Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for the Kings River Pyrg, 8629-8631 [2024-02620]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 27 / Thursday, February 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules
that the station provides an average of
at least three hours per week of locally
originated programming. This paragraph
does not apply to TV translator or radio
translator or booster stations.
(1) For purposes of this provision,
locally originated programming is
programming produced either
(i) [W]ithin the station’s community
of license;
(ii) [A]t any location within the
principal community contour of any
AM, FM, or TV broadcast station
licensed to the station’s community of
license; or
(iii) [W]ithin 25 miles from the
reference coordinates of the center of its
community of license as described in
§ 73.208(a)(1).
(2) For purposes of this provision,
locally originated programming is
defined as:
(i) Programming that was created
within the area defined in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section. Programming that
contains video or audio recordings that
were made at locations outside the area
defined in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section qualifies as locally originated
programming as long as the program
also includes some other element of
local creation that takes place in the
area defined in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section, including program scripting,
recording (video or audio) at a studio or
other location in the local market,
editing, or other activity.
(ii) Locally originated programming
does not include: the broadcast of
repetitive or automated programs or
time-shifted recordings of non-local
programming whatever its source; a
local program that has been broadcast
twice, even if the licensee broadcasts
the program on a different day or makes
small variations in the program
thereafter. In addition, with respect to
television stations, locally originated
programming is programming
containing simultaneous video and
audio programming where the audio
portion of the programming directly
relates to the video portion of the
program.
*
*
*
*
*
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
[FR Doc. 2024–02039 Filed 2–7–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Feb 07, 2024
Jkt 262001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0261;
FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 245]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding for the
Kings River Pyrg
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition finding
and initiation of status review.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to add the
Kings River pyrg (Pyrgulopsis
imperialis) to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Based on our review, we
find that the petition to list the Kings
River pyrg presents substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be
warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this document, we
announce that we are initiating a status
review to determine whether the
petitioned action is warranted. To
ensure that the status review is
comprehensive, we request scientific
and commercial data and other
information regarding Kings River pyrg
and factors that may affect its status.
Based on the status review, we will
issue a 12-month petition finding,
which will address whether or not the
petitioned action is warranted, in
accordance with the Act.
DATES: This finding was made on
February 8, 2024. As we commence our
status review, we seek any new
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the Kings River pyrg or its
habitats. Any information we receive
during the course of our status review
will be considered.
ADDRESSES:
Supporting documents: A summary of
the basis for the petition finding
contained in this document is available
on https://www.regulations.gov in
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0261. In
addition, this 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 Kings River pyrg or its
habitat, please provide those data or
information by one of the following
methods:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8629
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R8–ES–2023–0261, which is
the docket number for this action. Then,
click on the ‘‘Search’’ button. After
finding the correct document, you may
submit information by clicking on
‘‘Comment.’’ 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:
FWS–R8–ES–2023–0261, 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:
Justin Barrett, Deputy Field Supervisor,
Reno Fish and Wildlife Office,
telephone: 775–861–6300, email: justin_
barrett@fws.gov. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
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
E:\FR\FM\08FEP1.SGM
08FEP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
8630
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 27 / Thursday, February 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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)). A positive 90-day
petition finding does not indicate that
the petitioned action is warranted; the
finding indicates only that the
petitioned action may be warranted and
that a full review should occur.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Feb 07, 2024
Jkt 262001
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.
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).
We note that designating critical
habitat is not a petitionable action under
the Act. Petitions to designate critical
habitat (for species without existing
critical habitat) are reviewed under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
551 et seq.) and are not addressed in
this finding (see 50 CFR 424.14(j)). To
the maximum extent prudent and
determinable, any proposed critical
habitat will be addressed concurrently
with a proposed rule to list a species, if
applicable.
Summary of Petition Finding
Species and Range
Kings River pyrg (Pyrgulopsis
imperialis); Humboldt County, Nevada.
Evaluation of Information Summary
On October 31, 2023, we received a
petition from the Western Watersheds
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Project, requesting that the Kings River
pyrg, an endemic springsnail found in
Humboldt County, Nevada, be listed as
an endangered species or a threatened
species and critical habitat be
designated 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
We reviewed the petition, sources
cited in the petition, and other readily
available information (within the
constraints of the Act and 50 CFR
424.14(h)(1)). We considered the
credible information that the petition
provided regarding effects of the threats
that fall within factors under the Act’s
section 4(a)(1) as potentially
ameliorated or exacerbated by any
existing regulatory mechanisms or
conservation efforts. Based on our
review of the petition and readily
available information regarding spring
modification (Factor A), we find that the
petition presents substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating
that listing the Kings River pyrg may be
warranted. The petition presents
credible information that all 13 known
springs occupied by the Kings River
pyrg exhibited signs of habitat
disturbance during 2018 surveys and
that the flows of 4 occupied springs
have already been modified.
