Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Three Species, 40186-40189 [2021-15497]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
40186
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 27, 2021 / Proposed Rules
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2021–0414 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’
box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Next, look for
this document in the Search Results
column, and click on it. Then click on
the Comment option. If you cannot
submit your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule as being available in the docket,
find the docket as described in the
previous paragraph, and then select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the
Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all
comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of
the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or
duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept
anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will
include any personal information you
have provided. For more about privacy
and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
§ 165.T05–0414 Safety Zone; M/V ZHEN
HUA 24, Crane Delivery Operation,
Chesapeake Bay and Patapsco River,
Baltimore, MD.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters of the
Chesapeake Bay and Patapsco River,
within 500 feet of the M/V ZHEN HUA
24 while it is transiting between
Chesapeake Channel Lighted Buoy 90
(LLNR 7825) in position 38°58′18.53″ N,
076°23′18.96″ W, and the Seagirt Marine
Terminal in position 39°15′02.43″ N,
076°32′20.50″ W, Baltimore, MD. These
coordinates are based on WGS 84.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section—
Captain of the Port (COTP) means the
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Maryland-National Capital Region.
Designated representative means a
Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty
officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and
local officer designated by or assisting
the Captain of the Port MarylandNational Capital Region (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general
safety zone regulations in subpart C of
this part, you may not enter the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
representative by telephone at 410–576–
2693 or on Marine Band Radio VHF–FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Those in the
safety zone must comply with all lawful
orders or directions given to them by the
COTP or the COTP’s designated
representative.
(d) Enforcement officials. The U.S.
Coast Guard may be assisted in the
patrol and enforcement of the safety
zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced during inbound transit
of the M/V ZHEN HUA 24 to the Port
of Baltimore.
50 CFR Part 17
Dated: July 20, 2021.
David E. O’Connell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Maryland-NCR.
[FR Doc. 2021–15918 Filed 7–26–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
2. Add § 165.T05–0414 to read as
follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jul 26, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000212]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Three
Species
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition findings
and initiation of status reviews.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90day findings on two petitions to add
species to the Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants and one
petition to remove a species (‘‘delist’’)
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). Based on our
review, we find that the petitions to list
the Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis
lupus ligoni) and western ridged mussel
(Gonidea angulata) present substantial
scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned actions
may be warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this document, we
announce that we plan to initiate status
reviews of these species to determine
whether the petitioned actions are
warranted. We find that the petition to
delist the golden-cheeked warbler
(Dendroica chrysoparia) does not
present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating the
petitioned action may be warranted.
Therefore, we are not initiating a status
review of the species. To ensure that the
status reviews are comprehensive, we
are requesting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding the
species and factors that may affect their
status. Based on the status reviews, we
will issue 12-month petition findings,
which will address whether or not the
petitioned actions are warranted, in
accordance with the Act.
DATES: These findings were made on
July 27, 2021. As we commence our
status reviews, we seek any new
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the species or their habitats.
Any information we receive during the
course of our status reviews will be
considered.
SUMMARY:
ADDRESSES:
Supporting documents: Summaries of
the basis for the petition findings
contained in this document are
available on https://www.regulations.gov
under the appropriate docket number
(see table under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION). In addition, this
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 27, 2021 / Proposed Rules
supporting information is available by
contacting the appropriate person, as
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Status reviews: If you have new
scientific or commercial data or other
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the species for which we are
initiating status reviews, please provide
those data or information by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter the appropriate docket number
(see table under SUPPLEMENTARY
Then, click on the
‘‘Search’’ button. After finding the
correct document, you may submit
information by clicking on ‘‘Comment
Now!’’ If your information will fit in the
provided comment box, please use this
feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as
it is most compatible with our
information review procedures. If you
attach your information as a separate
document, our preferred file format is
Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple
comments (such as form letters), our
preferred format is a spreadsheet in
Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
to: Public Comments Processing, Attn:
[Insert appropriate docket number; see
table under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803.
We request that you send information
only by the methods described above.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Species common name
Contact person
Alexander Archipelago wolf .........
Douglass Cooper, Ecological Services Branch Chief, Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 907–
271–1467, Douglass_Cooper@fws.gov.
Adam Zerrener, Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological Services Field Office, 512–490–0057 x248, Adam_
Zerrenner@fws.gov.
Paul Henson, State Supervisor, Portland Ecological Services Field Office, 503–231–6179, paul_henson@
fws.gov.
Golden-cheeked warbler .............
Western ridged mussel ...............
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf, please call the Federal
Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
INFORMATION).
