Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71759

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR population of Mearn’s eastern cottontail Moline, IL 61265. Please submit any in east-central Illinois and western new information, materials, comments, Fish and Wildlife Service Indiana may be a listable entity, we did or questions concerning the finding on not evaluate whether or not the the prairie gray and the plains 50 CFR Part 17 information contained in the petition spotted to the Rock Island, [Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2012–0079; regarding threats to that population was Illinois Ecological Services Field Office 4500030113] substantial. We are not initiating a at the above address. status review in response to this petition FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife for Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east- and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a central Illinois and western Indiana. Prairie and Mearn’s Eastern Petition To List the Prairie Gray Fox, However, we ask the public to submit to Cottontail the Plains , and a us any new information that becomes Richard Nelson, Field Supervisor, Distinct Population Segment of the available concerning the status of, or Rock Island, Illinois Ecological Service Mearn’s Eastern Cottontail in East- threats to, the Mearn’s eastern cottontail Field Office, 1511 4th Ave., Moline, IL Central Illinois and Western Indiana as or its at any time. 61265; by telephone at 309–757–5800; Endangered or Threatened Species DATES: The finding announced in this or by facsimile at 309–757–5804. If you AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, document was made on December 4, use a telecommunications device for the Interior. 2012. deaf (TDD), please call the Federal We request that we receive Information Relay Service (FIRS) at ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition information on or before February 4, 800–877–8339. finding and initiation of status review. 2013. The deadline for submitting an Plains Spotted Skunk SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and electronic comment using the Federal Wildlife Service (Service), announce a eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES Amy Salveter, Field Supervisor, 90-day finding on a petition to list the section, below) is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Missouri Ecological Services Field prairie gray fox ( Time on this date. After February 4, Office, 101 Park DeVille Drive, Suite A, cinereoargenteus ocythous), the plains 2013, you must submit information Columbia, MO 65203; by telephone at spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius directly to the Division of Policy and 573–234–2132; or by facsimile at 573– interrupta), and a distinct population Directives Management (see ADDRESSES 234–2181. If you use a segment (DPS) of the Mearn’s eastern section below). Please note that we telecommunications device for the deaf cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus might not be able to address or (TDD), please call the Federal mearnsi) in Illinois and western Indiana incorporate information that we receive Information Relay Service (FIRS) at as endangered or threatened species after the above requested date. 800–877–8339. under the Endangered Species Act of ADDRESSES: You may submit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our information on the prairie gray fox and Request for Information review, we find that the petition the plains spotted skunk, by one of the presents substantial scientific or following methods: When we make a finding that a commercial information that listing the (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal petition presents substantial prairie gray fox and the plains spotted eRulemaking Portal: http:// information indicating that listing a skunk may be warranted. Therefore, www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket species may be warranted, we are with the publication of this notice, we No. FWS–R3–ES–2012–0079, which is required to promptly initiate review of initiate a review of the status of the the docket number for this action. Then the status of the species (status review). prairie gray fox and the plains spotted click on the Search button. You may For the status review to be complete and skunk to determine if listing either of submit a comment by clicking on based on the best available scientific these subspecies is warranted. To ‘‘Comment Now!.’’ and commercial information, we request ensure that this status review is (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail information on the prairie gray fox and comprehensive, we are requesting or hand-delivery to: Public Comments the plains spotted skunk from scientific and commercial data and Processing, Attn: FWS–R3–ES–2012– governmental agencies, Native other information regarding these 0079; Division of Policy and Directives American tribes, the scientific subspecies. Based on the status review, Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife community, industry, and any other we will issue a 12-month finding on the Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS interested parties. We seek information petition, which will address whether 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. on: the petitioned action is warranted, as We will not accept email or faxes. We (1) The species’ biology, range, and provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. will post all information we receive on population trends, including: We also evaluated whether the http://www.regulations.gov. This (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, petition presents substantial generally means that we will post any breeding, and sheltering; information to indicate whether or not personal information you provide us (b) Genetics and ; the Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east- (see the Request for Information section (c) Historical and current range, central Illinois and western Indiana below for more details). including distribution patterns; qualifies as a DPS that may be This finding is available on the (d) Historical and current population warranted for listing. Based on our Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at levels, and current and projected trends; review, we conclude that the petition Docket Number FWS–R3–ES–2012– and does not provide substantial 0079. Supporting documentation we (e) Past and ongoing conservation information indicating that population used in preparing this finding is measures for the species, its habitat, or of Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east- available for public inspection, by both. central Illinois and western Indiana is a appointment, during normal business (2) The factors that are the basis for listable entity under the Act. Because hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife making a listing determination for a the petition does not present substantial Service, Rock Island, Illinois Ecological species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 information indicating that the Service Field Office, 1511 4th Ave., U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71760 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

(a) The present or threatened the methods listed in the ADDRESSES letter. On January 23, 2012, we received destruction, modification, or section. If you submit information via a revised petition from Mr. David Wade curtailment of its habitat or range; http://www.regulations.gov, your entire and Dr. Thomas Alton, requesting that (b) Overutilization for commercial, submission—including any personal the prairie gray fox (Urocyon recreational, scientific, or educational identifying information—will be posted cinereoargenteus ocythous), the plains purposes; on the Web site. If your submission is spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius (c) Disease or ; made via a hardcopy that includes interrupta), and a DPS of the Mearn’s (d) The inadequacy of existing personal identifying information, you eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus regulatory mechanisms; or may request at the top of your document mearnsi) in Illinois and western Indiana (e) Other natural or manmade factors that we withhold this personal be listed as endangered or threatened affecting its continued existence. identifying information from public species under the Act. In a January 30, (3) Information regarding overharvest review. However, we cannot guarantee 2012, letter to the petitioners, we and disease as potential ongoing threats that we will be able to do so. We will responded that we reviewed the to the plains spotted skunk and prairie post all hardcopy submissions on information presented in the petition gray fox. http://www.regulations.gov. and determined that issuing an (4) Information regarding the impacts Background emergency regulation temporarily of pesticides on food availability for the listing the species under section 4(b)(7) plains spotted skunk. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires of the Act was not warranted as each of (5) Information regarding the impacts that we make a finding on whether a the three petitioned species has extant of predation by and on petition to list, delist, or reclassify a populations in several States and most the prairie gray fox. species presents substantial scientific or of the threats mentioned in the petition If, after the status review, we commercial information indicating that are not immediate in nature. This determine that listing the prairie gray the petitioned action may be warranted. finding addresses the petition. fox or the plains spotted skunk is We are to base this finding on warranted, we will propose critical information provided in the petition, Previous Federal Action(s) habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) supporting information submitted with To date, no Federal actions have been of the Act) under section 4 of the Act, the petition, and information otherwise taken with regard to the prairie gray fox, to the maximum extent prudent and available in our files. To the maximum the plains spotted skunk, or the Mearn’s determinable at the time we propose to extent practicable, we are to make this eastern cottontail. list the species. Therefore, we also finding within 90 days of our receipt of request data and information on: the petition and publish our notice of Species Information (1) What may constitute ‘‘physical or the finding promptly in the Federal Plains Spotted Skunk (Spilogale biological features essential to the Register. putorius interrupta) conservation of the species,’’ within the Our standard for substantial scientific geographical range currently occupied or commercial information within the The plains spotted skunk is one of by the species; Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with three recognized subspecies of the (2) Where these features are currently regard to a 90-day petition finding is (Spilogale found; ‘‘that amount of information that would putorius); the other two recognized (3) Whether any of these features may lead a reasonable person to believe that subspecies are S. p. ambarvalis (no require special management the measure proposed in the petition common name) and S. p. putorius (no considerations or protection; may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). common name) (Kinlaw 1995, p. 1). (4) Specific areas outside the If we find that substantial scientific or Spotted are members of the geographical area occupied by the commercial information was presented, Order and Family species that are ‘‘essential for the we are required to promptly initiate a . Eastern spotted skunks are conservation of the species’’; and species status review, which we distinct from western spotted skunks (S. (5) What, if any, critical habitat you subsequently summarize in our 12- gracilis) based on reproductive and think we should propose for designation month finding. geographic isolation (Kinlaw 1995, p. 1). if one or both of the species are Little variation in skull or body Petition History proposed for listing, and why such measurements exists among the plains habitat meets the requirements of On July 18, 2011, we received a spotted skunk subspecies (Van Gelder section 4 of the Act. petition from Mr. David Wade and Dr. 1959, p. 270). The plains spotted skunk Please include sufficient information Thomas Alton, requesting that five or can be distinguished from other with your submission (such as scientific six entities of thicket species subspecies by the reduced amount of journal articles or other publications) to or subspecies be listed as endangered or white on its body, particularly the allow us to verify any scientific or threatened under the Act. The petition entirely black tail (Van Gelder 1959, pp. commercial information you include. clearly identified itself as such and 269–270). We accept the Submissions merely stating support included the requisite identification characterization of the plains spotted for or opposition to the action under information for the petitioners, required skunk as a subspecies because of consideration without providing at 50 CFR 424.14(a). However, while morphological distinction of its color supporting information, although noted, reviewing the petition, we determined pattern from other subspecies of eastern will not be considered in making a that the petition did not clearly state spotted skunk (Van Gelder 1959, pp. determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the which species were included in the 269–270). We consider information that Act directs that determinations as to petition. Therefore, in a September 2, refers to the eastern spotted skunk whether any species is an endangered or 2011, letter to the petitioners, we where it occurs in the delineated range threatened species must be made provided the petitioners with an of the plains spotted skunk to represent ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific opportunity to revise the petition to the plains spotted skunk. and commercial data available.’’ clearly identify the petitioned entities, Both the plains spotted skunk and You may submit your information which the petitioners accepted in a ( mephitis) have concerning this status review by one of September 12, 2011, response to our contrasting black and white markings;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71761

