Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Three Salamander Species Not Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species, 23869-23872 [2021-09489]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
new information relevant to the status of
any of the three species or their habitats.
DATES: The findings in this document
[U.S. States]
were made on May 5, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the
Channel No.
bases and supporting information for
*
*
*
*
*
these findings is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov at
COLORADO
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2021–0009 or
by contacting the person specified
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
*
*
*
*
*
Yampa ..................................
277C3 CONTACT. Please submit any new
information, materials, comments, or
*
*
*
*
*
questions concerning this finding to the
appropriate person specified under FOR
NEW MEXICO
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
*
*
*
*
*
Jenny Ericson, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Carrizozo ..............................
261C2 Fish and Wildlife Service, Yreka Fish
and Wildlife Office, 1829 S Oregon St.,
*
*
*
*
*
Yreka, CA 96097; telephone 530–841–
3115. If you use a telecommunications
NORTH DAKOTA
device for the deaf (TDD), please call the
Beulah ...................................
250A Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)—
Continued
*
*
*
*
*
Background
Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we are required to
make a finding whether or not a
*
*
*
*
*
Girard ....................................
248C3 petitioned action is warranted within 12
months after receiving any petition for
*
*
*
*
*
which we have determined contains
Kermit ...................................
289C3 substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
*
*
*
*
*
petitioned action may be warranted
(‘‘12-month finding’’). We must make a
[FR Doc. 2021–09399 Filed 5–4–21; 8:45 am]
finding that the petitioned action is: (1)
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3)
warranted but precluded. We must
publish a notice of these 12-month
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
findings in the Federal Register.
Fish and Wildlife Service
Summary of Information Pertaining to
the Five Factors
50 CFR Part 17
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2021–0009;
and the implementing regulations at
FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212]
part 424 of title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424)
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
set forth procedures for adding species
and Plants; Three Salamander Species to, removing species from, or
Not Warranted for Listing as
reclassifying species on the Lists of
Endangered or Threatened Species
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants (Lists). The Act defines
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
‘‘species’’ as including any subspecies
Interior.
of fish or wildlife or plants, and any
ACTION: Notification of findings.
distinct population segment of any
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
species of vertebrate fish or wildlife
Wildlife Service (Service), announce
which interbreeds when mature (16
findings that three salamander species,
U.S.C. 1532(16). The Act defines
the Samwel salamander (Hydromantes
‘‘endangered species’’ as any species
samweli), Shasta salamander, (H.
that is in danger of extinction
shastae), and Wintu salamander (H.
throughout all or a significant portion of
wintu), are not warranted for listing as
its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)), and
endangered or threatened species under ‘‘threatened species’’ as any species that
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
is likely to become an endangered
amended (Act). However, we ask the
species within the foreseeable future
public to submit to us at any time any
throughout all or a significant portion of
TEXAS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23869
its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may
be determined to be an endangered
species or a threatened species because
of any of the following five factors:
(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.
These factors represent broad
categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an
effect on a species’ continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and
conditions, we look for those that may
have a negative effect on individuals of
the species, as well as other actions or
conditions that may ameliorate any
negative effects or may have positive
effects.
We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in
general to actions or conditions that are
known to or are reasonably likely to
negatively affect individuals of a
species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes
actions or conditions that have a direct
impact on individuals (direct impacts),
as well as those that affect individuals
through alteration of their habitat or
required resources (stressors). The term
‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either
together or separately—the source of the
action or condition or the action or
condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) does not
necessarily mean that the species meets
the statutory definition of an
‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened
species.’’ In determining whether a
species meets either definition, we must
evaluate all identified threats by
considering the expected response by
the species, and the effects of the
threats—in light of those actions and
conditions that will ameliorate the
threats—on an individual, population,
and species level. We evaluate each
threat and its expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative
effect of all of the threats on the species
as a whole. We also consider the
cumulative effect of the threats in light
of those actions and conditions that will
have positive effects on the species,
such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The
Secretary determines whether the
species meets the definition of an
‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened
species’’ only after conducting this
cumulative analysis and describing the
E:\FR\FM\05MYR1.SGM
05MYR1
23870
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
expected effect on the species now and
in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term
‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in
the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened
species.’’ Our implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a
framework for evaluating the foreseeable
future on a case-by-case basis. The term
‘‘foreseeable future’’ extends only so far
into the future as the Service can
reasonably determine that both the
future threats and the species’ responses
to those threats are likely. In other
words, the foreseeable future is the
period of time in which we can make
reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not
mean ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to
provide a reasonable degree of
confidence in the prediction. Thus, a
prediction is reliable if it is reasonable
to depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary
to define foreseeable future as a
particular number of years. Analysis of
the foreseeable future uses the best
scientific and commercial data available
and should consider the timeframes
applicable to the relevant threats and to
the species’ likely responses to those
threats in view of its life-history
characteristics. Data that are typically
relevant to assessing the species’
biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan,
reproductive rates or productivity,
certain behaviors, and other
demographic factors.
