49422 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

also request that commenters address Federal Communications Commission. or questions concerning this finding to how such alternatives would be Elizabeth McIntyre, the above street address. sufficient to verify expenditures that are Deputy Division Chief, Pricing Policy FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: supported under the universal service Division, Wireline Competition Bureau. Richard C. Nelson, Field Supervisor, high-cost program rules. We also [FR Doc. 2013–19762 Filed 8–13–13; 8:45 am] Rock Island Field Office (see generally ask parties to demonstrate BILLING CODE 6712–01–P ADDRESSES); by telephone at 309–757– how their alternative approach would 5800; or by facsimile at 309–757–5807. satisfy basic requirements of property If you use a telecommunications device records. for the deaf (TDD), please call the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 6. The USTelecom Forbearance Long Federal Information Relay Service Order sought comments and reply Fish and Wildlife Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. comments refreshing the record 30 days SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and 45 days, respectively, after the 50 CFR Part 17 accompanying Report and Order Background eliminating CEI/ONA narrowband [Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2013–0089; Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 reporting requirements was published 4500030113] U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for in the Federal Register, 78 FR 39617, any petition to revise the Federal Lists July 2, 2013. Thus the comment Endangered and Threatened Wildlife of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife deadline would have been Aug. 1, 2013 and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a and Plants that contains substantial and the reply comment deadline would Petition to List the Rattlesnake-Master scientific or commercial information have been Aug. 16, 2013. To ensure all Borer Moth (Papaipema eryngii) as an that listing a species may be warranted, interested parties have a sufficient Endangered or Threatened Species we make a finding within 12 months of opportunity to consider and respond to the date of receipt of the petition. In this the issues identified above, comment AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. finding, we will determine that the and reply comments dates were petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted; ACTION: extended in the Public Notice to 30 days Notice of 12-month petition (2) warranted; or (3) warranted, but the and 45 days after this Federal Register finding. immediate proposal of a regulation document is published. The new SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and implementing the petitioned action is comment due dates are set forth under precluded by other pending proposals to the DATES section above. Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list determine whether species are II. Procedural Matters the rattlesnake-master borer moth endangered or threatened, and expeditious progress is being made to A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis (Papaipema eryngii) as an endangered or a threatened species under the add or remove qualified species from 7. Document DA 13–1617 does not Endangered Species Act of 1973, as the Federal Lists of Endangered and contain proposed information collection amended (Act). After review of the best Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section requirements subject to the Paperwork available scientific and commercial 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– information, we find that listing the treat a petition for which the requested 13. In addition, therefore, it does not rattlesnake-master borer moth is action is found to be warranted but contain any proposed information warranted. Currently, however, listing precluded as though resubmitted on the collection burden ‘‘for small business the rattlesnake-master borer moth is date of such finding, that is, requiring a concerns with fewer than 25 precluded by higher priority actions to subsequent finding to be made within employees,’’ pursuant to the Small amend the Lists of Endangered and 12 months. We must publish these 12- Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Upon month findings in the Federal Register. Public Law 107–198. See 44 U.S.C. publication of this 12-month petition Previous Federal Actions 3506(c)(4). However, the original notice finding, we will add the rattlesnake- in this proceeding contained master borer moth to our candidate On June 25, 2007, we received a information collections subject to the species list. We will develop a proposed formal petition dated June 18, 2007, PRA. We invite updated comments on rule to list the rattlesnake-master borer from Forest Guardians (now WildEarth the information collections proposed in moth as our priorities allow. In any Guardians), requesting that the this docket. interim period, we will address the rattlesnake-master borer moth be listed as either endangered or threatened B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis status of the candidate taxon through our annual Candidate Notice of Review under the Act with critical habitat. 8. As discussed above, this Public (CNOR). The petitioner incorporated into the Notice asks parties to refresh the record petition all analyses, references, and DATES: in the Property Records FNPRM The finding announced in this documentation provided by proceeding with respect to the property document was made on August 14, NatureServe in its online database at records rules for rate-of-return carriers. 