however, they are easily distinguished plains spotted skunks den in grassy insectivore and feeds on during by size (spotted skunks are substantially banks and crevices or cavities under all seasons of the year (Kinlaw 1995, p. smaller) and color pattern. The plains rock piles, hollow logs, and stumps 4). The proportion of different types of spotted skunk is a small, slender (Kinlaw 1995, p. 4; Schwartz and food items varies seasonally. with short legs and a tail with Schwartz 2001, p. 327). In landscapes Arthropods are the major dietary prominent, long hairs. Body weight dominated by humans, they den in component during summer and autumn, ranges from 300 to 1,300 grams (g) (0.75 shelterbelts (row of trees planted to with grasshoppers, crickets, ground to 2.75 pounds (lb)), and total length provide shelter from wind), fencerows, , and scarab beetles being the ranges from 36 to 61 centimeters (cm) farm buildings, haystacks, woodpiles, or preferred food (Schwartz and Schwartz (14 to 23.75 inches (in)) (Hazard 1982, corn cribs (Crabb 1948, pp. 214–215; 2001, p. 328). In the winter, small p. 143; Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. Hazard 1982, p. 144; Jones et al. 1983, , including eastern cottontail 325). In contrast, the striped skunk’s p. 302; Kinlaw 1995, p. 4; Schwartz and (Sylvilagus floridanus), voles (Microtus average weight is 6,300 g (14 lb), and its Schwartz 2001, p. 327). Plains spotted pennsylvanicus and M. ochrogaster), length is 80 cm (31.5 in). The plains skunks might dig their own dens, but and rats (Rattus norvegicus), are the spotted skunk is black overall with they often use burrows excavated by dominant food source (Chapman and narrow, white stripes and spots. Four other , such as Franklin’s Feldhamer 1982, p. 668; Kinlaw 1995, p. stripes on the neck, back, and sides run ground squirrel (Spermophilus 4). Other foods include , , wild longitudinally from the head to the franklinii), thirteen-lined ground ducks that are injured or killed by middle of the body. The four white squirrel (S. tridecemlineatus), hunters, fruit, corn, , , stripes break into patches or spots on woodchuck (Marmota monax), long- crayfish, , and mushrooms the hindquarters. There is a white spot tailed (Mustela frenata), striped (Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. 328). on the forehead and in front of each ear skunk, and woodrats (Neotoma spp.) The plains spotted skunk currently (Hazard 1982, p. 143; Schwartz and (Crabb 1948, p. 212; Kinlaw, 1995, p. 4; (and historically) occurs between the Schwartz 2001, p. 325). Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. 327). Mississippi River and the Continental Habitat associations of this subspecies Crabb (1948, p. 212) noted that skunks Divide from Minnesota to the Gulf of are likely influenced by whether it is required dens that excluded light and Mexico (Kinlaw 1995, p. 3). Historical using a natural or human-dominated afforded protection from inclement records indicate that the plains spotted landscape. The subspecies lives in a weather and predators. Dens are used by skunk was broadly distributed across its wide range of including forests, one or more members of the local range through the early to mid-1900s prairies, brushy areas, farmyards, and population of plains spotted skunks, and was one of the most common cultivated land (Crabb 1948, pp. 212– and individuals might den together mesocarnivores (a carnivore whose diet 215; Edmonds 1974, p. 12; Kinlaw 1995, during cold winter months (Schwartz consists of 50 to 70 percent meat) where p. 4; Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. and Schwartz 2001, p. 327). suitable habitat occurred (Crabb 1948, p. 327). Regardless of habitat type used, During most of the year, individual 203; Choate et al. 1973, p. 226; Tyler the plains spotted skunk requires plains spotted skunks remain in an area and Lodes 1980, p. 102; McCullough extensive vegetative cover. Brushy of approximately 40 hectares (ha) (98.8 1983, p. 19; Wires and Baker 1994, p. 1; borders along fields, fence rows, farm acres (ac)), but the home range can vary Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. 327). buildings, wood piles, heavily vegetated based on habitat quality and food Likewise, harvest records in the gullies, litter, or downed logs may availability (Schwartz and Schwartz Midwest indicate that population levels provide the required extensive cover, 2001, p. 327). The home range can vary in most States were at their highest which primarily provides protection seasonally as well; in spring, the range through the mid-1900s, during which from predators (Kinlaw 1995, p. 4; of males can expand to as much as 1,040 harvest in most years exceeded 100,000 Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, p. 327; ha (2,569.9 ac) (Schwartz and Schwartz plains spotted skunks (Novak et al. Lesmeister 2008, pp. 1517–1518). 2001, p. 327). In Missouri, home ranges 1987, pp. 223–226). Nowak (1999, p. 734) notes that spotted varied from 55 to 4,359 ha (135.9 to More contemporary records skunks avoid dense forests; however, 10,771.3 ac) (McCullough 1983, p. 34). consistently show that the plains plains spotted skunks are more likely to Lesmeister et al. (2008, p. 21) reported spotted skunk underwent declines in occur where the landscape is composed that home ranges in the Ouachita the mid- to late 1900s (Choate et al. of a high proportion of forest cover Mountains of Arkansas varied by gender 1973, pp. 227–230; McCullough 1983, (Hackett 2008, pp. 52–54), and they use and season. The home ranges of males pp. 19–25; Gompper and Hackett 2005, oak-hickory forests more than old fields (222 to 1,824 ha (548.6 to 4,507.2 ac)) p. 196; Nilz and Finck 2008, pp. 5–14). or glades (McCullough 1983, pp. 40–43). in the spring were 6.4 times larger than Declines occurred first in Missouri and Within forest habitats studied by those of females (31 to 192 ha (76.6 to Oklahoma in the late 1930s and early McCullough (1983, p. 41) and 474.4 ac)). Likewise, male home ranges 1940s, followed by Nebraska in the mid- Lesmeister (2007, p. 21), skunks used were at least 2.5 times larger than 1940s, and Kansas, Iowa, and Minnesota young, dense forest stands or stands females’ ranges in the winter and in the mid- to late 1940s (Wires and with downed logs and slash more often summer, but not autumn. Overall, home Baker 1994, p. 1; Gompper and Hackett than mature stands with open range size varied from 19 to 1,824 ha 2005, p. 199). Harvest numbers for the understories and clean forest floors. (47.0 to 4,507.2 ac) for males and 21 to plains spotted skunk from 1934–1935 Spotted skunks also require an early 192 ha (51.9 to 474.4 ac) for females were 248,062 (Service calculated from successional (process by which (McCullough 1983, p. 34; Lesmeister et Novak et al. 1987, pp. 223–226, for ecological communities undergo al. 2008, p. 21). Crabb (1948, p. 218) States in the range of the subspecies). changes following disturbance) found that spotted skunks on an More recent harvest information for component to their habitat to provide agricultural landscape in Iowa occurred 1975–1976 showed that only 1,476 cover and denning areas (Lesmeister at a density of approximately 5 skunks plains spotted skunks were harvested 2007, p. 56; Lesmeister et al. 2009, pp. per square kilometer (km2) (13 skunks (Service calculated from Novak et al. 23–24). per square mile (mi2)). 1987, pp. 223–226, for States in the Dens can be located above ground or The plains spotted skunk is range of the subspecies), which is less below ground. In natural landscapes, omnivorous, but is primarily an than 1 percent of the 1934–1935 harvest.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71762 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Gompper and Hackett (2005, p. 199) Whitaker 1979, p. 270). Gray fox are also predominantly when young are born. demonstrated rangewide declines in the distinguished from other canids by their Gray fox mate at different times of the plains spotted skunk based on harvest widely separated temporal ridges that year, depending on their geographic records and found that the decline was come together posteriorly in a U-shaped location (Chapman and Feldhammer not an artifact of reduced trapper effort form (Chapman and Feldhammer 1982, 1982, p. 476). For example, for the or demand for spotted skunk pelts. p. 476; Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. prairie gray fox, breeding lasts from late The subspecies likely still occupies 1; Hall 1981, p. 942; Hamilton and January through February in southern the same habitat types and occurs in all Whitaker 1979, p. 270). Gray fox are Illinois and from late January through the States within its historical range smaller than the ( vulpes), March in Wisconsin (Fritzell and (Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota, with a total length of 80 to 112.5 Haroldson 1982, pp. 3–4). The average Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South centimeters (cm) (31.5 to 44. 3 inches litter size for the gray fox is 3.8 pups per Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming), but in (in)), weight of 3 to 7 kilograms (6.6 to female, with litters ranging from 1 to 7 lower abundance (Choate et al. 1973, p. 15.4 lb), and males are slightly larger pups (Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 4). 231). Range fragmentation and reduced than females (Fritzell and Haroldson The home range of the gray fox varies abundance of the subspecies is recorded 1982, p. 1). The size of gray fox varies depending on the season and geographic through trapper records, buyer with geographic location, with location (Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. surveys, public surveys, and focused individuals in the northern part of the 4). Males in southern Illinois were field surveys (Hammond and Busby range larger than those in the south found to have a home range of 136 ha 1994, pp. 1–4; Wires and Baker 1994, (Hamilton and Whitaker 1979, p. 270). (336.1 ac), and females a home range of pp. 3–7); these records also document Gray fox are generally associated with 107 ha (264.4 ac) (Fritzell and locations where viable populations wooded habitats (Haroldson and Fritzell Haroldson 1982, p. 4). A study by likely occur (e.g., Ozark Plateau 1984, p. 226; Fritzell and Haroldson Haroldson and Fritzel (1984, p. 225) (McCullough 1983, p. 52; Hackett 2005, 1982, p. 3; Hamilton and Whitaker 1979, conducted in a Missouri oak-hickory pp. 51–52) and Ouachita Mountains p. 270). Gray fox use oak-hickory forests forest indicated that nightly range use (Lesmeister et al. 2010, pp. 54–58)). almost exclusively in southern by gray fox was a fraction of the total Missouri, and are frequently found in Prairie Gray Fox (Urocyon monthly range. They also found dense stands of young trees during the cinereoargenteus ocythous) composite (multiple month) home day (Haroldson and Fritzell 1984, pp. ranges (average 676 (+/¥) 357 ha (1,670 Gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) 226–227). This study noted, however, ¥ are mammals of the Order Carnivora (+/ ) 882 ac)) are much larger than the that forest habitat was the most individual month home ranges (average and Family . U. c. ocythous is a abundant habitat type in their study ± ± recognized subspecies of the gray fox. In 299 ( ) 155 ha (738 ( ) 383 ac)) area and the importance of wooded (Haroldson and Fritzel 1984, p. 223). this finding, we refer to the subspecies habitat is dependent on its availability, Haroldson and Fritzel (1984, p. 226) U. c. ocythous as the prairie gray fox, as and will be used disproportionately to also indicated that gray fox home ranges this is the common name the petition its abundance when wooded habitat is vary among populations. Gray fox are uses, although there is no recognized scarce (Haroldson and Fritzell 1984, p. more active at night, with activity at common name for this subspecies. The 226). Gray fox use woody cover in sunrise sharply decreasing and prairie gray fox was first described by deciduous or pine forest, but they also increasing again at sunset (Haroldson Bangs in 1899 (Fritzell and Haroldson use edge habitat and early old-fields and Fritzell 1984, p. 224). 1982, p. 1; Hall 1981, p. 943). We accept (open habitats that are transitioning the characterization of the prairie gray from field to forest and are dominated The gray fox is primarily an fox as a subspecies of the gray fox as by forbs, grass, and shrubs and small opportunistic carnivore, with mammals noted in Chapman and Feldhammer trees) (Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. composing most of its diet in the (1982, p. 475), Fritzell and Haroldson 3). The gray fox tends to select against Midwest (Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, (1982, p. 1), and Hall (1981, p. 943). agricultural areas (Fritzell and p. 4). According to Chapman and Few references refer specifically, by Haroldson 1982, p. 3). Cooper (2008, p. Feldhammer (1982, p. 480), the gray name, to U. c. ocythous; therefore, we 24) found a greater relative abundance fox’s diet depends highly on what is consider information available for the of gray fox in Illinois, where there was available. Although rabbits have been gray fox within the delineated prairie a greater dispersion of grassland patches found to be one of their primary food gray fox range to represent the into forested areas, and lower densities sources, they routinely feed on small petitioned subspecies. in areas with larger patches of and other mammals, birds, and The following characteristics describe agricultural fields. A notable reptiles (Jones et al. 1985, p. 264; the gray fox species in general, as they characteristic of the gray fox is their Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 4). In are similar to the characteristics of the ability to climb trees; gray fox are the summer, invertebrates have been prairie gray fox subspecies. The gray fox capable of climbing a tree trunk using found to be more important food items, has a distinguishable appearance with their to grasp and pull themselves while in the fall, the gray fox consumes gray fur on its upper body; reddish fur up or bounding from branch to branch more fruit and sometimes corn on its neck, the sides of the belly, and (Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 5; (Chapman and Feldhammer 1982, p. inner legs; and white on the rest of its Hamilton and Whitaker 1979, p. 270). 476; Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 4; underbody. The guard hairs (long, This behavior is used during foraging, Hamilton and Whitaker 1979, p. 272). course hairs that protect soft underfur) predator avoidance, or resting (Fritzell The plains gray fox ranges primarily are banded with white, gray, and black, and Haroldson 1982, p. 5). west of the Mississippi and Illinois which gives the fox’s fur a grizzled Gray fox dens are usually located in Rivers through portions of the central appearance. It has a black tipped tail wooded areas and include underground plain States. The historical range for this and a coarse dorsal mane of black- burrows, cavities in trees or logs, wood- subspecies included western Wisconsin, tipped hairs at the base of its tail piles, and rock outcrops or cavities Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, (Chapman and Feldhammer 1982, p. under rocks (Jones et al. 1985, p. 264; and the eastern sections of North and 476; Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 1; Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 189). South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Hall 1981, p. 942; Hamilton and Gray fox will use dens year-round, but Oklahoma in the United States, and the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71763