In conducting our evaluation of the
five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act to determine whether the
Samwel salamander (Hydromantes
samweli), Shasta salamander, (H.
shastae), or Wintu salamander (H.
wintu) (together referred to as the Shasta
Complex salamanders) meet the
definition of ‘‘endangered species’’ or
‘‘threatened species,’’ we considered
and thoroughly evaluated the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats for the three species.
We reviewed the petition, information
available in our files, and other
available published and unpublished
information. Our evaluation included
information from recognized experts as
well as Federal and State government
resource and land management
agencies.
We developed a species status
assessment (SSA) (Service 2021a, entire)
for the Shasta Complex salamanders
that contains more detailed biological
information, species’ needs information,
and information on the threats facing
the three species and their habitat now
and into the future. We also developed
a species assessment form (Service
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
2021b, entire) that contains our analysis
of the listing factors and documents our
determination that these species do not
meet the definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species. This
supporting information can be found on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2021–0009. The following
is an informational summary of the
finding for the Shasta Complex
salamanders and information found in
the SSA and species assessment form
for the three species. Please see those
documents for additional information.
2021b, entire), the SSA (Service 2021a,
entire), and this document as the Shasta
Complex salamanders. The three
salamanders are lungless web-footed
salamanders that breathe through their
skin and the mucous membrane in their
mouth and throat. The three species are
very similar except that the Shasta
salamander has a longer third digit on
the pes (rear foot). The approximate
length of the three species is
approximately 2 to 2.5 inches (51 to 64
millimeters). The three species have
short, strongly tapered, generally blunttipped tails and broad, flattened heads.
Previous Federal Actions
On July 11, 2012, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity to list 53 species of reptiles
and amphibians, including the Shasta
salamander (Hydromantes shastae), as
endangered or threatened under the Act
(Center for Biological Diversity 2012,
entire). On September 18, 2015, we
published in the Federal Register (80
FR 56423) our 90-day finding that the
petition presented substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating
that listing the Shasta salamander as
endangered or threatened may be
warranted based on impacts to the
species’ habitat (Factor A) and other
natural or humanmade factors (Factor
E). On April 23, 2018, the petitioners
(Center for Biological Diversity 2018,
entire) supplied us with a publication
regarding a taxonomic split of the
Shasta salamander into three separate
species (Samwel salamander
(Hydromantes samweli), Shasta
salamander (H. shastae), and Wintu
salamander (H. wintu) (Bingham et al.
2018, entire)), and requested that we
consider this information in our status
review. On November 29, 2018, we
received a complaint for not completing
the 12-month finding. Per a court
approved settlement agreement, we
agreed to deliver a 12-month finding for
the Shasta salamander to the Federal
Register by April 30, 2021. This
document complies with the settlement
agreement.
Taxonomy and Genetic Information
Species Description
The Shasta salamander was first
described in 1953, as a single species
(Gorman and Camp 1953, entire). Since
that time the scientific community has
determined that the Shasta salamander
is made up of three separate individual
species (Bingham et al. 2018, entire).