2013. http://www.natureserve.org/. The The Initial Regulatory Flexibility ADDRESSES: This finding is available on petition clearly identified itself as a Analysis for that proceeding is found at the Internet at http:// petition and included the appropriate Appendix H of the Property Records www.regulations.gov at Docket Number identification information, as required FNPRM. We invite comment on the FWS–R3–ES–2013–0089. Supporting in 50 CFR 424.14(a). We sent a letter to IRFA in light of developments since the documentation we used in preparing the petitioner dated July 11, 2007, issuance of the original IRFA. this finding is available for public acknowledging receipt of the petition 9. For further information, please inspection, by appointment, during and stating that the petition was under contact Marvin F. Sacks, Wireline normal business hours at the U.S. Fish review by staff in our Southwest Competition Bureau, Pricing Policy and Wildlife Service, 1511 47th Ave, Regional Office. On March 19, 2008, Division, at (202) 418–1520 or via email Moline, IL 61265. Please submit any WildEarth Guardians filed a complaint at [email protected]. new information, materials, comments, indicating that the Service failed to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49423

comply with its mandatory duty to moths of similar appearance (Forbes et al. 2009, p. 4; Bird 1917, p. 127). The make a preliminary 90-day finding on 1954, p. 193; Bird 1917, p. 126). boring activities of the rattlesnake- the June 18, 2007, petition to list 475 Rattlesnake-master borer moth larvae master borer moth generally result in southwest species. We subsequently develop in five instars, all of which the plant not producing a flower and published an initial 90-day finding for have a yellowish head and are deep can be fatal to the host plant (Wiker 270 of the 475 petitioned species on purplish brown with longitudinal white 2013, pers. comm.; LaGesse et al. 2009, January 6, 2009, concluding that the lines that are broken over the first four p. 4). petition did not present substantial abdominal segments (Hessel 1954, p. 62; Although there are no specific data on Bird 1917, p. 127). information that listing of those species their home range, rattlesnake-master may be warranted (74 FR 419). On Life History borer moths are not thought to disperse March 13, 2009, the Service and widely and have been described as WildEarth Guardians filed a stipulated Rattlesnake-master borer moths are univoltine (having a single flight per ‘‘relatively sedentary’’ (LaGesse et al. settlement agreement, agreeing that the 2009, p. 4; Panzer 2003, p. 18). Panzer Service would submit to the Federal year) with adults emerging from mid- September to mid-October, and flying (2003, p. 19) found that female Register a finding as to whether rattlesnake-master borer moths WildEarth Guardians’ petition presents through mid- to late October or when dispersed up to 120 meters (m) (394 feet substantial information indicating that the weather becomes too cold (Derkovitz (ft)) from where they were released and the petitioned action may be warranted 2013, pers. comm.; Hessel 1954, p. 59; some traversed a 25-m (82-ft) gap that for the remaining southwestern species Forbes 1954, p. 198; Bird 1917, p. 128). was devoid of host plants. LaGesse et al. by December 9, 2009. On December 16, Their nocturnal habits make them hard (2009, p. 4) indicate that rattlesnake- 2009, we published a 90-day finding to observe, thus adults feeding habits master borer moths will disperse up to that the petition presented substantial are unknown. Based on their short adult 2 miles (3–6 kilometers (km)) if the scientific or commercial information flight span, their underdeveloped mouth number of host plants is limiting. indicating that listing may be warranted parts, and the large amount of stored fat, researchers postulate that they likely do for 67 species, including the rattlesnake- Habitat master borer moth (74 FR 66866). not need much for nectar sources and This notice constitutes the 12-month likely use dew or oozing sap for Rattlesnake-master borer moths are finding on the WildEarth Guardians’ imbibing moisture (Wiker 2013, pers. obligate residents of undisturbed prairie petition to list the rattlesnake-master comm.). Adults will drink from sugar and woodland openings that contain borer moth as an endangered or water when held in captivity (LaGesse their only food plant, rattlesnake-master threatened species. 2013, pers. comm.). Based on their (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 351; LaGesse coloring, researchers believe the moths et al. 2009, p. 4; Panzer 2002, p. 1298; Species Information likely spend their days attached to Molano-Florez 2001, p. 1; Panzer et al. Taxonomy and Species Description plants or on the bottom of leaves, where 1995, p. 115; Mohlenbrock 1986, p. 34; their presence is camouflaged (Wiker The rattlesnake-master borer moth is Hessel 1954, p. 59; Forbes 1954, p. 198; 2013, pers. comm.). Bird 1917, p. 124). Although common in a member of the family Noctuidae In mid-October, females drop their remnant prairies, rattlesnake-master (owlet moths) and was first described in eggs in the vicinity of the food plant, 1917 from individuals collected near Eryngium yuccifolium (rattlesnake- occurs in low densities; it is a Chicago, Illinois (Bird 1917, pp. 125– master), where the eggs overwinter in conservative species and has been found 128). The genus Papaipema contains 53 the duff; young larvae emerge between to have relative frequencies in restored species, all of which are found in North mid-May and early June (Derkovitz and relict prairies of