southernmost sections of Ontario and higher than the long-term average 1981, p. 136). They have dense fur, Manitoba, Canada (Hall 1981, p. 944). (during the 23 years of the study) of 0.42 ranging from brownish to greyish in The petition asserts that prairie gray observations per respondent (Kitchell color, with white fur on the underside fox numbers have declined in many of 2010, unpaginated). The number of gray of the body and tail. The average home the States within its range (Petition, fox counted during the annual range for the eastern cottontail varies unpaginated). The petition mentions Bowhunter Observation Survey in from approximately 1 to 2 acres (0.4 to that the Department of the Interior used Arkansas have been low but stable from 1 ha) in Wisconsin (Trent and Rungstad scent stations to track the relative 2005–2010 (Petition, unpaginated; Sasse 1974) to around 4 acres (2 ha) in abundance of several predators, 2011, unpaginated). The numbers of Pennsylvania, with male home ranges including the gray fox, in many western gray fox counted during the Iowa 2010 increasing to an average of 17 to 19 States. The average Statewide indices Bowhunter Observation Survey were acres (7 to 8 ha) in spring and summer between the 1980 and 1981 surveys fewer than the margin of error for some (Althoff and Storm 1989). The eastern showed a decline in Minnesota from 2.4 of the regions and showed an overall cottontail is the most widely distributed to 1.9, and in Oklahoma from 2.0 to 1.0 decline in the State (Petition, cottontail species in North America (U.S. Department of the Interior 1981, unpaginated; Roberts and Clark 2011, (Scharine et al. 2011, p. 885; Hall and pp. 42, 70; U.S. Department of the unpaginated). The petitioners attribute Kelson 1981, p. 300; Chapman et al. Interior 1980, pp. 44, 72). The Statewide this decline to the loss of preferred 1980, p. 2) and occurs sympatrically indices for Kansas, Nebraska, North habitat and the increase in agricultural with six species of the genus Sylvilagus Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin habitat, which gray fox avoid (Petition, and six species of the genus Lepus were zero in both 1980 and 1981 (U.S. unpaginated; Cooper 2008, p. 24; (Chapman et al. 1980, p. 136). Department of the Interior 1981, pp. 38, Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 189). 52, 66, 78, 98; U.S. Department of the Although the evidence included in the In describing eastern cottontail Interior 1980, pp. 40, 54, 68, 80, 100). petition and within our files shows a habitat, Chapman et al. (1980, p. 2) There was an increase in the numbers decline in the population of the prairie stated, ‘‘This cottontail is generally of gray fox between 1980 and 1981 in gray fox for several States, there are no thought of as a mammal of farmlands, Illinois; however, all of the scent studies included that specifically fields, and hedge rows; however, stations recorded were outside the range indicate what the population of the historically it occurred in natural glades of the prairie gray fox subspecies, so prairie gray fox was prior to human and woodlands, deserts, swamps, they were likely a different subspecies settlement or how much the population prairies, hardwood forests, rain forests, (U.S. Department of the Interior 1981, p. has declined rangewide. and boreal forests.’’ When comparing 36; U.S. Department of the Interior 1980, the eastern cottontail to the swamp Mearn’s Eastern Cottontail (Sylvilagus p. 36). The petitioners cite these rabbit (S. aquaticus), Scharine et al. floridanus mearnsi) numbers when asserting that the prairie (2011, p. 881) stated that the dense gray fox was rare to absent in the plains Eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus understory vegetation provided by early States by 1980 (Petition, unpaginated). floridanus) are members of Order successional cover types are important The petitioners cite the Minnesota Lagomorpha and Family Leporidae. The habitat for both species; however, the Department of Natural Resources’ Mearn’s eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus eastern cottontail is a habitat generalist annual carnivore scent station survey as floridanus mearnsi) is a recognized and occupies a larger distribution. including gray fox in their ‘‘fox’’ subspecies of the eastern cottontail, as Mankin and Warner (1999b, p. 960) numbers (Petition unpaginated); first described in 1894 by J.A. Allen identified eastern cottontails in old however we can find no indication in (Hall and Kelson 1981, p. 304; Chapman fields, , hedgerows, cropland, this reference that gray fox were et al. 1980, p. 1). We accept the and urban areas, but found that the counted during those surveys (Erb 2010, characterization of the Mearn’s eastern species preferred open shrub land. p. 43–57). cottontail (S. f. mearnsi) as a subspecies The Missouri Department of of the eastern cottontail rabbit as The Mearn’s eastern cottontail occurs Conservation’s annual Archer’s Index to described in Chapman et al. (1980, p. 1), across a large portion of the eastern Furbearer Populations shows a 75 and Hall and Kelson (1959, p. 262). Few cottontail’s range, including the entire percent decline in gray fox numbers references relate specifically to the States of Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, since 1983 (petition unpaginated; Blair Mearn’s eastern cottontail; therefore, we Indiana, and Ohio; most of Minnesota, 2011, p. 31). The petitioners state that consider information available for the Illinois, and Kentucky; southwestern the number of gray fox in Wisconsin, as eastern cottontail to represent the New York; northern Pennsylvania; observed by the Wisconsin Department petitioned subspecies. western West Virginia; northern of Natural Resources during routine The eastern cottontail is described as Missouri; northeastern Kansas; eastern field work, was comparable to the having a total length of 395 to 456 mm Nebraska; a small portion of the , which is listed by the State as (15.6 to 18.0 in) and weighing 801 to southeastern corner of South Dakota; endangered (Petition, unpaginated). The 1,411 g (28.3 to 49.8 ounces (oz)) for and the small portion of the western report does indicate that the number of males, and 400 to 477 mm (15.7 to 18.8 edge of Virginia (Figure 1) (Hall and gray fox observed in 2010 was 0.78 in) and weighing 842 to 1,533 g (29.7 to Kelson 1981, p. 261; Chapman et al. observations per respondent, which is 54.1 oz) for females (Chapman et al. 1980, p. 3).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71764 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Distinct Population Segment Evaluation Discreteness submission, and other information readily available in our files. Under the Service’s Policy Regarding Under our DPS Policy, a population The petition cites one study (Mankin the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate segment of a vertebrate species may be and Warner 1999a) as the supporting Population Segments Under the considered discrete if it satisfies either evidence that the population of Mearn’s Endangered Species Act (61 FR 4722, one of the following conditions: eastern cottontail in east-central Illinois February 7, 1996), three elements are (1) It is markedly separated from other and western Indiana is: (1) Physically considered in the decision concerning populations of the same taxon as a discrete from the rest of the subspecies; the establishment and classification of a consequence of physical, physiological, (2) ecologically distinct due to intensive possible DPS. These are applied ecological, or behavioral factors. agriculture leaving only artificial similarly for additions to or removal Quantitative measures of genetic or remnants of its original habitat; and (3) from the Federal List of Endangered and morphological discontinuity may behaviorally distinct because Threatened Wildlife. These elements provide evidence of this separation. individuals require home ranges include: averaging 7 times larger than other (2) It is delimited by international (1) The discreteness of a population in members of the eastern cottontail governmental boundaries within which relation to the remainder of the taxon to species. significant differences in control of which it belongs; The petitioners assert that the exploitation, management of habitat, petitioned DPS occupies an ecologically (2) The significance of the population conservation status, or regulatory distinct area where intensive agriculture segment to the taxon to which it mechanisms exist that are significant in has left only artificial remnants of its belongs; and light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. original habitat. Mankin and Warner (3) The population segment’s The petitioners describe the area of (1999a, p. 940) state that east-central conservation status in relation to the the petitioned DPS in the revised Illinois is one of the most intensively Act’s standards for listing, delisting petition submission (dated January 23, farmed regions in North America. This (removal from the list), or 2012) as follows: ‘‘this region covers the is supported by the findings of Ribic et reclassification (i.e., is the population former Grand Prairie region of Illinois al. (1998), which suggest a decrease in segment endangered or threatened). and western Indiana.’’ However, the the quantity of upland wildlife habitat Our understanding of the petitioners’ submitted description does not provide in Illinois from 1920 to 1987, and an requested action is that the population exact boundaries or reference maps for increase in farming disturbance, of Mearn’s cottontail in east-central the petitioned DPS. Therefore, the DPS indicating an intensification of Illinois and western Indiana (Figure 1) we consider in our evaluation is based agricultural practices for the State be considered a DPS and listed as on a hand-drawn map submitted by the during that time period. They found that endangered or threatened under the Act. petitioners in the original petition the western and southern portions of the Therefore, in this analysis, we evaluate submission (dated July 18, 2011) (not State had higher wildlife habitat values whether the petition provides paginated). For our DPS evaluation, we than the rest of the State and that substantial information that the Mearn’s considered references provided with the harvest of eastern cottontails was higher eastern cottontail in east-central Illinois original July 18, 2011, petition in counties with the most upland and western Indiana may constitute a submission, references provided with habitat and the lowest amount of DPS. the revised January 23, 2012, petition farming disturbance (Ribic et al. 1998,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with EP04DE12.025 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71765