The three species are identified as the
Samwel salamander (Hydromantes
samweli), Shasta salamander (H.
shastae), and Wintu salamander (H.
wintu). We refer to the three species in
the species assessment form (Service
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
From 1953 to 2018, the Shasta
salamander was recognized as a single
species (Gorman and Camp 1953, entire;
Gorman 1964, entire; Rovito 2010,
entire). However, a high degree of
variation in genetic structure and
genetic divergence was found after both
mitochondrial and nuclear DNA studies
of the species were completed (Wake et
al. 1978, entire; Wake and Papenfuss
2005, entire; Bingham 2007, entire). As
such, and as noted above, in 2018 the
Shasta salamander was split into three
separate species (Bingham et al. 2018,
entire). Based on this study, there are
three divergent lineages made up of five
genetic clades (a group of organisms that
evolved from a common ancestor)
(Bingham et al. 2018, pp. 403, 407).
Hydromantes shastae and H. wintu
make up two of the clades, with H.
samweli having three genetic clades
(Bingham et al. 2018, p. 408). This
information has been published and the
split of the Shasta salamander has been
accepted by the scientific community.
After review of this information, we
have determined that the three species
are listable entities under the Act.
Habitat/Life History
The three species are strictly
terrestrial for their entire lives and must
remain moist in order for individuals to
absorb oxygen through their skin.
Consequently, the three salamanders are
surface active only when it is moist and
cool. Historically, the three species were
thought to occur only in and around
limestone rock outcrops or within
limestone caves. In the last 25 years, the
three species have been found in a
broader range of habitats away from
limestone, including other types of rock
outcrops, and even habitats with no
rock outcrop associations, such as areas
with thick vegetative litter (Lindstrand
2000, pp. 259–261; Nauman and Olson
2004, pp. 35–38; Lindstrand et al. 2012,
pp. 236–241).
E:\FR\FM\05MYR1.SGM
05MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Range/Distribution
The historical range of the three
species is restricted to unglaciated and
non-volcanized forested areas within
the lower McCloud River, Pit River,
Sacramento River, and Squaw Creek
watersheds in Shasta County, California,
with Samwel salamander extending
slightly further west. The absence of
glaciation and volcanic activity has
maintained the limestone and other rock
outcrops and subsurface characteristics
of the area occupied by the three
species. Although current survey efforts
have identified the distribution of the
three species within their respective
ranges, the exact distribution and
abundance of the three species within
the larger range of suitable geologic
habitat around and near Shasta Lake is
unknown, as surveys in such areas are
difficult to obtain given the physical
restrictions of accessing the terrain and
difficulty of detecting individuals. The
current range of the three species is
similar to their historical range with
likely some loss due to the construction
of Shasta Dam and subsequent
inundation from Shasta Lake in the
1950s.
Evaluation of Status
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats to the Samwel
salamander, Shasta salamander, and
Wintu salamander, and we evaluated all
relevant factors under the five listing
factors, including any regulatory
mechanisms and conservation measures
addressing these threats and the
cumulative impact of these threats. Our
analysis identified the threats from
habitat loss, degradation, and
modification due to vegetation
management and wildfire (Factor A) and
the effects of increased temperature and
reduced moisture from climate change
(Factor E) as the main threats currently
facing the three species. We also
identified the additional threat of the
proposed action of raising Shasta Dam
and the subsequent removal and
inundation of habitat for the three
species (Factor E).
Existing conservation measures for
the species and their habitats include
State and Federal protections and
conservation measures. The Shasta
salamander was listed by the State of
California as a threatened species under
the California Endangered Species Act
(CESA) before it was split into three
separate species. The State has not
officially recognized the split; however,
the State listing provides measures to
protect and conserve all three species.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
For example, any road construction or
maintenance actions associated with
timber harvest plans or other roadways
managed by Caltrans, the counties, or
other private landowners undergo
environmental compliance review with
the State under CESA and the California
Environmental Quality Act, to ensure
that impacts to species listed as
threatened by the State are mitigated.
The three species are also managed by
the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of
Land Management as sensitive species
and currently receive protection through
conservation measures and best
management practices under the
Northwest Forest Plan’s Survey and
Manage program and Sensitive Species
programs. These measures reduce or
eliminate impacts to rock outcrops,
limestone areas, and known salamander
occurrence sites during road
construction and maintenance activities
as well as any vegetation management
actions.