The petition discusses several
additional threats, which could
ultimately result in spring modification
and impacts to Kings River pyrg habitat.
These threats include livestock grazing,
roads, drought, climate change, and the
Thacker Pass Lithium Mine. The current
State of Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection (NDEP) Water
Pollution Control permit for the Thacker
Pass Lithium Mine does not authorize
mining below the groundwater table
(NDEP 2022), which as written, may
significantly reduce the potential for
spring modification from this project.
The petitioners also presented
information suggesting that nonnative
aquatic species, small population size
and limited distribution, and the
species’ lack of mobility may be threats
to the Kings River pyrg. We will fully
evaluate all potential threats to the
species during our 12-month status
review, pursuant to the Act’s
requirement to review the best scientific
and commercial information available
when making that finding.
E:\FR\FM\08FEP1.SGM
08FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 27 / Thursday, February 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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–R8–ES–2023–0261 under the
Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the
information presented in the petition
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we
have determined that the petition
summarized above for the Kings River
pyrg presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are, therefore, initiating a status
review of the species to determine
whether the action is warranted under
the Act. At the conclusion of the status
review, we will issue a finding, in
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the
Act, as to whether the petitioned action
is not warranted, warranted, or
warranted but precluded by pending
proposals to determine whether any
species is an endangered species or a
threatened species.
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff members of the Pacific
Southwest Region, Ecological Services
Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–02620 Filed 2–7–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2023–0113;
FF09M32000–234–FXMB1231099BPP0]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 1018–BG63
Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed
2024–25 Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations (Preliminary)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service or we) proposes to
establish hunting regulations for certain
migratory game birds for the 2024–25
hunting season. Through an annual
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Feb 07, 2024
Jkt 262001
rulemaking process, we prescribe
outside limits (which we refer to as
frameworks) within which States may
select hunting seasons. This proposed
rule provides the regulatory schedule,
describes the proposed regulatory
alternatives for the 2024–25 general
duck seasons, and provides preliminary
proposals that vary from the 2023–24
hunting season regulations. Migratory
bird hunting seasons provide
opportunities for recreation and
sustenance; aid Federal, State, and
Tribal governments in the management
of migratory game birds; and permit
harvests at levels compatible with
migratory game bird population status
and habitat conditions.
DATES: Comments: You may comment
on the general duck season regulatory
alternatives and other preliminary
proposals for the 2024–25 season until
March 11, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Comments: You may submit
comments on the proposals by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2023–
0113.
• U.S. mail: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2023–
0113; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
MS: PRB/3W; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls
Church, VA 22041–3803.
We will not accept emailed or faxed
comments. We will post all comments
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. See Public Comments,
below, for more information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior,
(703) 358–2606; jerome_ford@fws.gov.
For a summary of the rule, please see
the ‘‘rule summary document’’ in docket
FWS–HQ–MB–2023–0113 on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Process for Establishing Annual
Migratory Game Bird Hunting
Regulations
Background
Migratory game birds are those bird
species so designated in conventions
between the United States and several
foreign nations for the protection and
management of these birds. Under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16
U.S.C. 703–712), the Secretary of the
Interior is authorized to determine when
‘‘hunting, taking, capture, killing,
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8631
possession, sale, purchase, shipment,
transportation, carriage, or export of any
such bird, or any part, nest, or egg’’ of
migratory game birds can take place,
and to adopt regulations for this
purpose (16 U.S.C. 704(a)). These
regulations are written after giving due
regard to ‘‘the zones of temperature and
to the distribution, abundance,
economic value, breeding habits, and
times and lines of migratory flight of
such birds’’ (16 U.S.C. 704(a)) and are
updated annually. This responsibility
has been delegated to the Service as the
lead Federal agency for managing and
conserving migratory birds in the
United States. However, migratory bird
management is a cooperative effort of
Federal, State, and Tribal governments.
The Service annually develops
migratory game bird hunting regulations
by establishing the frameworks, or
outside limits, for season dates, season
lengths, shooting hours, bag and
possession limits, and areas where
migratory game bird hunting may occur.
These frameworks are necessary to
allow harvest at levels compatible with
migratory game bird population status
and habitat conditions. After the
frameworks are established, States may
select migratory game bird hunting
seasons within the frameworks. States
may always be more conservative in
their selections than the frameworks,
but never more liberal. The annual
process of developing migratory game
bird hunting regulations concludes
when we establish the State season
selections as Federal regulations under
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, part 20, subpart K.