pp. 307, 311). This differentiation is also markedly separated from other hybridized by the introductions of other supported by Mankin and Warner populations of the same taxon based on species, and thus its loss would result (1999b, p. 962), who showed that behavioral reasons. in a significant gap in the range of the counties in east-central Illinois had the There are no international subspecies. The petition cites one greatest decline in cottontail abundance governmental boundaries associated reference, Chapman and Morgan 1973, and the highest increase in intense row- with this subspecies that are significant. to support their assertion. Chapman and cropping. The population of Mearn’s eastern Morgan (1973, p. 6) discuss the The petitioners also cite Mankin and cottontail in east-central Illinois and introduction of many species and Warner (1999a) in stating that the DPS western Indiana lies wholly within the subspecies of rabbits into the eastern represents a population of Mearn’s United States. Because this element is United States from 1920 to 1950, and cottontail that is broken into small not relevant in this case for a finding of the impacts on the native rabbit species populations and is behaviorally distinct discreteness, it was not considered in in western Maryland and the nearby from other Mearn’s cottontails. Mankin reaching this determination. portions of West Virginia. They found and Warner (1999a) studied the evidence of hybridization between responses of Mearn’s eastern cottontails Significance native eastern cottontails and other to intensive row-crop agriculture in If a population segment is considered rabbit species and subspecies from other Ford County, Illinois, which is in the discrete under one or more of the parts of the country and the center of the proposed DPS. They found conditions described in our DPS policy, that the Mearn’s eastern cottontail had its biological and ecological significance hybridization of the subspecies S. f. a home range 2.3 times larger during the will be considered in light of mallurus with other subspecies. The growing season for the crops than Congressional guidance that the intergrade (hybridization) zone of during the non-growing season (Mankin authority to list DPSes be used eastern cottontail in the East has and Warner 1999a, p. 943). The ‘‘sparingly’’ while encouraging the expanded, and it now out-competes the cottontails in the study also had an conservation of genetic diversity. In New England cottontail (S. overall home range that was 7 to 8 times making this determination, we consider transitionalis) in its traditional habitat larger than those found by previous available scientific evidence of the (Chapman and Morgan 1973, p. 51). research (Mankin and Warner 1999a, p. discrete population segment’s Although the study suggests that the 945). Mankin and Warner (1999a, p. importance to the taxon to which it eastern cottontail subspecies interbreed 945) specifically compared their belongs. As precise circumstances are where they overlap, it does not findings to home ranges of Mearn’s likely to vary considerably from case to specifically discuss how much habitat eastern cottontail in Wisconsin by Trent case, the DPS policy does not describe may be lost by each subspecies to and Rongstad (1974), and indicated they all the classes of information that might hybridization. Therefore, when were 8 times larger than Wisconsin be used in determining the biological determining how much of the Mearn’s males’ home ranges and 7 times larger and ecological importance of a discrete eastern cottontail range is included in than females’. Chapman et al. (1980, p. population. However, the DPS policy the petitioned DPS, we used the range 136) indicate that there have been many does provide four possible reasons why from Hall and Kelson (1981, p. 303) as studies of home ranges of the eastern a discrete population may be significant. cited in the petition and the hand- cottontail, with a mean for males of 0.95 As specified in the DPS policy (61 FR drawn map from the original petition to ha (2.34 acres) to 2.8 ha (6.9 acres) and 4722), this consideration of the generate the map in Figure 1. Using for females of 0.95 ha (2.34 acres) to 1.2 population segment’s significance may ArcGIS, we calculated that the area ha (2.96 acres). Mankin and Warner include, but is not limited to, the petitioned as a DPS makes up 3.6 (1999a, pp. 944–945) found the following: percent of the Mearn’s cottontail range population of cottontails in the Ford (1) Persistence of the discrete and not the approximate 20 percent County, Illinois study area to be sparse population segment in an ecological asserted by the petitioners. To calculate yet stable. Although the cottontails used setting unusual or unique to the taxon; the size of the proposed DPS, we the crop ground extensively and 23 (2) Evidence that loss of the discrete scanned the hand-drawn map included percent of the home ranges occurred on population segment would result in a in the petition, georeferenced it to a map farmsteads, farmsteads made up less significant gap in the range of a taxon; of the United States, and digitized the than 2 percent of the available habitat. (3) Evidence that the discrete DPS boundary from the georeferenced Based on the information submitted population segment represents the only scanned map. We used the same with the petition and information in our surviving natural occurrence of a taxon procedures to georeference the range of files, we find that the petition presents that may be more abundant elsewhere as the Mearn’s eastern cottontail from substantial information to suggest there an introduced population outside its may be a markedly separate population historical range; or Hall’s map (Hall 1980, p. 303). We were of Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east- (4) Evidence that the discrete able to calculate the total acres of both central Illinois and western Indiana due population segment differs markedly the DPS and the Mearn’s eastern to behavioral differences when from other populations of the species in cottontail range with the new digitized compared to the subspecies located its genetic characteristics. georeferenced maps. We then clipped elsewhere. The population of Mearn’s A population segment needs to satisfy the DPS from the full range to calculate eastern cottontail in east-central Illinois only one of these criteria to be the difference in acres and the and western Indiana may be discrete considered significant. Furthermore, the percentage of the Mearn’s eastern from the rest of the Mearn’s population list of criteria is not exhaustive; other cottontail range that the DPS includes. because they occupy an area of criteria may be used as appropriate. Although the population of Mearn’s intensive agriculture that leads to the The petitioners assert that the eastern cottontail in east-central Illinois behavior of maintaining different home- population of Mearn’s eastern cottontail and western Indiana is located in the range sizes than the subspecies in the in east-central Illinois and western center of the subspecies’ range, the rest of the range. Therefore, this Indiana is significant because it petition does not provide substantial population of Mearn’s cottontail may represents approximately 20 percent of information, nor is there information meet the discreteness criterion that it is the range of the subspecies that was not available in our files, to suggest that loss