After review of the threats identified
above and cumulative effects facing the
species, as well as existing conservation
measures, we conclude that habitat loss
or disturbance from various threats (e.g.,
vegetation management activities,
wildfire, climatic changes) within the
range of the Samwel, Shasta, and Wintu
salamanders have likely impacted
individuals of each species. However,
the magnitude and extent of these
impacts up to the present time have not
impacted the resiliency, representation,
or redundancy for each species or
resulted in a decline in the overall
distribution or general demographic
condition of any of the three species
such that they are in danger of
extinction now throughout all of their
ranges.
In determining potential future threats
facing the three species, we evaluated
various climate change projections
using downscaled data for interior
northern California, which includes the
ranges of the three species. Our
timeframe for review looked out
approximately 15, 30, and 50 years
based on the threat information
identified below and climate change
data. This was our timeframe for our
threats analysis of future conditions for
the three species to determine if they
were likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future (i.e., if they
meet the Act’s definition of ‘‘threatened
species’’) throughout all of their ranges.
In our analysis of potential future
conditions, we analyzed the future
conditions related to vegetation
management, future wildfire conditions,
and projected climate change effects
such as variability of precipitation
events and timing, increased
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23871
temperatures, reduced snowpack, and
prolonged drought. We also identified
the additional threat of the proposed
action of raising Shasta Dam and the
subsequent removal and inundation of
habitat for the three species.
We anticipate that vegetation
management activities and wildfire will
have a similar degree of impact into the
future as they do currently, and that
they will not result in impacts to the
three species at a level such that they
would meet the Act’s definition of
‘‘threatened species.’’ Although the
potential raising of Shasta Dam would
affect individuals and inundate or
remove additional habitat for the three
species, the extent of the potential loss
of known detection sites and habitat
areas that can support individuals is
very limited relative to the overall
number of detection sites and remaining
available suitable habitat in each
species’ range.
We expect that existing regulatory
mechanisms and conservation measures
will continue to help ameliorate or
reduce impacts of threats to the species
and will protect Shasta Complex
salamanders and their habitats now and
into the foreseeable future (50 years)
such that their resiliency,
representation, and redundancy will
support their ability to sustain
populations in the wild over time.
We also reviewed whether there were
any significant portions of the three
species’ ranges that may meet the
definition of endangered or threatened.
In our analysis, we did not find any
portion of the Samwel, Shasta, or Wintu
salamanders’ ranges where the threats
identified above are currently acting on
the three species at a biologically
meaningful scale such that the species
may be endangered, or are likely to act
on the species into the future such that
they may be threatened. Therefore, no
portion of the three species’ ranges can
provide a basis for determining that any
one of the three species is in danger of
extinction now or likely to become so in
the foreseeable future in a significant
portion of its range.
Finding
Our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information
indicates that the Samwel salamander,
Shasta salamander, and Wintu
salamander do not meet the definition
of an endangered species or a threatened
species in accordance with sections 3(6)
and 3(20) of the Act. Therefore, we find
that listing the Samwel salamander,
Shasta salamander, and Wintu
salamander as endangered or threatened
species under the Act is not warranted
at this time. A detailed discussion of the
E:\FR\FM\05MYR1.SGM
05MYR1
23872
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
basis for this finding can be found in the
SSA (Service 2021a, entire) and species
assessment form (Service 2021b, entire).
Request for New Information
We request that you submit any new
information concerning the taxonomy
of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or
threats to the Samwel salamander,
Shasta salamander, or Wintu
salamander to the Yreka Fish and
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT), whenever it
becomes available. New information
will help us monitor these three species
and make appropriate decisions about
their conservation and status. We
encourage Federal, State, and local
agencies and stakeholders to continue
cooperative monitoring and
conservation efforts for the three
species.
References Cited
A list of the references cited in this
petition finding is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2021–0009 or
upon request from the person specified
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are the staff members of the Species
Assessment Team, Ecological Services
Program.
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the
Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–09489 Filed 5–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 200505–0127; RTID 0648–
XB031]
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
fisheries as set out under the heading
Inseason Actions.
NMFS announces seven
inseason actions in the 2021 ocean
salmon fisheries. These inseason actions
modified the commercial salmon
fisheries in the area from the U.S./
Canada border to the U.S./Mexico
border.
