that impacts to sensitive
species would be addressed in the SRMA plan (BLM 1994, pp. 5-159).
According to the petition, no management plan has been prepared for the
SRMA (WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 11). We are unaware of any other
restrictions being placed on motorized use at Crescent Dunes to protect
the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the Crescent Dunes serican
scarab or their habitat as was done at Sand Mountain to protect the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly and its habitat.
Therefore, based on the information provided in the petition and
available in our files, we have determined that the petition does
present substantial information to indicate that listing the Crescent
Dunes aegialian scarab and the Crescent Dunes serican scarab may be
warranted due to the inadequacies of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Big Dune and Lava Dune
The large aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab are known
only from Big Dune and Lava Dune. According to the petition, in the Las
Vegas Resource Management Plan (LVRMP), the BLM designated an 11,600-ac
(4,694-ha) SRMA, which includes a 1,920-ac (777-ha) ACEC at Big Dune
(BLM 1998b, pp. 7, 23). The objective of the SRMA is to provide for
moderate, casual ORV use; camping; and other casual recreation
opportunities. The ACEC was established to protect beetle habitat. The
management direction is to prohibit ORV use within 200 ac (81 ha) of
dune beetle habitat within the ACEC, except on the designated route
through it, to ensure continued survival of the native beetle
population. Speed-based competitive ORV events within the ACEC are also
prohibited (BLM 1998b, p. 23). Other commercial activities and
permitted events are allowed on a case-by-case basis. The management
direction stipulates that long-term recreation management within the
dunes be based on the minimum habitat requirements of the beetles (BLM
1998b, p. 23). Lands within the ACEC are designated as a rights-of-way
exclusion area and are closed to locatable mineral, salable mineral,
and solid leasable mineral entry; fluid mineral leasing is allowed,
subject to a no-surface-occupancy stipulation (BLM 1998b, p. 7). The
LVRMP does not specifically address management of renewable resources
such as solar energy (BLM 1998b). There is no livestock grazing within
the ACEC. A BLM brochure states that a 5-ac (2-ha) area within the ACEC
on the east side of the dunes has been set aside specifically for the
protection of beetle habitat (BLM 2010c, p. 1). We have no information
in our files that explains the discrepancy between the 200 ac (81 ha)
protected area identified in the LVRMP and the 5 ac (2 ha) area
described in the brochure.
In our files, we have correspondence that indicates that a study of
the distribution of the beetles and their ecological requirements was
initiated at Big Dune in 2007 (Murphy 2007, p. 1). This correspondence
includes a statement that the researchers were successful in locating
both endemic scarab beetles in ``huge'' numbers although ORV activities
were having impacts (Murphy 2007, p. 1). This survey information,
however, is anecdotal, and we lack sufficient details or a written
report to evaluate this claim. We have no information on the status of
the beetles at the nearby Lava Dune, which has no special management
designations.
Therefore, based on the information provided in the petition and
available in our files, we have determined that the petition does
present substantial information to indicate that listing the large
aegialian scarab and Giuliani's dune scarab may be warranted due to the
inadequacies of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Summary of Factor D
We find that the petition provides substantial information that
there may be inadequate existing regulatory mechanisms related to ORV
use and solar facility siting and, therefore, a potential threat to the
Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab and the Crescent Dunes serican scarab
that occur at Crescent Dunes, and to the large aegialian scarab and
Giuliani's dune scarab that occur at Big Dune and Lava Dune.
While ORV use also occurs at Sand Mountain (see also Factor A
discussion), we believe that the mandatory route restrictions in place
since 2006 protect the shrub habitat on which the two dune beetles that
occur there depend. We do not have information indicating
[[Page 47132]]
that violations of the 2006 restrictions occur, or occur frequently
enough to impact the dune beetles' shrub habitat. Off Road Vehicle
recreation does not occur throughout much of the Blowsand Mountains'
dune system because much of it is not open to public access. The
bombing operations at the Blowsand Mountains are of limited geographic
scope and, therefore, direct mortality to dune biota was given a low
stress ranking by an interagency assessment team. Solar facilities are
not being proposed at or near Sand Mountain or Blowsand Mountains. For
these reasons, we do not consider the petition to provide substantial
information that listing Hardy's aegialian scarab or the Sand Mountain
serican scarab, endemic to Sand Mountain and the Blowsand Mountains,
may be warranted due to the inadequacies of existing regulatory
mechanisms.
Therefore, based on our evaluation of the information available in
the petition and our files, we have determined that the petition does
not present substantial information to indicate that listing Hardy's
aegialian scarab and the Sand Mountain serican scarab may be warranted,
but the information available in the petition and our files does
present substantial information to indicate that listing may be
warranted for the Crescent Dunes aegialian scarab, Crescent Dunes
serican scarab, large aegialian scarab, and Giuliani's dune scarab, due
to the inadequacies of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that the six petitioned sand dune beetles have
limited distribution and apparently small populations, increasing the
likelihood of extinction (WildEarth Guadians 2010, p. 8). In support of
this claim, the petition cites Service status assessments for a ground-
dwelling snail [Sisi (Ostodes strigatus)], and for Langford's tree
snail (Partula langfordii), in which the Service found that the small
number of individuals or the small number of extant populations made
these species more vulnerable to extinction (Service 2009a, pp. 4-5;
2009b, pp. 5-6). These assessments differ substantially, however, from
our current considerations for the six petitioned sand dune beetles.
The total population of Sisi was estimated at fewer than 50 individuals
in the early 1990s (Service 2009a, p. 3). In the case of Langford's
tree snail, there is a record of hi