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71766 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

of this population would result in a the petition regarding the conservation species to the point that the species may significant gap in the range of a taxon. status was substantial. meet the definition of an endangered or The petition does not present We encourage interested parties to threatened species under the Act. information to suggest the population of continue to gather data that will assist In making this 90-day finding, we Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east-central with the conservation of the population evaluated whether information Illinois and western Indiana may persist of Mearn’s eastern cottontail in east- regarding threats to the prairie gray fox in an ecological setting unusual or central Illinois and western Indiana. If and the plains spotted skunk, as unique to the taxon, evidence that the you wish to provide information presented in the petition and other population represents the only regarding the Mearn’s eastern cottontail, information available in our files, is surviving natural occurrence of a taxon you may submit your information or substantial, thereby indicating that the that may be more abundant elsewhere as materials to the Field Supervisor at the petitioned action may be warranted. Our an introduced population outside its Rock Island, Illinois Ecological Service evaluation of this information is historical range, or evidence that the Field Office (see ADDRESSES), at any presented below. population differs markedly from other time. Plains Spotted Skunk (Spilogale populations of the species in its genetic Evaluation of Information for This putorius interrupta) characteristics. Additionally, we do not Finding have information in our files to indicate A. The Present or Threatened that these characteristics are met. Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) Destruction, Modification, or and its implementing regulations at 50 Substantial information is not Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range CFR part 424 set forth the procedures presented in the petition, nor is it for adding a species to, or removing a Information Provided in the Petition available in our files, to suggest that the species from, the Federal Lists of population of Mearn’s eastern cottontail The petitioners claim that threats to Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in east-central Illinois and western the plains spotted skunk include habitat and Plants. A species may be Indiana is biologically or ecologically loss and modification. The petition determined to be an endangered or significant to the remainder of the suggests that loss of grassland and early threatened species due to one or more taxon. Therefore, we determine, based successional habitat has contributed to of the five factors described in section on the information provided in the declining population trends of 90 to 100 4(a)(1) of the Act: percent throughout the subspecies’ petition and in our files that the (A) The present or threatened range (Petition, unpaginated). Plains population of Mearn’s eastern cottontail destruction, modification, or spotted skunks require some early in east-central Illinois and western curtailment of its habitat or range; Indiana does not meet the significance (B) Overutilization for commercial, successional component to their habitat criterion of the 1996 DPS policy. recreational, scientific, or educational to provide cover and denning areas (Petition, unpaginated; Lesmeister 2007, Finding for Mearn’s Eastern Cottontail purposes; (C) Disease or predation; p. 56; Lesmeister et al. 2009, pp. 23–24). We reviewed the information (D) The inadequacy of existing Before European settlement, this need presented in the petition and evaluated regulatory mechanisms; or was satisfied by both natural that information in relation to (E) Other natural or manmade factors disturbances (e.g., fire, storms, beaver, information readily available in our affecting its continued existence. elk, and bison) and disturbance by files. On the basis of this review, we In considering what factors might Native Americans (Petition, find that neither the petition, nor constitute threats, we must look beyond unpaginated; Sewell 2009, p. 11). information readily available in our the mere exposure of the species to the Grasslands and successional habitats files, suggests that the Mearn’s eastern factor to determine whether the species were prevalent across the landscape. cottontail population in east-central responds to the factor in a way that However, anthropogenic changes lead to Illinois and western Indiana meets the causes actual impacts to the species. If landscapes that were more conducive to criteria for being significant under our there is exposure to a factor, but no species that need early successional DPS policy. Although the population response, or only a positive response, habitat, such as the plains spotted may meet the criteria for being discrete that factor is not a threat. If there is skunk. Such species shifted their use under the DPS policy, neither the exposure and the species responds from naturally created, early information in the petition, nor the negatively, the factor may be a threat successional habitats to those that were information readily available in our and we then attempt to determine how created by humans, and the species now files, suggests that this population of significant a threat it is. If the threat is seem to depend on these human-created Mearn’s eastern cottontail may be significant, it may drive or contribute to habitats to some extent (Petition, significant to the remainder of the the risk of extinction of the species such unpaginated; Sewell 2009, p. 12). taxon. Because both discreteness and that the species may warrant listing as The petition claims that the plains significance are required to satisfy the an endangered or threatened species as spotted skunk has since declined DPS policy, we have determined that those terms are defined by the Act. This (Petition, unpaginated; Gompper and the Mearn’s eastern cottontail does not necessarily require empirical Hackett 2005, pp. 199–200) because of population in east-central Illinois and proof of a threat. The combination of changes in agriculture, silviculture, and western Indiana does not satisfy the exposure and some corroborating climate. Because plains spotted skunks elements of being a DPS under our 1996 evidence of how the species is likely rely on early successional habitat, policy and, therefore, is not a listable impacted could suffice. The mere management activities or lack of entity under section 3(16) of the Act. identification of factors that could management that reduce the occurrence Because the petition does not present impact a species negatively may not be of dense vegetative stands or modify substantial information that the sufficient to compel a finding that forest structure to more open, mature population of Mearn’s eastern cottontail listing may be warranted. The stands could be detrimental to the in east-central Illinois and western information must contain evidence subspecies (Petition, unpaginated; Indiana is a DPS, we did not evaluate sufficient to suggest that these factors Lesmeister 2007, p. 56; Lesmeister 2009, whether the information contained in may be operative threats that act on the pp. 23–24).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71767