The fisheries affected by the inseason
actions described below were
authorized in the final rule for 2020
annual management measures for ocean
salmon fisheries (85 FR 27317, May 8,
2020). At its March 10, 2021 meeting,
the Council’s Salmon Technical Team
(STT) presented updated stock
abundance forecasts for salmon stocks
managed under the Pacific Coast
Salmon Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). Based on the STT’s report, SOF
ocean salmon fisheries will be
constrained in 2021 by the low
abundance forecast for Klamath River
fall-run Chinook salmon (KRFC), which
was determined to be overfished under
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(MSA) in 2018. The forecast of potential
spawner abundance for KRFC in 2021 is
42,098 natural area spawners; which is
below the 2020 potential spawner
forecast of 48,274, and is 31 percent of
the average forecast of potential KRFC
spawners over the previous 9 years
(2012–2020). To reduce ocean salmon
fishery impacts on KRFC, NMFS took 9
inseason actions concurrent with the
March Council meeting to restrict some
fisheries that were previously scheduled
to open prior to May 16, 2021 (86 FR
16540, March 30, 2021). At its April 6–
15, 2021 meeting, the Council finalized
development of its recommended 2021
ocean salmon management measures.
NMFS took additional inseason
actions, described below, to manage and
conserve SOF ocean salmon fishery
impacts on overfished KRFC by
reducing impacts in spring fisheries
through closure or shortened fisheries in
areas that impact KRFC consistent with
its forecasted abundance in 2021 and
conservation goals.
The NMFS West Coast Regional
Administrator (RA) considered the
abundance forecasts for Chinook salmon
stocks and the impacts of the SOF ocean
salmon fisheries, as modeled by the
STT, and determined that the inseason
actions, described below, were
necessary to meet management and
conservation goals set preseason. These
inseason actions modify boundaries
under 50 CFR 660.409(b)(1)(v) and
fishing seasons under 50 CFR
660.409(b)(1)(i).
Consultation under 50 CFR 660.409(b)
on these inseason actions occurred on
April 15, 2021. Representatives from
NMFS, ODFW, CDFW, and Council staff
participated in this consultation.
SUMMARY:
The effective dates for the
inseason actions are set out in this
document under the heading Inseason
Actions.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christina Iverson at 360–742–2506,
Email: Christina.iverson@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In the 2020 annual management
measures for ocean salmon fisheries (85
FR 27317, May 8, 2020), NMFS
announced management measures for
the commercial and recreational
fisheries in the area from U.S./Canada
border to the U.S./Mexico border,
effective from 0001 hours Pacific
Daylight Time (PDT), May 6, 2020, until
the effective date of the 2021
management measures, as published in
the Federal Register. NMFS is
authorized to implement inseason
management actions to modify fishing
seasons and quotas as necessary to
provide fishing opportunity while
meeting management objectives for the
affected species (50 CFR 660.409).
Inseason actions in the salmon fishery
may be taken directly by NMFS (50 CFR
660.409(a)—Fixed inseason
management provisions) or upon
consultation with the Chairman of the
Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) and the appropriate State
Directors (50 CFR 660.409(b)—Flexible
inseason management provisions). The
state management agencies that
participated in the consultations
described in this document were: The
Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, the Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife (ODFW) and the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW).
Management Areas
Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Modifications of the West Coast
Commercial and Recreational Salmon
Fisheries; Inseason Actions #10
Through #16
AGENCY:
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Inseason modification of 2021
management measures.
Management of the salmon fisheries is
generally divided into two geographic
areas: North of Cape Falcon (NOF)
(U.S./Canada border to Cape Falcon,
OR) and south of Cape Falcon (SOF)
(Cape Falcon, OR, to the U.S./Mexico
border). The actions described in this
document affected both NOF and SOF
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Reason and Authorization for SOF
Inseason Actions #10–#14
E:\FR\FM\05MYR1.SGM
05MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 5, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23869-23872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09489]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2021-0009; FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Three Salamander
Species Not Warranted for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of findings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce
findings that three salamander species, the Samwel salamander
(Hydromantes samweli), Shasta salamander, (H. shastae), and Wintu
salamander (H. wintu), are not warranted for listing as endangered or
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new
information relevant to the status of any of the three species or their
habitats.