40187
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and its implementing regulations in title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth the
procedures for adding species to,
removing species from, or reclassifying
species on the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part
17. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
that we make a finding on whether a
petition to add a species to the List (i.e.,
‘‘list’’ a species), remove a species from
the List (i.e., ‘‘delist’’ a species), or
change a listed species’ status from
endangered to threatened or from
threatened to endangered (i.e.,
‘‘reclassify’’ a species) presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are
to make this finding within 90 days of
our receipt of the petition and publish
the finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our regulations establish that
substantial scientific or commercial
information with regard to a 90-day
petition finding refers to credible
scientific or commercial information in
support of the petition’s claims such
that a reasonable person conducting an
impartial scientific review would
conclude that the action proposed in the
petition may be warranted (50 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jul 26, 2021
Jkt 253001
424.14(h)(1)(i); before 2016, 50 CFR
424.14(b)).
A species may be determined to be an
endangered species or a threatened
species because of one or more of the
five factors described in section 4(a)(1)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The
five factors are:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range
(Factor A);
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes (Factor B);
(c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); and
(e) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (Factor
E).
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,
affect individuals of a species
negatively. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘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) may not
be sufficient to compel a finding that the
information in the petition is substantial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. The
information presented in the petition
must include evidence sufficient to
suggest that these threats may be
affecting the species to the point that the
species may meet the definition of an
endangered species or threatened
species under the Act.
If we find that a petition presents
such information, our subsequent status
review will evaluate all identified
threats by considering the individual-,
population-, and species-level effects
and the expected response by the
species. We will evaluate individual
threats and their expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative
effect 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 are expected
to have positive effects on the species—
such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts that
may ameliorate threats. It is only after
conducting this cumulative analysis of
threats and the actions that may
ameliorate them, and the expected effect
on the species now and in the
foreseeable future, that we can
determine whether the species meets
the definition of an endangered species
or threatened species under the Act.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
40188
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 27, 2021 / Proposed Rules
If we find that a petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted, the
Act requires that we promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species, and we will subsequently
complete a status review in accordance
with our prioritization methodology for
12-month findings (81 FR 49248; July
27, 2016).
Summaries of Petition Findings
The petition findings contained in
this document are listed in the table
below, and the basis for each finding,
along with supporting information, is
available on https://www.regulations.gov
under the appropriate docket number.
TABLE—STATUS REVIEWS
Common name
Docket No.
Alexander Archipelago wolf ............................
Golden-cheeked warbler .................................
Western ridged mussel ...................................
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150
Evaluation of a Petition To List
Alexander Archipelago Wolf
America (Guatemala, Honduras,
Nicaragua, and El Salvador).
Species and Range
Petition History
On December 27, 1990, the Service
published in the Federal Register (55
FR 53153) a final rule to list the goldencheeked warbler as an endangered
species. On June 30, 2015, we received
a petition dated June 29, 2015, from
Nancie G. Marzulla (Marzulla Law,
LLC—Washington, DC) and Robert
Henneke (Texas Public Policy
Foundation—Austin, TX) requesting
that we remove the golden-cheeked
warbler from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(‘‘delist’’ the species) due to recovery or
error in information. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, required
at now 50 CFR 424.14(c) (before 2016,
50 CFR 424.14(a)).
On December 11, 2015, we received
supplemental information from the
petitioners that included additional
published studies and an unpublished
report. These studies, as well as others
known to the Service and in our files at
the time the supplement was received,
were considered, as appropriate. On
June 3, 2016, we published in the
Federal Register (81 FR 35698) our
finding that the petition did not provide
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petition
action may be warranted.
The General Land Office of Texas
(GLO) challenged our June 3, 2016,
negative 90-day finding on the petition
to delist. The District Court found in
favor of the Service. The GLO appealed
the June 3, 2016, 90-day finding that
decision, and the Circuit Court vacated
and remanded it to the Service. This
finding addresses the petition in
response to the court’s decision.
Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis
lupus ligoni); Alaska and Canada.
Petition History
We received a petition on July 15,
2020, dated the same, from the Center
for Biological Diversity, Alaska
Rainforest Defenders, and Defenders of
Wildlife, requesting that we list the
Alexander Archipelago wolf as an
endangered species or a threatened
species and designate critical habitat for
this species under the Act. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, required
at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding
addresses the petition.
Finding
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
URL to docket on https://www.regulations.gov
FWS–R7–ES–2020–0147
FWS–R2–ES–2016–0062
FWS–R1–ES–2020–0150
Based on our review of the petition
and sources cited in the petition, we
find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating the petitioned
action may be warranted for the
Alexander Archipelago wolf due to
potential threats associated with the
following: Logging and road
development (Factor A); illegal and
legal trapping and hunting (Factor B);
the effects of climate change (Factor E);
and loss of genetic diversity and
inbreeding depression (Factor E).