Evaluation of Information Provided in larger agricultural units. Farm buildings young oak-hickory forest stands over the Petition and Available in Service were removed that had provided both mature oak-hickory forest (McCullough Files shelter and sources of prey, such as 1983, p. 41). Considering that the The information readily available in rodents (Choate et al. 1973, p. 230; Nilz subspecies seems to require structural our files supports the petitioners’ claims and Finck 2008, pp. 19–20). This change complexity provided by early that the plains spotted skunk may be in the agricultural landscape was successional habitats, management declining rangewide due to loss, intensified by the drought of 1933–1940, priorities that endeavor to create degradation, and modification of early during which thousands of small landscapes dominated by mature forest successional habitat. The plains spotted farmers moved to other areas, stands could negatively impact the skunk has apparently undergone long- abandoning many of the farms that plains spotted skunk. For example, such term fluctuations in population (Choate remained. Arid conditions impacted conflicts in habitat management might et al. 1973, pp. 228–233; Novak et natural riparian habitats of plains occur where the ranges of the red- al.1987, pp. 223–226; Gompper and spotted skunks along watercourses, cockaded woodpecker and plains Hackett 2005, pp. 199–200). Increases in likely making them uninhabitable. The spotted skunk are coincident. Red- abundance in the early 1900s likely continued introduction of technology cockaded woodpeckers require open, were facilitated by human presence and and mechanization into farming mature pine woodlands and savannahs influence on the landscape, as were operations caused further decline of maintained by frequent fire (USFWS subsequent declines (Choate et al. 1973, small, diverse farms and replaced them 2003, p. 5). Management for red- pp. 228–233). Construction of houses, with large monocultures (Choate et al. cockaded woodpeckers focuses on outbuildings, haystacks, and brush piles 1973, p. 231). Plains spotted skunks restoration of pine forests to old, open provided shelter, and the storage of avoid expansive open areas, such as stands with canopy and herbaceous crops provided a direct source of food, pasture lands, that are devoid of layers but no hardwood midstory as well as an indirect food source (mice overhead cover, and plains spotted (USFWS 2003, pp. 2, 41). This type of and rats that were attracted to stored skunks are likely intolerant of this pine restoration is currently occurring grain) (Choate et al. 1973, p. 230). habitat type (Lesmeister et al. 2009, p. in Arkansas on the Ouachita National Exploitation of these novel features 23). Finally, the widespread application Forest (Hedrick et al. 2007, pp. 1–8). allowed the expansion and increase of of insecticides, such as Dichloro- In summary, we find that the the plains spotted skunk (Choate et al. diphenyl-trichlorethane (DDT), in information provided in the petition, as 1973, p. 230). Subsequent removal of industrial farming might have well as other information available in anthropogenic features, as small farms contributed to the decline in the 1940s. our files, presents substantial scientific were deserted and incorporated into Because the plains spotted skunk is or commercial information indicating larger farms reduced the amount of primarily an insectivore, application of that the petitioned action may be available habitat (Choate et al. 1973, p. pesticide likely reduced the main food warranted due to historical and 231). However, the plains spotted skunk source for the subspecies. Foraging currently ongoing habitat loss and has declined throughout its range, not opportunities were historically and degradation due to modifications of just in the parts of the range where the continue to be further limited by dietary early successional habitat. Further subspecies exists in anthropogenic preference; competition with other assessment of population declines due landscapes. Harvest by fur trappers has species, such as striped skunk and to the loss of early successional habitat consistently decreased from the mid- , for an alternate food source; or caused by changes in agricultural 1940s to present (Novak et al. 1987, pp. both (Kinlaw 1995, p. 4; Nilz and Finck practices, changes in silvicultural 223–226). Gompper and Hackett (2005, 2008, pp. 19–20). practices, and reduction in food pp. 199–200) analyzed harvest data from Habitat loss or modification might availability by intensive use of seven States (Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, also be currently occurring in more pesticides is necessary. Kansas, Oklahoma, Minnesota, and natural forested landscapes where the B. Overutilization for Commercial, Arkansas) in the range of the plains plains spotted skunk occurs. In the Recreational, Scientific, or Educational spotted skunk and confirmed the Ouachita Mountains and Ozark Plateau, Purposes population decline, demonstrated that use of forested areas was limited to the timing of the onset of decline young forest stands with closed canopy Information Provided in the Petition differed among States, and determined and dense understory, areas with fallen The petitioners did not present that the decline was not an artifact of logs and brushpiles, ravine bottoms, or information regarding the harvest effort or pelt demand. stands that had undergone timber stand overutilization of the plains spotted Although there does not appear to be improvement (TSI) and had high levels skunk for commercial, recreational, a single cause of decline, a suite of of ground litter and slash (McCullough scientific, or educational purposes. potential factors are suggested 1983, pp. 40–41; Lesmeister et al. 2009, consistently in the literature. The p. 23). Young shortleaf pine stands were Evaluation of Information Provided in decline of small farms, the advent of the only early successional habitat the Petition and Available in Service agriculture practices that encourage present in the Ouachita Mountains Files removal of fence rows and brush piles, study area and were preferred over the Harvest pressure on the plains spotted intensive use of pesticides, improved dominant habitat type, mature shortleaf skunk during the 1930s has received grain management practices, and the pine. Mature shortleaf pine stands offer little consideration for contributing to end of large haystack construction are more open canopy conditions and are the decline of the subspecies, but might implicated as potential causes for the considered suboptimal habitat for the have been a factor historically (Nilz and species’ decline in landscapes plains spotted skunk compared to young Finck 2008, p. 19). Available harvest dominated by human activity (Choate et stands that provide more desirable records from the 1930s to 1940s (Novak al. 1973, pp. 229–231; Gompper and structural characteristics (Lesmeister et et al. 1987, pp. 223–226) show high Hackett 2005, p. 199). Following the al. 2009, p. 24). Similar to the results in harvest numbers for most States in the Great Depression, many small farms the Ouachita Mountains, plains spotted subspecies’ range, but since the mid- were deserted and incorporated into skunks in the Ozark Plateau preferred 1940s, harvest numbers have

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71768 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

consistently decreased. The population Ouachita Mountains. Sixty-three spotted skunk may warrant listing due status and dynamics of plains spotted percent of documented mortalities were to predation. skunks during this period of heavy attributed to avian predators, 26 percent D. The Inadequacy of Existing harvest are not fully understood, but the to mammalian predators, and 11 percent Regulatory Mechanisms plains spotted skunk appears to have to unknown causes. Eleven of the 12 been common in most landscapes in the avian-caused mortalities occurred in Information Provided in the Petition early 1900s (Choate et al. 1973, pp. 227– mature shortleaf pine stands with an The petitioners state that there 230). Based on information readily open canopy and herbaceous currently is no mechanism to protect available in our files, overutilization understory, whereas all of the mammal- habitat or garner appropriate resources appears to be a potential cause of caused mortalities occurred in young for species conservation. historical decline, but we do not have shortleaf pine stands (Lesmeister et al. information to indicate that the 2010, p. 54). These results suggest that Evaluation of Information Provided in overutilization for commercial, there is a difference between the amount the Petition and Available in Service recreational, scientific, or educational and source of predation that occurs in Files purposes is presenting an ongoing threat habitat that is considered optimal We do not have any information in to the plains spotted skunk. However, as (young shortleaf pine) and suboptimal our files to indicate whether any we proceed with the 12-month status (mature shortleaf pine) for plains regulatory mechanisms that are review, we will further investigate this spotted skunk (Lesmeister et al. 2010, designed to alleviate threats to the factor to determine whether pp. 55–56). Plains spotted skunks species (i.e., loss of early successional overutilization for commercial, avoided use of mature forest stands and habitat due to changes in agricultural recreational, scientific, or educational selected young forest stands (Lesmeister practices, changes in silvicultural purposes is an ongoing threat to the et al. 2009, pp. 23–24); mortality due to practices, climatic fluctuations, subspecies. predation was disproportionate to reduction in food availability by habitat use because the highest C. Disease or Predation intensive use of pesticides, or excessive mortality occurred in the least-used predation) exist. Therefore, we find that Information Provided in the Petition mature forest habitat. While predation the petition and the information readily plays a natural role in the life history The petitioners did not present available in our files do not provide dynamics of the plains spotted skunk, substantial scientific or commercial information regarding diseases that may there is some evidence that it may be affect the plains spotted skunk. The information to indicate that the occurring at a higher rate that could inadequacy of existing regulatory petitioners claim that the plains spotted have a negative affect on populations of skunk is experiencing unnaturally high mechanisms is a threat to the plains the species. spotted skunk such that the petitioned levels of predation, mainly by birds of Diseases affecting the subspecies action may be warranted. However, as prey, because of loss of protective cover include pneumonia, coccidiosis, and we proceed with the 12-month finding provided by early successional habitat (Kinlaw 1995, p. 4). The plains status review, we will further (Petition, unpaginated). Lesmeister et al. spotted skunk, however, is often investigate whether the inadequacy of (2009, pp. 23–24) observed 18 overrated as a carrier of rabies; fewer existing regulatory mechanisms may be mortalities of plains spotted skunks in cases were documented in spotted a threat to the plains spotted skunk. the Ouachita Mountains, most of which skunks than in domestic , cattle, were caused by avian predators and , or striped skunks (Hazard 1982, p. E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors occurred in mature shortleaf pine forests 145). Viral disease, such as parvovirus, Affecting Its Continued Existence that provide little in the way of or enteritis virus, may contribute protective cover. They noted that stands to localized population declines, and Information Provided in the Petition of young shortleaf pine seem to be less some viral diseases can exhibit rapid Humans are reported as the main preferred by typical predators of plains spread and long-term impacts to local cause of mortality in less natural spotted skunk, such as ( population viability, but do not appear landscapes (Kinlaw 1995, p. 4). Death is latrans), bobcats ( rufus), and great to impact the species as a whole caused by vehicle collision, poisoning, horned owls (Bubo virginanus), which (Gompper and Hackett 2005, p. 200). shooting, domestic dogs and cats, and prefer more open habitats. Open Based on information readily available trappers who target plains spotted conditions in mature forest stands might in our files, disease may have been a skunks or take them incidentally when be more favorable for the presence of cause of historical decline, but we do trapping for other species (Jones et al. predators and consequently less not have information to indicate that 1983, p. 304; Wires and Baker 1994, p. favorable to plains spotted skunks disease is presenting an ongoing threat 4). A common source of sightings for (Lesmeister et al. 2009, p. 24). to the plains spotted skunk. As we plains spotted skunks are those that are proceed with the 12-month status found as road kill. Of 72 total possible Evaluation of Information Provided in review, we will further investigate sightings of the plains spotted skunk the Petition and Available in Service whether disease is an ongoing threat to within a 5-year period in Minnesota, 11 Files the subspecies. were road kills and an additional 13 Based on our review of information In summary, the petition and were killed by the individual reporting provided by the petitioners and readily information in our files identifies the sighting (Wires and Baker 1994, p. available in our files, the plains spotted excessive predation that may be 4). skunk may be declining rangewide due occurring at a higher rate than naturally to predation. The most common natural expected as a threat to the plains Evaluation of Information Provided in predators of the plains spotted skunks spotted skunk. Therefore, we find that the Petition and Available in Service are owls and mesocarnivores (Kinlaw the information provided in the Files 1995, p. 4; Schwartz and Schwartz 2001, petition, as well as other information We do not have information in our p. 329). Lesmeister et al. (2010, pp. 54– readily available in our files, presents files to indicate any potential threat to 58) observed a relatively low survival substantial scientific and commercial the plains spotted skunk due to other rate for plains spotted skunk in the information to indicate that the plains natural or manmade factors. Based on