DATES: The findings in this document were made on May 5, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the bases and supporting
information for these findings is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2021-0009 or by contacting
the person specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please
submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions
concerning this finding to the appropriate person specified under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenny Ericson, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Yreka Fish and Wildlife Office, 1829 S
Oregon St., Yreka, CA 96097; telephone 530-841-3115. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal
Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we
are required to make a finding whether or not a petitioned action is
warranted within 12 months after receiving any petition for which we
have determined contains substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted
(``12-month finding''). We must make a finding that the petitioned
action is: (1) Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3) warranted but
precluded. We must publish a notice of these 12-month findings in the
Federal Register.
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations at part 424 of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for adding species to, removing
species from, or reclassifying species on the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists). The Act defines ``species'' as
including any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any
distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or
wildlife which interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16). The Act
defines ``endangered species'' as any species that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16
U.S.C. 1532(6)), and ``threatened species'' as any species that is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C.
1532(20)). Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be
determined to be an endangered species or a threatened species because
of any of the following five factors:
(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.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition or the action or condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) does not necessarily mean that the
species meets the statutory definition of an ``endangered species'' or
a ``threatened species.'' In determining whether a species meets either
definition, we must evaluate all identified threats by considering the
expected response by the species, and the effects of the threats--in
light of those actions and conditions that will ameliorate the
threats--on an individual, population, and species level. We evaluate
each threat and its expected effects on the species, then analyze the
cumulative effect of all of the threats on the species as a whole. We
also consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those
actions and conditions that will have positive effects on the species,
such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The
Secretary determines whether the species meets the definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species'' only after
conducting this cumulative analysis and describing the
[[Page 23870]]
expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term
``foreseeable future'' extends only so far into the future as the
Service can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the
species' responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the
prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to
depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define foreseeable future
as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable future
uses the best scientific and commercial data available and should
consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and to the
species' likely responses to those threats in view of its life-history
characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the
species' biological response include species-specific factors such as
lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and
other demographic factors.
In conducting our evaluation of the five factors provided in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine whether the Samwel salamander
(Hydromantes samweli), Shasta salamander, (H. shastae), or Wintu
salamander (H. wintu) (together referred to as the Shasta Complex
salamanders) meet the definition of ``endangered species'' or
``threatened species,'' we considered and thoroughly evaluated the best
scientific and commercial information available regarding the past,
present, and future threats for the three species. We reviewed the
petition, information available in our files, and other available
published and unpublished information. Our evaluation included
information from recognized experts as well as Federal and State
government resource and land management agencies.
We developed a species status assessment (SSA) (Service 2021a,
entire) for the Shasta Complex salamanders that contains more detailed
biological information, species' needs information, and information on
the threats facing the three species and their habitat now and into the
future. We also developed a species assessment form (Service 2021b,
entire) that contains our analysis of the listing factors and documents
our determination that these species do not meet the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened species. This supporting information
can be found on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket
No. FWS-R8-ES-2021-0009. The following is an informational summary of
the finding for the Shasta Complex salamanders and information found in
the SSA and species assessment form for the three species. Please see
those documents for additional information.
Previous Federal Actions
On July 11, 2012, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity to list 53 species of reptiles and amphibians,
including the Shasta salamander (Hydromantes shastae), as endangered or
threatened under the Act (Center for Biological Diversity 2012,
entire). On September 18, 2015, we published in the Federal Register
(80 FR 56423) our 90-day finding that the petition presented
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that
listing the Shasta salamander as endangered or threatened may be
warranted based on impacts to the species' habitat (Factor A) and other
natural or humanmade factors (Factor E). On April 23, 2018, the
petitioners (Center for Biological Diversity 2018, entire) supplied us
with a publication regarding a taxonomic split of the Shasta salamander
into three separate species (Samwel salamander (Hydromantes samweli),
Shasta salamander (H. shastae), and Wintu salamander (H. wintu)
(Bingham et al. 2018, entire)), and requested that we consider this
information in our status review. On November 29, 2018, we received a
complaint for not completing the 12-month finding. Per a court approved
settlement agreement, we agreed to deliver a 12-month finding for the
Shasta salamander to the Federal Register by April 30, 2021. This
document complies with the settlement agreement.