less than 1 percent America and are root or stem boring 2013, pers. comm.; LaGesse et al. 2009, (Danderson and Molano-Flores 2010, p. (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 349; Panzer p. 4; Bird 1917, p. 126). Rattlesnake- 235; Molano-Flores 2001, p. 1). The 1998, p. 48). Rattlesnake-master borer master borer moths are monophagous range of rattlesnake-master covers much moth is the accepted common name for (have only one food source), with larvae of the eastern United States and spans Papaipema eryngii. feeding exclusively on rattlesnake- from Minnesota south to Texas, east to The adult rattlesnake-master borer master (Panzer 2003, p. 18; Hessel 1954, Florida and back north to Connecticut moth measures 3.5–4.8 centimeters (cm) p. 59; Forbes 1954, p. 198; Bird 1917, p. (U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1.4–1.9 inches) (Bird 1917, p. 125). It 124). When larvae first emerge, they Plants Web site 2013, http:// has a smooth head with simple feed on the leaves of the host plant and plants.usda.gov/java/; Danderson and antennae and a tufted body (Forbes the second instars burrow into the stem Molano-Flores 2010, p. 235). Although 1954, p. 191, Bird 1917, p. 125). The (or root) and on into the root where they the plant has an expansive range, the forewing is rich purple brown to red remain until they pupate in mid- to late loss of its tallgrass prairie habitat within brown becoming lighter and showing August (Derkovitz, pers. comm. 2013; that area is estimated to be between 82– yellow powderings near the inner LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 4; Bird 1917, p. 99 percent (Samson and Knopf 1994, p. margin, a yellowish white dot at the 127). During the time that the larvae are 418). Most high-quality prairies that base, and a powdery yellow patch at the actively boring into the host plant, remain are small and scattered across apex (Bird 1917, p. 125). The middle of researchers have detected cannibalistic the landscape (Robertson et al. 1997, p. the forewing contains several distinct behavior with some caterpillars moving 63). In 1997, Robertson et al. (1997, p. white and yellow spots (Bird 1917, p. into already occupied bore holes, killing 63) cited the Illinois Natural Areas 125). The hind wing is duller than the the occupant and pushing them back Inventory, which found that of the 253 forewing and is described by Bird (1917, out (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 4). grade A and B (high-quality) prairies p. 125) as smoky fawn overlaid with Rattlesnake-master borer moths identified, 83 percent were smaller than dark purplish powderings becoming diapause in the chamber they create in 10 acres (4 hectares) and 30 percent darker at the margin. Male rattlesnake- the host plant and pupation appears to were smaller than 1 acre (0.4 hectares). master borer moths have distinctively take place either inside the chamber or Most prairie destruction occurred identifiable genitalia, which allow in the soil and lasts 2–3 weeks between 1840 and 1900 (Robertson et al. distinction from other Papaipema (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.; LaGesse 1997, p. 63).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49424 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Distribution and Status plants.usda.gov/java/), it is likely the Larval surveys were conducted at the All but one of the currently known rattlesnake-master borer moth’s second Will County site (the railroad rattlesnake-master borer moth sites have historical range was larger than at siding site), with presence last been identified since 1994. Little present; however, not much data confirmed in 1997 (Illinois Natural historical data exists for this species supports its presence in other Midwest Heritage Database 2012). This site was from before 1994. Some, but not all, of States. There are no historical records described by researchers as being very the sites have had some subsequent and no known records of rattlesnake- small and with few host plants when it survey work to monitor individual master borer moth in Indiana, although was surveyed in 1997 (Derkovitz 2013, populations. surveys have been conducted at several pers. comm.). The population of Surveys for rattlesnake-master borer sites where the host plant occurs rattlesnake-master borer moths on this moths are conducted for both the adult (Okajima 2012, pers. comm.). In site is under private ownership of the and larval stage. Surveying for adult Missouri, experts have examined railroad, however, it is contiguous with moths can be limiting, due to their numerous Papaipema specimens an Illinois State Nature Preserve sedentary nature, relatively short flight without finding any collections of (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.). During a time, and the potential difficulties of rattlesnake-master borer moth larval survey in 2008, researchers found (McKenzie 2012, pers. comm.). Experts no signs of rattlesnake-master borer surveying at night when the moths are indicate that, given the abundance of moths and suggested they may be active (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; the host plant in Missouri, the species extirpated from the site (Illinois Natural Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 19; LaGesse et possibly occurs in Missouri and has not Heritage Database 2012). Based on this al. 2009, p. 7; Metzler et al. 2005, p. 59). been detected (McKenzie 2012, pers. information, we consider the status of The usual survey method for comm.). There are also no historical or the species on this site to be unknown. Papaipema moths is with blacklight known records for Iowa (Howell 2013, The