The basis for our finding on this
petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can
be found as an appendix at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R7–ES–2020–0147 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To Delist
Golden-Cheeked Warbler
Species and Range
Golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica
chrysoparia = Setophaga chrysoparia);
Texas, Mexico (Chiapas), and Central
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jul 26, 2021
Jkt 253001
Finding
Based on our review of the petition
and sources cited in the petition, we
find that the petition does not present
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating the petitioned
action may be warranted for the goldencheeked warbler. Because the petition
does not present substantial information
indicating that delisting the goldencheeked warbler may be warranted, we
are not initiating a status review of this
species in response to this petition.
However, we ask that the public submit
to us any new information that becomes
available concerning the status of, or
threats to, this species or its habitat at
any time by contacting the appropriate
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT, above.
The basis for our finding on this
petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can
be found as an appendix at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2016–0062 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Western
Ridged Mussel
Species and Range
Western ridged mussel (Gonidea
angulata); California, Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and the
Canadian Province of British Columbia.
Petition History
On August 21, 2020, we received a
petition dated August 18, 2020, from the
Xerces Society for Invertebrate
Conservation, requesting that we list the
western ridged mussel as an endangered
species and designate critical habitat for
this species under the Act. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and
included the requisite identification
information for the petitioner, required
at 50 CFR 424.14(c).
Finding
Based on our review of the petition
and sources cited in the petition, we
find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted for
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 27, 2021 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
the western ridged mussel due to
potential threats associated with the
following: Habitat destruction,
modification, and curtailment of range;
impacts to water quantity, water quality,
and natural flow and temperature
regimes; aquatic invasive species (Factor
A); and disease (Factor C).
We find that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that regulatory
mechanisms may be inadequate to
ameliorate or reduce those threats
(Factor D). We determined that the
petition does not provide substantial
documentation for the threats of
overutilization of the species for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes (Factor B) and loss
of genetic diversity (Factor E). The basis
for our finding on this petition, and
other information regarding our review
of the petition, can be found as an
appendix at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2020–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jul 26, 2021
Jkt 253001
0150 under the Supporting Documents
section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the
information presented in the petitions
under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and
4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we have
determined that the petitions
summarized above for Alexander
Archipelago wolf and western ridged
mussel present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned actions may be
warranted. We are, therefore, initiating
status reviews of these species to
determine whether the actions are
warranted under the Act. At the
conclusion of the status reviews, we
will issue findings, in accordance with
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to
whether the petitioned actions are not
warranted, warranted, or warranted but
precluded by pending proposals to
determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened
species. In addition, we have
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
40189
determined that the petition
summarized above for the goldencheeked warbler does not present
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We
are, therefore, not initiating a status
review of this species in response to this
petition.
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff members of the Ecological
Services Program, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for these actions is 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. 2021–15497 Filed 7–26–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP1.SGM
27JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 27, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40186-40189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15497]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000212]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings
for Three Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition findings and initiation of status
reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on two petitions to add species to the Lists of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants and one petition to remove a species
(``delist'') under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions to list the
Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni) and western ridged
mussel (Gonidea angulata) present substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted.
Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we
plan to initiate status reviews of these species to determine whether
the petitioned actions are warranted. We find that the petition to
delist the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) does not
present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating the
petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, we are not initiating a
status review of the species. To ensure that the status reviews are
comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and
other information regarding the species and factors that may affect
their status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month
petition findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned
actions are warranted, in accordance with the Act.
DATES: These findings were made on July 27, 2021. As we commence our
status reviews, we seek any new information concerning the status of,
or threats to, the species or their habitats. Any information we
receive during the course of our status reviews will be considered.
ADDRESSES:
Supporting documents: Summaries of the basis for the petition
findings contained in this document are available on https://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see table
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In addition, this
[[Page 40187]]
supporting information is available by contacting the appropriate
person, as specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the species
for which we are initiating status reviews, please provide those data
or information by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket
number (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on the
``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may submit
information by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your information will
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W,
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send information only by the methods described
above. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species common name Contact person
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Archipelago wolf............................. Douglass Cooper, Ecological Services Branch Chief,
Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 907-
271-1467, [email protected].
Golden-cheeked warbler................................. Adam Zerrener, Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological
Services Field Office, 512-490-0057 x248,
[email protected].
Western ridged mussel.................................. Paul Henson, State Supervisor, Portland Ecological
Services Field Office, 503-231-6179,
[email protected].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call the
Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part 17.
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to add a species to the List (i.e., ``list'' a
species), remove a species from the List (i.e., ``delist'' a species),
or change a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or
from threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable,
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to credible
scientific or commercial information in support of the petition's
claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific
review would conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be
warranted (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i); before 2016, 50 CFR 424.14(b)).
A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors
are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes (Factor B);
(c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D);
and
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence (Factor E).
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, affect
individuals of a species negatively. 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) may not be sufficient to compel a
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information
presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest
that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the
species may meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened
species under the Act.
If we find that a petition presents such information, our
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by
considering the individual-, population-, and species-level effects and
the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the
cumulative effect 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 are expected to have positive effects on the
species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this
cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate
them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable
future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act.