Species Description
The Shasta salamander was first described in 1953, as a single
species (Gorman and Camp 1953, entire). Since that time the scientific
community has determined that the Shasta salamander is made up of three
separate individual species (Bingham et al. 2018, entire). The three
species are identified as the Samwel salamander (Hydromantes samweli),
Shasta salamander (H. shastae), and Wintu salamander (H. wintu). We
refer to the three species in the species assessment form (Service
2021b, entire), the SSA (Service 2021a, entire), and this document as
the Shasta Complex salamanders. The three salamanders are lungless web-
footed salamanders that breathe through their skin and the mucous
membrane in their mouth and throat. The three species are very similar
except that the Shasta salamander has a longer third digit on the pes
(rear foot). The approximate length of the three species is
approximately 2 to 2.5 inches (51 to 64 millimeters). The three species
have short, strongly tapered, generally blunt-tipped tails and broad,
flattened heads.
Taxonomy and Genetic Information
From 1953 to 2018, the Shasta salamander was recognized as a single
species (Gorman and Camp 1953, entire; Gorman 1964, entire; Rovito
2010, entire). However, a high degree of variation in genetic structure
and genetic divergence was found after both mitochondrial and nuclear
DNA studies of the species were completed (Wake et al. 1978, entire;
Wake and Papenfuss 2005, entire; Bingham 2007, entire). As such, and as
noted above, in 2018 the Shasta salamander was split into three
separate species (Bingham et al. 2018, entire). Based on this study,
there are three divergent lineages made up of five genetic clades (a
group of organisms that evolved from a common ancestor) (Bingham et al.
2018, pp. 403, 407). Hydromantes shastae and H. wintu make up two of
the clades, with H. samweli having three genetic clades (Bingham et al.
2018, p. 408). This information has been published and the split of the
Shasta salamander has been accepted by the scientific community. After
review of this information, we have determined that the three species
are listable entities under the Act.
Habitat/Life History
The three species are strictly terrestrial for their entire lives
and must remain moist in order for individuals to absorb oxygen through
their skin. Consequently, the three salamanders are surface active only
when it is moist and cool. Historically, the three species were thought
to occur only in and around limestone rock outcrops or within limestone
caves. In the last 25 years, the three species have been found in a
broader range of habitats away from limestone, including other types of
rock outcrops, and even habitats with no rock outcrop associations,
such as areas with thick vegetative litter (Lindstrand 2000, pp. 259-
261; Nauman and Olson 2004, pp. 35-38; Lindstrand et al. 2012, pp. 236-
241).
[[Page 23871]]
Range/Distribution
The historical range of the three species is restricted to
unglaciated and non-volcanized forested areas within the lower McCloud
River, Pit River, Sacramento River, and Squaw Creek watersheds in
Shasta County, California, with Samwel salamander extending slightly
further west. The absence of glaciation and volcanic activity has
maintained the limestone and other rock outcrops and subsurface
characteristics of the area occupied by the three species. Although
current survey efforts have identified the distribution of the three
species within their respective ranges, the exact distribution and
abundance of the three species within the larger range of suitable
geologic habitat around and near Shasta Lake is unknown, as surveys in
such areas are difficult to obtain given the physical restrictions of
accessing the terrain and difficulty of detecting individuals. The
current range of the three species is similar to their historical range
with likely some loss due to the construction of Shasta Dam and
subsequent inundation from Shasta Lake in the 1950s.
Evaluation of Status
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Samwel salamander, Shasta salamander, and Wintu salamander, and
we evaluated all relevant factors under the five listing factors,
including any regulatory mechanisms and conservation measures
addressing these threats and the cumulative impact of these threats.
Our analysis identified the threats from habitat loss, degradation, and
modification due to vegetation management and wildfire (Factor A) and
the effects of increased temperature and reduced moisture from climate
change (Factor E) as the main threats currently facing the three
species. We also identified the additional threat of the proposed
action of raising Shasta Dam and the subsequent removal and inundation
of habitat for the three species (Factor E).