presence of rattlesnake-master traps, although some researchers have pers. comm.). Below we present specific borer moths was confirmed on three found that rattlesnake-master borer occurrence information across the 5 other railroad siding prairies, one each moth may not be attracted to blacklights States where the species is currently in Livingston, Kankakee, and Grundy (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; LaGesse et known to occur. Counties (Illinois Natural Heritage al. 2009, p. 4). It is difficult to determine Database 2012). The information on the population size based on capture of Illinois Kankakee railroad siding is limited, adults, due to their irregular attraction The State of Illinois has the most although the species was confirmed on to blacklights and the difficulty of rattlesnake-master borer moth sites. At the site in 1997 (Illinois Natural designing a study that would factor in this time, 10 known sites contain Heritage Database 2012). Not much is how many adults may be flying at a rattlesnake-master borer moths in 8 known about the Livingston County site given time and how far they may range Illinois counties (Will, Cook, Grundy, since the presence of the moth was (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; Schweitzer Livingston, Kankakee, Marion, detected here in 2001, as there have et al. 2011, p. 19; LaGesse et al. 2009, Effingham, and Fayette). Nine of the been no other known surveys of the site p. 7). known sites are thought to have extant (Illinois Natural Heritage Database Larval surveys are conducted by populations and one is unknown. When 2012). Larvae were first detected on the searching the host plant for signs of Bird (1917, p. 124) first described the Grundy County railroad siding in 1997, boring (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 7). species, specimens were collected from and presence of the species at the site Rattlesnake-master show signs of stress the Chicago area, and five of the sites was most recently confirmed in 2012 that indicate the occupancy of the root with extant populations are still found (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.). Like the by rattlesnake-master borer larvae, close to the city of Chicago (Will, Cook, railroad siding prairie in Will County, which usually leave a pile of frass Grundy, Livingston, and Kankakee these three sites are in private (excrement) below the bore hole Counties). There are two known sites in ownership and the unmanaged– (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; Hall 2012, Will County—one of these sites is populations are considered extant at pers. comm.). One benefit of larval owned by the Illinois Department of these sites. surveys is that these surveys can be Natural Resources (IDNR) and is extant, A second site owned by the Illinois conducted for a longer time because and the other is in railroad siding in DNR is located in Grundy County. The evidence of larval infestation remains private and State ownership and its rattlesnake-master borer moth was first even after emergence (Schweitzer et al. population status is unknown. The found in this site in 1990, with 2011, p. 13). Researchers will often population of rattlesnake-master borer subsequent surveys in 1991, 1993, 1995, collect rattlesnake-master borer moth moths within the IDNR site is thought 1996, and 2003 (Illinois Natural larvae and rear them to adulthood to to be stable (Derkovitz 2013, pers. Heritage Database 2012). Although an confirm identification, as other similar comm.). Surveys of both adults and extensive survey of the population has species have been found in rattlesnake- larvae have been conducted on this site, not been done on this site, it is master (such as the silphium borer moth with the most recent larval survey in protected and managed, with the last (Papaipema silphii)) (Wiker 2013, pers. 2012 (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.). prescribed burn occurring in 2011 comm.). Much of the available census This Will County site is protected and (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.). Poaching data for rattlesnake-master borer moths managed with prescribed burning to of rattlesnake-master borer moths has does not indicate the size or stability of control woody species (Derkovitz 2013, occurred on this site, and so the location the populations, but indicate only the pers. comm.). Although researchers of the population is kept undisclosed continued presence or absence of the have not found a decline of the moths (Illinois Natural Heritage Database species in a specific area. within this site, poachers have removed 2012). The rattlesnake-master borer The rattlesnake-master borer moth is individuals in the past and the location moth population on this Grundy County currently known to occur in five States: of the population is kept undisclosed for site is considered to be extant. Illinois, Arkansas, Kentucky, North this reason (Derkovitz 2013, pers. One other known population of Carolina, and Oklahoma. Given that its comm.). Based on this information, we rattlesnake-master borer moth close to food plant ranges across 26 States consider the status of the species to be Chicago occurs in Cook County, with (USDA Plants Web site 2013, http:// extant on this site. rattlesnake-master borer moths

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49425