[[Page 40188]]
If we find that a petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted, the Act requires that we promptly commence a review of the
status of the species, and we will subsequently complete a status
review in accordance with our prioritization methodology for 12-month
findings (81 FR 49248; July 27, 2016).
Summaries of Petition Findings
The petition findings contained in this document are listed in the
table below, and the basis for each finding, along with supporting
information, is available on https://www.regulations.gov under the
appropriate docket number.
Table--Status Reviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common name Docket No. URL to docket on https://www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Archipelago wolf...... FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147............. https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147
Golden-cheeked warbler.......... FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062............. https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062
Western ridged mussel........... FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150............. https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of a Petition To List Alexander Archipelago Wolf
Species and Range
Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni); Alaska and Canada.
Petition History
We received a petition on July 15, 2020, dated the same, from the
Center for Biological Diversity, Alaska Rainforest Defenders, and
Defenders of Wildlife, requesting that we list the Alexander
Archipelago wolf as an endangered species or a threatened species and
designate critical habitat for this species under the Act. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating the petitioned action may be
warranted for the Alexander Archipelago wolf due to potential threats
associated with the following: Logging and road development (Factor A);
illegal and legal trapping and hunting (Factor B); the effects of
climate change (Factor E); and loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding
depression (Factor E).
The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147 under
the Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To Delist Golden-Cheeked Warbler
Species and Range
Golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia = Setophaga
chrysoparia); Texas, Mexico (Chiapas), and Central America (Guatemala,
Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador).
Petition History
On December 27, 1990, the Service published in the Federal Register
(55 FR 53153) a final rule to list the golden-cheeked warbler as an
endangered species. On June 30, 2015, we received a petition dated June
29, 2015, from Nancie G. Marzulla (Marzulla Law, LLC--Washington, DC)
and Robert Henneke (Texas Public Policy Foundation--Austin, TX)
requesting that we remove the golden-cheeked warbler from the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (``delist'' the species) due
to recovery or error in information. The petition clearly identified
itself as such and included the requisite identification information
for the petitioner, required at now 50 CFR 424.14(c) (before 2016, 50
CFR 424.14(a)).
On December 11, 2015, we received supplemental information from the
petitioners that included additional published studies and an
unpublished report. These studies, as well as others known to the
Service and in our files at the time the supplement was received, were
considered, as appropriate. On June 3, 2016, we published in the
Federal Register (81 FR 35698) our finding that the petition did not
provide substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petition action may be warranted.
The General Land Office of Texas (GLO) challenged our June 3, 2016,
negative 90-day finding on the petition to delist. The District Court
found in favor of the Service. The GLO appealed the June 3, 2016, 90-
day finding that decision, and the Circuit Court vacated and remanded
it to the Service. This finding addresses the petition in response to
the court's decision.
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition does not present substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating the petitioned action
may be warranted for the golden-cheeked warbler. Because the petition
does not present substantial information indicating that delisting the
golden-cheeked warbler may be warranted, we are not initiating a status
review of this species in response to this petition. However, we ask
that the public submit to us any new information that becomes available
concerning the status of, or threats to, this species or its habitat at
any time by contacting the appropriate person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT, above.
The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information
regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062 under
the Supporting Documents section.
Evaluation of a Petition To List Western Ridged Mussel
Species and Range
Western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulata); California, Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and the Canadian Province of British
Columbia.
Petition History
On August 21, 2020, we received a petition dated August 18, 2020,
from the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, requesting that
we list the western ridged mussel as an endangered species and
designate critical habitat for this species under the Act. The petition
clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR
424.14(c).
Finding
Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted for
[[Page 40189]]
the western ridged mussel due to potential threats associated with the
following: Habitat destruction, modification, and curtailment of range;
impacts to water quantity, water quality, and natural flow and
temperature regimes; aquatic invasive species (Factor A); and disease
(Factor C).
We find that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that regulatory mechanisms may be
inadequate to ameliorate or reduce those threats (Factor D). We
determined that the petition does not provide substantial documentation
for the threats of overutilization of the species for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (Factor B) and loss
of genetic diversity (Factor E). The basis for our finding on this
petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition,
can be found as an appendix at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket
No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150 under the Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the
petitions under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we
have determined that the petitions summarized above for Alexander
Archipelago wolf and western ridged mussel present substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned
actions may be warranted. We are, therefore, initiating status reviews
of these species to determine whether the actions are warranted under
the Act. At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue
findings, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to
whether the petitioned actions are not warranted, warranted, or
warranted but precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any
species is an endangered species or a threatened species. In addition,
we have determined that the petition summarized above for the golden-
cheeked warbler does not present substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. We
are, therefore, not initiating a status review of this species in
response to this petition.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are staff members of the
Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for these actions is 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. 2021-15497 Filed 7-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