Existing conservation measures for the species and their habitats
include State and Federal protections and conservation measures. The
Shasta salamander was listed by the State of California as a threatened
species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) before it
was split into three separate species. The State has not officially
recognized the split; however, the State listing provides measures to
protect and conserve all three species. For example, any road
construction or maintenance actions associated with timber harvest
plans or other roadways managed by Caltrans, the counties, or other
private landowners undergo environmental compliance review with the
State under CESA and the California Environmental Quality Act, to
ensure that impacts to species listed as threatened by the State are
mitigated. The three species are also managed by the U.S. Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management as sensitive species and
currently receive protection through conservation measures and best
management practices under the Northwest Forest Plan's Survey and
Manage program and Sensitive Species programs. These measures reduce or
eliminate impacts to rock outcrops, limestone areas, and known
salamander occurrence sites during road construction and maintenance
activities as well as any vegetation management actions.
After review of the threats identified above and cumulative effects
facing the species, as well as existing conservation measures, we
conclude that habitat loss or disturbance from various threats (e.g.,
vegetation management activities, wildfire, climatic changes) within
the range of the Samwel, Shasta, and Wintu salamanders have likely
impacted individuals of each species. However, the magnitude and extent
of these impacts up to the present time have not impacted the
resiliency, representation, or redundancy for each species or resulted
in a decline in the overall distribution or general demographic
condition of any of the three species such that they are in danger of
extinction now throughout all of their ranges.
In determining potential future threats facing the three species,
we evaluated various climate change projections using downscaled data
for interior northern California, which includes the ranges of the
three species. Our timeframe for review looked out approximately 15,
30, and 50 years based on the threat information identified below and
climate change data. This was our timeframe for our threats analysis of
future conditions for the three species to determine if they were
likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future (i.e., if
they meet the Act's definition of ``threatened species'') throughout
all of their ranges.
In our analysis of potential future conditions, we analyzed the
future conditions related to vegetation management, future wildfire
conditions, and projected climate change effects such as variability of
precipitation events and timing, increased temperatures, reduced
snowpack, and prolonged drought. We also identified the additional
threat of the proposed action of raising Shasta Dam and the subsequent
removal and inundation of habitat for the three species.
We anticipate that vegetation management activities and wildfire
will have a similar degree of impact into the future as they do
currently, and that they will not result in impacts to the three
species at a level such that they would meet the Act's definition of
``threatened species.'' Although the potential raising of Shasta Dam
would affect individuals and inundate or remove additional habitat for
the three species, the extent of the potential loss of known detection
sites and habitat areas that can support individuals is very limited
relative to the overall number of detection sites and remaining
available suitable habitat in each species' range.
We expect that existing regulatory mechanisms and conservation
measures will continue to help ameliorate or reduce impacts of threats
to the species and will protect Shasta Complex salamanders and their
habitats now and into the foreseeable future (50 years) such that their
resiliency, representation, and redundancy will support their ability
to sustain populations in the wild over time.
We also reviewed whether there were any significant portions of the
three species' ranges that may meet the definition of endangered or
threatened. In our analysis, we did not find any portion of the Samwel,
Shasta, or Wintu salamanders' ranges where the threats identified above
are currently acting on the three species at a biologically meaningful
scale such that the species may be endangered, or are likely to act on
the species into the future such that they may be threatened.
Therefore, no portion of the three species' ranges can provide a basis
for determining that any one of the three species is in danger of
extinction now or likely to become so in the foreseeable future in a
significant portion of its range.
Finding
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information indicates that the Samwel salamander, Shasta salamander,
and Wintu salamander do not meet the definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species in accordance with sections 3(6) and
3(20) of the Act. Therefore, we find that listing the Samwel
salamander, Shasta salamander, and Wintu salamander as endangered or
threatened species under the Act is not warranted at this time. A
detailed discussion of the
[[Page 23872]]
basis for this finding can be found in the SSA (Service 2021a, entire)
and species assessment form (Service 2021b, entire).
Request for New Information
We request that you submit any new information concerning the
taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or threats to the
Samwel salamander, Shasta salamander, or Wintu salamander to the Yreka
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT),
whenever it becomes available. New information will help us monitor
these three species and make appropriate decisions about their
conservation and status. We encourage Federal, State, and local
agencies and stakeholders to continue cooperative monitoring and
conservation efforts for the three species.
References Cited
A list of the references cited in this petition finding is
available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R8-ES-2021-0009 or upon request from the person specified under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the
Species Assessment Team, Ecological Services Program.
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-09489 Filed 5-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