Acknowledging regional differences
in hunting conditions, the Service has
administratively divided the United
States into four Flyways for the primary
purpose of managing migratory game
birds. Each Flyway (Atlantic,
Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) has a
Flyway Council, a formal organization
generally composed of one member
from each State within the Flyway, as
well as Provinces in Canada that share
migratory bird populations with the
Flyway. The Flyway Councils,
established through the Association of
Fish and Wildlife Agencies, also assist
in researching and providing migratory
game bird management information for
Federal, State, Tribal, and Provincial
governments, as well as private
conservation entities and the general
public.
Overview of the Rulemaking Process
The process for adopting migratory
game bird hunting regulations, which
are set forth at 50 CFR part 20, is
constrained by three primary factors.
E:\FR\FM\08FEP1.SGM
08FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8629-8631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02620]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0261; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 245]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for
the Kings River Pyrg
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to add the Kings River pyrg (Pyrgulopsis
imperialis) to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review,
we find that the petition to list the Kings River pyrg presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of
this document, we announce that we are initiating a status review to
determine whether the petitioned action is warranted. To ensure that
the status review is comprehensive, we request scientific and
commercial data and other information regarding Kings River pyrg and
factors that may affect its status. Based on the status review, we will
issue a 12-month petition finding, which will address whether or not
the petitioned action is warranted, in accordance with the Act.
DATES: This finding was made on February 8, 2024. As we commence our
status review, we seek any new information concerning the status of, or
threats to, the Kings River pyrg or its habitats. Any information we
receive during the course of our status review will be considered.
ADDRESSES:
Supporting documents: A summary of the basis for the petition
finding contained in this document is available on https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0261. In addition,
this 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 Kings
River pyrg or its habitat, 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 FWS-R8-ES-2023-0261,
which is the docket number for this action. Then, click on the
``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may submit
information by clicking on ``Comment.'' 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: FWS-R8-ES-2023-0261, 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: Justin Barrett, Deputy Field
Supervisor, Reno Fish and Wildlife Office, telephone: 775-861-6300,
email: [email protected]. Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay
services offered within their country to make international calls to
the point-of-contact in the United States.
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
[[Page 8630]]
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)). A positive 90-day petition finding
does not indicate that the petitioned action is warranted; the finding
indicates only that the petitioned action may be warranted and that a
full review should occur.
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.
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).
We note that designating critical habitat is not a petitionable
action under the Act. Petitions to designate critical habitat (for
species without existing critical habitat) are reviewed under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.) and are not
addressed in this finding (see 50 CFR 424.14(j)). To the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, any proposed critical habitat will be
addressed concurrently with a proposed rule to list a species, if
applicable.
Summary of Petition Finding
Species and Range
Kings River pyrg (Pyrgulopsis imperialis); Humboldt County, Nevada.
Evaluation of Information Summary
On October 31, 2023, we received a petition from the Western
Watersheds Project, requesting that the Kings River pyrg, an endemic
springsnail found in Humboldt County, Nevada, be listed as an
endangered species or a threatened species and critical habitat be
designated 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
We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available
information regarding spring modification (Factor A), we find that the
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing the Kings River pyrg may be warranted. The
petition presents credible information that all 13 known springs
occupied by the Kings River pyrg exhibited signs of habitat disturbance
during 2018 surveys and that the flows of 4 occupied springs have
already been modified.
The petition discusses several additional threats, which could
ultimately result in spring modification and impacts to Kings River
pyrg habitat. These threats include livestock grazing, roads, drought,
climate change, and the Thacker Pass Lithium Mine. The current State of
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Water Pollution
Control permit for the Thacker Pass Lithium Mine does not authorize
mining below the groundwater table (NDEP 2022), which as written, may
significantly reduce the potential for spring modification from this
project. The petitioners also presented information suggesting that
nonnative aquatic species, small population size and limited
distribution, and the species' lack of mobility may be threats to the
Kings River pyrg. We will fully evaluate all potential threats to the
species during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the Act's
requirement to review the best scientific and commercial information
available when making that finding.
[[Page 8631]]
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-R8-ES-2023-0261 under
the Supporting Documents section.
Conclusion
On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the
petition under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that
the petition summarized above for the Kings River pyrg presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are, therefore, initiating a
status review of the species to determine whether the action is
warranted under the Act. At the conclusion of the status review, we
will issue a finding, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act,
as to whether the petitioned action is not warranted, warranted, or
warranted but precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any
species is an endangered species or a threatened species.
Authors
The primary authors of this document are staff members of the
Pacific Southwest Region, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-02620 Filed 2-7-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P