introduced to the site in 1998 (Derkovitz rattlesnake-master across the 3 sites boring was found in rattlesnake-master 2013, pers. comm.; Illinois Natural discovered in 2008 and found that 33 in Fayette County in 2009, the areas Heritage Database 2012). This site is were inhabited by rattlesnake-master were subsequently flooded due to heavy owned and managed by Northeastern borer moths (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). rain events (LaGesse and Walk 2010, Illinois University and larval surveys Although some populations were unpaginated). have been conducted each year since it probably undetected, they estimated the Kentucky was introduced to the site (Derkovitz overall population of rattlesnake-master 2013, pers. comm.). Area managers have borer moths to be approximately 4,600 The rattlesnake-master borer moth is found that the rattlesnake-master borer (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 6). known from two sites in Kentucky, one moths within this area are scattered into Management is conducted on all three each in Christian and Hardin Counties. several small populations that have of these sites in order to conserve and The Christian County site is known stayed approximately the same size sustain the prairie communities. from a single occurrence prior to 1999, since 1998 (Derkovitz 2013, pers. Prescribed fire is used on all of the sites, but researchers have not found any sign comm.). This site is considered to have and the 65-hectare (160-acre) IDNR area of boring in rattlesnake-master in recent an extant population. also includes grazing to stimulate years (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). In 2008, populations of rattlesnake- structural openings for prairie birds The succession to woody plants has master borer moths were found for the (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). Researchers changed the composition of the plant first time in Marion and Effingham found that the grazing practices likely community on site and experts believe Counties in southern Illinois (LaGesse did not impact the rattlesnake-master that rattlesnake-master borer moth has and Wiker 2008, pp. 7–8). The presence borer moth population (see Factor A and been extirpated from the site of the moth was confirmed at three sites E discussion in this finding). All three (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). The through larval surveys; two sites within of the sites in southern Illinois are Hardin County site is thought to be IDNR prairie areas in Marion County, considered to contain extant extant based on larval counts dating and one within scenic right-of-way populations. back to 2003, with researchers finding sections of a privately owned railroad In 2009, an application of herbicide between 100 and 500 feeding larvae siding that spans through Marion and affected populations of rattlesnake- during each survey year (Laudermilk Effingham Counties (LaGesse and Wiker master in the railroad siding prairie 2012, pers. comm.). A comprehensive 2008, pp. 7–8). The railroad prairie is a (LaGesse and Walk 2010, unpaginated). survey in 2008 indicated the largest large, linear prairie that covers Consequently, in 2010 researchers number of feeding larvae found at that approximately 64 hectares (158 acres) surveyed the railroad prairie areas using site was approximately 500. The site has (Dietrich et al. 1996, p. 2). Of the two the same techniques from 2009 in order a wide distribution of rattlesnake- IDNR owned properties, one is a 65- to estimate and map the population of master, although the moth has shown a hectare (160-acre) relict prairie area and rattlesnake-master and rattlesnake- clumped distribution (Laudermilk 2012, the other is a 16 hectare (40-acre) prairie master borer moths and compare them pers. comm.). This site is secure and its restoration, which contains the only to the findings from 2009 (LaGesse and population considered extant, although known rattlesnake-master borer moth Walk 2010, unpaginated). LaGesse and its location is undisclosed due to population that is not in a relict habitat Walk (2010, unpaginated) found that 2 concern of collection of the species. rattlesnake-master populations were area (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). The Arkansas number of bored rattlesnake-master completely destroyed and 19 declined plants was estimated to be between between 2009 and 2010. Researchers The rattlesnake-master borer moth 200–250 on one IDNR site and the other found that both the overall population was first discovered on two sites in contained between 250–300 bored of rattlesnake-master and the density of Arkansas in 1997, one each in Pulaski plants (LaGesse and Wiker 2008, pp. 7– the plants declined (LaGesse and Walk and Jefferson Counties (Weaver and 8). The railroad site contained between 2010, unpaginated). Boos 1998, p. 8; Weaver and Boos 1997, 5 and 10 bored plants (containing Fourteen populations of rattlesnake- p. 8). The Jefferson County site is evidence of larval boring) and 15–20 master borer moths with a total of 112 located on the Pine Bluff Arsenal, where bored plants (LaGesse and Wiker 2008, caterpillars were detected in 2010 populations of the species were found pp. 7–8). (LaGesse and Walk 2010, unpaginated). in dry mesic savanna remnants (Zollner In 2009, researchers returned to each One-third of the nine populations of 2013, pers. comm.; Weaver and Boos of these sites to map and estimate the rattlesnake-master borer moths surveyed 1998, p. 8). Researchers found the populations and establish monitoring in 2009 declined; however, nine new rattlesnake-master borer moths in small protocols (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 3). populations were identified during the subpopulations of 3–12 individuals Survey methods included marking and 2010 survey (LaGesse and Walk 2010, scattered throughout the patches of outlining the perimeter of each unpaginated). Due to an expanded rattlesnake-master within the savanna