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71769

information provided in the petition, Prairie Gray Fox (Urocyon reported a decrease in red and gray fox direct human-caused mortality (e.g., cinereoargenteus ocythous) populations in Illinois, and vehicle collision, poisoning, shooting, hypothesized that the decline may be A. The Present or Threatened domestic dogs and cats, and trapping) worsened by additional succession of Destruction, Modification, or oak-dominated forests. may be impacting individual skunks, Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range but we do not have information to Evaluation of Information Provided in Information Provided in the Petition indicate that such mortality is the Petition and Available in Service presenting a population-level threat to The petitioners claim that habitat loss Files the plains spotted skunk. Therefore, we and modification are threats to the The petitioners assert that the gray fox find that the petition and information prairie gray fox. The petitioners state requires early successional cover, readily available in our files do not that the gray fox requires early grassland, or dense forest and that the provide substantial scientific or successional cover, grassland, or dense decline of this habitat type has commercial information to indicate that forest, and that the decline of this contributed to the subspecies decline other natural or manmade factors habitat within the range of this (Petition, unpaginated). Gray fox prefer present a threat to the plains spotted subspecies has contributed to its decline wooded habitat, areas of mixed skunk such that the petitioned action (Petition, unpaginated). The gray fox’s grassland and forest, and early may be warranted. However, as we use of deciduous or pine woody habitat proceed with the 12-month status successional areas (Cooper 2008, p. 4; is well established in the literature Chamberlain and Leopold 2000, p. 749; review, we will further investigate (Chamberlain and Leopold 2000, p. 749; whether other natural or manmade Haroldson and Fritzell 1984, p. 226; Jones et al. 1985, p. 264; Haroldson and Fritzell and Haroldson 1982, p. 4). Gray factors, such as potential impacts from Fritzell 1984, p. 226; Fritzell and climate change and direct human- fox utilize this dense protective cover Haroldson 1982, p. 4). Cooper (2008, p. especially during the day when they are caused mortality, may be a threat to the 24) reported a lower relative abundance plains spotted skunk. not as active (Haroldson and Fritzell of gray fox for Illinois counties where 1984, p. 227). There is evidence that Finding for Plains Spotted Skunk agricultural patches were larger and gray fox are more abundant in areas occurred in a wider variety of shapes We reviewed the information where there is woody or dense cover and sizes. Conversely, Cooper (2008, pp. and less abundant in agricultural areas presented in the petition and evaluated 24–25) reported higher relative (Cooper 2008, p. 4). Cooper (2008, p. 26) that information in relation to abundances of gray fox in Illinois suggests that habitat loss is one of the information readily available in our counties that contained a greater gray fox’s biggest threats and that the files. On the basis of our determination availability of grassland dispersed into changes in the landscape, under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we the landscape, with forest patch size predominantly to agriculture in the determine that the petition does present highly variable and closer together. Midwest, have adversely affected gray substantial scientific or commercial Haroldson and Fritzell (1984, p. 226) fox populations. The petitioners have information indicating that listing the found that gray fox relied heavily on provided evidence of low or declining plains spotted skunk as an endangered forested habitats in Missouri. They numbers of gray fox within the range of or threatened species throughout its found that gray fox used dense stands of the prairie gray fox subspecies (Blair entire range may be warranted. This young trees during the day, stating that 2011, p. 31; Roberts and Clark 2011, finding is based on information ‘‘dense protective cover is characteristic unpaginated; Sasse 2011, unpaginated; provided under factors A and C. of the diurnal retreats of gray fox Kitchell 2010, unpaginated; U.S. Because we have found that the throughout their range’’ (Haroldson and Department of the Interior 1981, pp. 38– petition presents substantial Fritzell 1984, p. 227; Petition, 98; U.S. Department of the Interior 1980, information indicating that listing the unpaginated). The petitioners indicate pp. 40–100). The conversion from native plains spotted skunk may be warranted, that habitat important to the gray fox, woody habitat to agricultural practices we are initiating a status review to such as early successional cover, has likely impacted the prairie gray fox determine whether listing the plains grassland, or dense forest, are in decline as all of the States within its range have spotted skunk as an endangered or (Petition, unpaginated; Gillen 2011). agriculture to differing degrees. When threatened species under the Act is Gillen (2011, p. 9) evaluated the settlers arrived in the Midwest, the warranted. relationship of mast-producing trees forests were converted to agriculture The ‘‘substantial information’’ (trees that produce acorns or nuts), before the technology was available to standard for a 90-day finding differs small mammal densities, and the convert prairie lands (U.S. Geological from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and occurrence of carnivores in forests in Survey 1998, p. 4). For example, prior commercial data’’ standard that applies southern Illinois and hypothesized that to 1860, forest areas were the primary to a status review to determine whether the decline of oak-dominated forests in source of cropland in Illinois (U.S. a petitioned action is warranted. A 90- the eastern United States may cause Geological Survey 1998, p. 4). Due to day finding does not constitute a status declines in small mammals that the conversion to agriculture, timber review under the Act. In a 12-month consume acorns, and in turn the harvest, and development, finding, we will determine whether a carnivores that consume small approximately 70 percent of the petitioned action is warranted after we mammals. Gillen (2011, p. 1) cited available forest land in the Midwest has have completed a thorough status several studies that indicate oak- been lost since 1920 (U.S. Geological review of the species, which is dominated forests are declining due to Survey 1998, p. 4), and landcover in the conducted following a substantial 90- the reduced regeneration and secondary Midwest consists of approximately 44 day finding. Because the Act’s standards succession of shade-tolerant species percent agriculture (Mankin and Warner for 90-day and 12-month findings are such as maple and beech. Gillen (2011, 1999a, p. 956). Although the petitioners different, as described above, a p. 9) cited studies by Haroldson and do not provide information on the substantial 90-day finding does not Fritzell (1984, p. 226) that found that amount of habitat that has been lost mean that the 12-month finding will gray fox select forests with high throughout the prairie gray fox’s range, result in a warranted finding. densities of prey. Gillen (2011, p. 10) we believe there is substantial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 71770 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