rattlesnake-master subpopulation, survey area, researchers also identified remnants (Weaver and Boos 1998, p. 9). flagging all plants that had signs of an additional 24 populations of Surveys were also conducted within a being bored by rattlesnake-master borer rattlesnake-master during the 2010 railroad prairie on the Arsenal moths, and mapping the locations survey in Marion, Fayette, and containing many rattlesnake-master (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). Individual Effingham Counties (LaGesse and Walk plants, but the moth was not found plants that had evidence of rattlesnake- 2010, unpaginated). Within these new there; it has not been found since the master borer moth damage were counted stands of rattlesnake-master, they found 1997 survey and researchers suggested within each subpopulation, except for 7 new populations of rattlesnake-master that the fire regime in this area may be one subpopulation that was too large for borer moths with a total of 41 suppressing the colonization of this area such a count (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). caterpillars. The five populations of by the moth (Zollner 2013, pers. comm.; A sampling method was established to rattlesnake-master borer moth identified Weaver and Boos 1998, pp. 16–17). estimate the population within this within Fayette County in 2010 were the Since the 1997 survey, one of the areas large population of rattlesnake-master first recorded occurrence of the moth for containing rattlesnake-master borer (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 5). Researchers this county (LaGesse and Walk 2010, moths has been developed and an surveyed 67 subpopulations of unpaginated). Although evidence of incinerator built on the area (Zollner

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49426 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

2013, pers. comm.). The other savanna prairie area on the Air Force Base is The moth was first identified from a remnants remain and have been unknown. single adult on this site in 1994 (Hall 2012, pers. comm.; Schweitzer et al. surveyed for evidence of rattlesnake- Oklahoma master borer moth larva every year since 2011, p. 351). A prescribed burn was it was discovered (Zollner 2013, pers. One known location of rattlesnake- conducted on the site soon after the comm.). These annual surveys indicate master borer moth is in Oklahoma, in 1994 collection, and a subsequent Osage County (LaGesse 2013, pers. that the population has stayed stable survey resulted in location of one larva comm.). During surveys conducted with generally the same number of during the summer of 1995 (Hall 2012, between 2000 and 2005, three larvae found, but always fewer than 20 pers. comm.; Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. populations were found within The 351). A 2002 survey of approximately individuals (Zollner 2013, pers. comm.). Nature Conservancy’s Tallgrass Nature This area is managed yearly with 80–100 rattlesnake-master plants for Preserve, approximately 2–4 miles (3–6 larval feeding damage resulted in only rotational prescribed burning, usually km) apart (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.). before April 15 (Zollner 2013, pers. one hole, indicating possible The first population to be studied on the occupancy, however, no frass was found comm.). The Pine Bluff Arsenal site is Preserve had approximately 200 considered extant. outside of the hole, which is a more individuals. Later, the two other reliable sign of larvae inhabitance (Hall The Pulaski County site is located populations were found, both with 2012, pers. comm.). No surveys have within a mesic prairie area on the Little approximately 50 individuals (LaGesse occurred in the area since 2002 to verify Rock Air Force Base (Weaver and Boos 2013, pers. comm.). The prairie the status of the population, so the 1997, p. 8). The 1997 survey is the only community on the entire site is status of the population on this site is survey conducted within this site managed with grazing bison and a considered unknown. randomized prescribed fire regime (Popham 2013, pers. comm.; Zollner In summary, the rattlesnake-master 2013, pers. comm.). Because of its designed to mimic the natural forces found on site prior to settlement borer moth currently occurs in five proximity to the airfield and States: Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, implementation of Bird Aircraft Strike (Hamilton 2013, pers. comm.). Although no surveys have been conducted on site Oklahoma, and North Carolina. Within Hazard rules, the prairie is mowed since 2005, the management of the area these states, 16 sites have confirmed annually, which is the same is unchanged, so this site is considered populations of the moth since 1993 management regime conducted onsite extant. (Table 1). Of these sites, 12 are when rattlesnake-master was found in considered to be extant, 3 unknown, 1997 (Popham 2013, pers. comm.). North Carolina and 1 is considered to be extirpated. Rattlesnake-master is known to occur in Rattlesnake-master borer moth is Given the range of the food plant and other areas of the Air Force Base; known from a pine barrens, which is the relatively recent discovery of all of however, this prairie remnant is the owned and managed by the State, in the known populations, the range of the only area where the moth has been Pender County, North Carolina (Hall moth is possibly greater within these detected (Popham 2013, pers. comm.) 2013, pers. comm.; Hall 2012, pers. five States and within other States The status of the population and the comm.; Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 351). where rattlesnake-master is found.