information to suggest that a decline in furbearers harvested is likely predation like red fox have. McFarland the population of this subspecies may underreported. (2007, p. 11) indicates that the increase be due to the loss of habitat. Although there is evidence in the in coyote numbers in Illinois may be In summary, we find that the literature that gray fox have been hunted due to a shift in agricultural practices information provided in the petition, as in the past and continue to be harvested and movement of humans to urban well as other information available in to some degree, which may have areas, and a subsequent decrease in our files, presents substantial scientific individual and localized impacts, coyote hunters and an increase in the or commercial information indicating neither the petition nor information coyote’s food supply. readily available in our files indicates that the petitioned action may be Evaluation of Information Provided in that harvest is affecting the subspecies warranted due to the loss of early the Petition and Available in Service overall. Therefore, based on information successional cover, grassland, or dense Files forest habitat within the range of this readily available in our files, subspecies. overutilization may have occurred and Jones et al. (1985, p. 264) and Fritzell may have potentially caused historical and Haroldson (1982, p. 5) both mention B. Overutilization for Commercial, decline, but neither the petition nor the coyote and (Lynx rufus) as a Recreational, Scientific, or Educational information readily available in our files predator of the gray fox. In their study Purposes indicate that the overutilization for of coyote, fox, and bobcat interactions in Information Provided in the Petition commercial, recreational, scientific, or California, Fedriani et al. (2000, p. 262) educational purposes is a current threat predicted the dominance of coyote over The petitioners state that the threats the other two carnivores. During their 2- of continued human and to the prairie gray fox. However, as we proceed with the 12-month status year study, Fedriani et al. (2000, p. 262) trapping of this subspecies is ‘‘an found 7 gray fox killed by coyote and 2 additional stressor’’ but do not provide review, we will further investigate this factor to determine whether by bobcat, and found remains of gray information as to the numbers of gray fox in coyote feces. They suggested that fox being harvested in any of the States overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational ‘‘the sum of population losses due to within the range of the prairie gray fox coyote predation plus the avoidance of (Petition, unpaginated). purposes is an ongoing threat to the subspecies. areas of high coyote predation risk by Evaluation of Information Provided in fox limit the size and range of gray fox the Petition and Available in Service C. Disease or Predation populations in the Santa Monica Files Information Provided in the Petition Mountains, whereas no evidence of food limitation is indicated’’ (Fedriani et al. Fritzel and Haroldson (1984, p. 4) The petitioners did not present 2000, p. 268). Chamberlain and Leopold state that ‘‘undoubtedly the most information regarding disease affecting (2005, pp. 171–178) studied similar important predator of gray fox is man,’’ the prairie gray fox. The petitioners interactions among bobcat, coyote, and referencing specific citations indicating claim that the loss of dense cover gray fox in central Mississippi. They the importance of gray fox pelts in the available to the prairie gray fox due to found that the home ranges of coyote 1970s. An estimated 26,109 gray fox habitat degradation has made the and gray fox intersected and that gray pelts were harvested in the United subspecies more susceptible to fox maintained home ranges within the States during the 1970–1971 season, predation from coyotes (Canis latrans), larger range of the coyote (Chamberlain increasing to 163,458 during the 1975– stating coyotes are the gray fox’s only and Leopold 2005, p. 175). However, 1976 season. It was estimated in 1977 major non-human predator (Petition, they found that the amount of overlap that approximately half of the gray fox unpaginated). The petitioners cite a of core areas was negligible, suggesting population in Wisconsin was harvested personal communication with Stan that gray fox avoid areas of greater annually (Fritzel and Haroldson 1984, p. Gehrt from Ohio State University coyote concentration. They considered 4). Illinois hunters harvested 9,086 gray asserting that gray fox in northern the interspecific competition between fox pelts in the winter of 1977–1978 Illinois are being ‘‘wiped out’’ due to coyotes and gray fox minimal, as there (McFarland 2007, p. 9). More recently, coyote predation because they do not were 2 deaths of gray fox from coyotes during the 2010–2011 season, gray fox have adequate cover (Petition, (of the 37 gray fox studied). Researchers harvested in the State of Missouri unpaginated). The petition states that also indicated there were two instances increased 112 percent, while the annual Gehrt cited additional research of den abandonment due to coyote Archer’s Index to Furbearer Populations suggesting that coyote killed gray fox; disturbance (Chamberlain and Leopold (where deer and turkey archery hunters however, they did not consume them 2005, p. 177). The coyote’s range in the record sightings of furbearers each fall) (Petition, unpaginated). The petitioners United States has expanded shows a 75 percent decline in gray fox cite McFarland (2007), which discusses dramatically since pre-settlement; numbers since 1983 (Petition, studies being conducted in Illinois on however it has always been a part of the unpaginated; Missouri Department of coyote-gray fox interactions in northern prairie gray fox’s range (Parker 1995, p. Conservation 2011 Furbearer Program and southern Illinois, with Gehrt cited 17). Before the 1900s, coyote was Annual Report, pp. 11–12; Blair 2011, p. as one of the researchers. McFarland limited to the prairies of the central 31). According to the Arkansas Game (2007, p. 11) quotes Gehrt in reference United States from Canada south into and Fish Commission 2010–2011 to the study: ‘‘We identified a family of Mexico (Parker 1995, p. 17). Although Furbearing Report, 976 gray fox gray living in a cemetery in an the available information shows that were purchased by licensed fur buyers intensely urban area on the south side coyote and bobcat do prey on gray fox, in the State (Sasse 2011, unpaginated). of Chicago, the amazing thing is, it was it does not indicate whether the The report indicates that there was an a place nobody would expect to find predation rate has increased beyond a overall increase in pelts purchased for even a red fox. On top of that, coyotes natural level or that such predation is this season after an overall low in 2009– still found their hiding spot and killed causing a population-level effect. 2010, with the number of pelts them.’’ In McFarland (2007, p. 11), We found few sources in our files purchased increasing by 91 percent. The Gehrt suggests that gray fox have been referencing the effects of disease on gray report also indicates actual numbers of unable to adapt to the increase in coyote fox populations. Fritzell and Haroldson

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 71771

(1982, p. 5) state that canine distemper information to indicate that the based on information provided under virus (CDV) and rabies may affect local inadequacy of existing regulatory factor A. populations. Cooper 2008 (p. 1) also mechanisms is a threat to the prairie Because we have found that the mentions that rabies, , gray fox such that the petitioned action petition presents substantial and CDV affect the gray fox. Cooper may be warranted. However, as we information indicating that listing the 2008 (p. 1) also states that CDV is, ‘‘the proceed with the 12-month status prairie gray fox may be warranted, we most significant mortality factor for gray review, we will further investigate are initiating a status review to foxes,’’ citing several references whether the inadequacy of existing determine whether listing the prairie supporting the adverse effects CDV has regulatory mechanisms may be a threat gray fox under the Act is warranted. had on gray fox populations. to the prairie gray fox. The ‘‘substantial information’’ The information provided by the standard for a 90-day finding differs E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors petitioners and within our files from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and Affecting Its Continued Existence indicates that the gray fox is being commercial data’’ standard that applies preyed on by coyotes and, to a lesser Information Provided in the Petition to a status review to determine whether a petitioned action is warranted. A 90- degree, bobcats; however, we do not The petitioners did not present day finding does not constitute a status have information as to whether the information on whether or how other review under the Act. In a 12-month predation rate has increased beyond a natural or manmade factors are affecting finding, we will determine whether a natural level. Our files also contain the prairie gray fox. some information that the impacts of petitioned action is warranted after we disease may be detrimental to Evaluation of Information Provided in have completed a thorough status individual populations of the prairie the Petition and Available in Service review of the species, which is gray fox, but we do not have Files conducted following a substantial 90- information as to what impact disease is We do not have information in our day finding. Because the Act’s standards having on the subspecies. files to indicate any potential threat to for 90-day and 12-month findings are Therefore, based on information the prairie gray fox due to other natural different, as described above, a readily available in our files, gray fox or manmade factors. Therefore, we find substantial 90-day finding does not are currently being preyed on by that the petition and information readily mean that the 12-month finding will coyotes, but we do not have information available in our files do not provide result in a warranted finding. to indicate that disease or predation is substantial scientific or commercial References Cited an ongoing threat to the prairie gray fox. information to indicate that other A complete list of references cited is As we proceed with the 12-month status natural or manmade factors present a available on the Internet at http:// review, we will further investigate threat to the prairie gray fox such that www.regulations.gov and upon request whether disease or predation are an the petitioned action may be warranted. from the Rock Island, Illinois Ecological ongoing threat to the subspecies. However, as we proceed with the 12- Service Field Office (see FOR FURTHER month status review, we will further D. The Inadequacy of Existing INFORMATION CONTACT). Regulatory Mechanisms investigate whether other natural or manmade factors, such as potential Authors Information Provided in the Petition impacts from climate change, may be a The primary authors of this notice are No information on this factor is threat to the prairie gray fox. the staff members of the Columbia, provided in the petition. Finding for Prairie Gray Fox Missouri, and Rock Island, Illinois Ecological Services Field Offices. Evaluation of Information Provided in We reviewed the information the Petition and Available in Service presented in the petition and evaluated Authority Files that information in relation to The authority for this action is the We do not have any information in information readily available in our Endangered Species Act of 1973, as our files to indicate the amount of files. On the basis of our determination amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). protection currently being afforded the under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we prairie gray fox within individual determine that the petition does present Dated: November 20 2012. States. Therefore, we find that the substantial scientific or commercial Rowan Gould, petition and the information readily information indicating that listing the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. available in our files do not provide prairie gray fox throughout its entire [FR Doc. 2012–29188 Filed 12–3–12; 8:45 am] substantial scientific or commercial range may be warranted. This finding is BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Dec 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM 04DEP1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with