TABLE 1—RATTLESNAKE-MASTER BORER MOTH STATUS AT ALL KNOWN SITES

Date of last State Site description County Current status observation

Illinois ...... IDNR Site ...... Will ...... Extant ...... 2012 Illinois ...... railroad siding ...... Will ...... Unknown ...... 1997 Illinois ...... railroad siding ...... Livingston ...... Extant ...... 2001 Illinois ...... railroad siding ...... Grundy ...... Extant ...... 2012 Illinois ...... IDNR ...... Grundy ...... Extant ...... 2003 Illinois ...... railroad siding ...... Kankakee ...... Extant ...... 1997 Illinois ...... Northeastern Illinois University ...... Cook ...... Extant ...... 2012 Illinois ...... IDNR ...... Marion ...... Extant ...... 2009 Illinois ...... IDNR ...... Marion ...... Extant ...... 2009 Illinois ...... railroad siding ...... Marion, Effingham, Fayette ...... Extant ...... 2010 Kentucky ...... Christian ...... Extirpated ...... 1999 Kentucky ...... Hardin ...... Extant ...... 2008 Arkansas ...... Pine Bluff ...... Jefferson ...... Extant ...... 2012 Arkansas ...... Little Rock Air Force Base ...... Pulaski ...... Unknown ...... 1997 Oklahoma ...... The Nature Conservancy ...... Osage ...... Extant ...... 2005 North Carolina ...... Pine Barrens ...... Pender ...... Unknown ...... 2002

Summary of Information Pertaining to 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be (C) Disease or predation; the Five Factors determined to be endangered or (D) The inadequacy of existing threatened based on any of the regulatory mechanisms; or Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) following five factors: (E) Other natural or manmade factors and implementing regulations (50 CFR (A) The present or threatened affecting its continued existence. 424) set forth procedures for adding destruction, modification, or In making this finding, information species to, removing species from, or curtailment of its habitat or range; pertaining to the rattlesnake-master reclassifying species on the Federal (B) Overutilization for commercial, borer moth in relation to the five factors Lists of Endangered and Threatened recreational, scientific, or educational provided in section 4(a)(1) of the Act is Wildlife and Plants. Under section purposes; discussed below. In considering what

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49427

factors might constitute threats to a prairie patches that support the (Popham 2013, pers. comm.). Although species, we must look beyond the remaining rattlesnake-master borer moth researchers did not find rattlesnake- exposure of the species to a particular populations will not support their food master borer moths within this savanna factor to evaluate whether the species plant, rattlesnake-master, making these area in 1997, removal of this area would may respond to that factor in a way that expansive areas uninhabitable to the decrease the opportunity of the moth to causes actual impacts to the species. If moth. expand into other habitat. there is exposure to a factor and the The conservation of good-quality In Illinois, several of the populations species responds negatively, the factor prairie habitat is important for are close to Chicago and are within may be a threat and, during the status rattlesnake-master borer moth urban areas; however, all of those that review, we attempt to determine how populations, especially those that are are not railroad sidings are managed to significant a threat it is. The threat is small and isolated, which would not be maintain the prairie habitat and are significant if it drives, or contributes to, recolonized if they were extirpated. The currently protected from development. the risk of extinction of the species such loss of prairie habitat and the A high-speed rail project planned from that the species warrants listing as an degradation and destruction of remnant Chicago, Illinois, to St. Louis, Missouri, endangered or threatened species as habitat occurs in many ways, including may impact rattlesnake-master borer those terms are defined in the Act. but not limited to development, fire, populations located within railroad However, the identification of factors flooding, invasive species sidings. According to the U.S. that could impact a species negatively encroachment, and succession, which Department of Transportation (USDOT) may not be sufficient to compel a are discussed in further detail below. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (2012, pp. 5–34), all proposed finding that the species warrants listing. Conversion of Prairie for Agriculture The information must include evidence alternatives would impact sufficient to suggest that these factors Since Euro-American settlement, approximately 94 hectares (233 acres) of are operative threats that act on the conversion of prairie for agriculture is prairie remnants. The populations of species to the point that the species may the most significant factor in the decline rattlesnake-master borer moth occurring meet the definition of an endangered or of American grasslands, and, thus, that within the railroad sidings in Will, threatened species under the Act. of the rattlesnake-master borer moth. Livingston, and Grundy Counties are According to Samson and Knoff (1994, located along the same Union Pacific Factor A. The Present or Threatened p. 419), by 1994, tallgrass prairie had railroad track that has been identified in Destruction, Modification, or declined 99.9 percent from historical all of the build alternatives in the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range levels in Illinois, Iowa, and Indiana and USDOT EIS (USDOT EIS 2012, Rattlesnake-master borer moths are 99.5 percent in Missouri. Warner (1994) Appendix A). monophagous, feeding exclusively on studied the transition of land use in Although not all of the project plans the prairie plant, rattlesnake-master Illinois since 1800. He found that have been finalized, potential (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 351; LaGesse between 1820 and 1920, Illinois went construction impacts to the railroad et al. 2009, p. 4; Panzer 2002, p. 1298; from almost two-thirds of the State siding prairies included in the EIS Molano-Florez 2001, p. 1; Panzer et al. covered with prairie to less than 1 include construction of a second rail in 1995, p. 115; Mohlenbrock 1986, p. 34; percent (Warner 1994, p. 149). With the order to provide double tracking for the Hessel 1954, p. 59; Forbes 1954, p. 198; onset of intensive row-cropping after the entire alignment and construction of a Bird 1917, p. 124). Although the overall 1950s, Illinois saw declines in parallel maintenance road along the range of rattlesnake-master is large diversified farming practices that alignment, both of which could impact (occurring in 26 States), the plant’s included grazing of livestock on populations of rattlesnake-master borer relative densities in prairie are low, grasslands, leading to even further moth (USDOT EIS 2012, pp. 3–19). making up 1 percent of the prairie flora losses of grasslands (Warner 1994, p. Surveys will be conducted in the (Danderson and Molano-Flores 2010, p. 150). The loss of grasslands has been coming years to identify all rattlesnake- 235; Molano-Flores 2001, p. 1). precipitous and has followed the master borer moth populations in these Rattlesnake-master is not known to settlement of the Midwest and the areas and potentially translocate occur in disturbed areas, and the expansion and modernization of individuals out of the construction zone extensive loss of undisturbed prairie in farming practices. The current threat of (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.). There are the United States has resulted in the such conversion to extant populations is some indications that construction of remaining remnants that could support not well known and may now be the second track may impact the entire rattlesnake-master generally to be small secondary to other threats. west side of the current alignment, and isolated. The rattlesnake-master effectively removing half of the prairie Nonagricultural Conversion of Prairie borer moth’s dependence on rattlesnake- habitat in some places (LaGesse 2013, master as its only larval food source The conversion of remaining prairie pers. comm.). makes the moth’s potential habitat very remnants for nonagricultural purposes narrow, which is likely limiting for this continues to be a threat for some of the Fire species. In their multiyear study, Panzer rattlesnake-master borer moth sites. Rattlesnake-master borer moth et al. (1995, p. 102) gauged the levels of Both Arkansas sites are within military populations existed historically in a vast remnant dependence (limited to natural installations and are under pressure of ecosystem maintained in part by fire. area remnants) for 22 families and 6 potential changes in land-use based on Although prairie insects are adapted to genera of insects around the Chicago, base priorities. An incinerator was fire in some ways, experts suggest that Illinois, area and provided a list of constructed on top of one site prescribed burns that are conducted remnant dependent species. They containing rattlesnake-master borer frequently and cover entire insect determined that rattlesnake-master borer moth within the Pine Bluff Arsenal populations can be detrimental moths are highly dependent on remnant (Zollner 2013, pers. comm.). Air Force (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 42). The patches of native prairie, not finding officials are considering allowing rattlesnake-master borer moth is them in any disturbed areas (Panzer et development in one area of the Little restricted in population size and al. 1995, p. 115). The disturbed area Rock Air Force Base that contains distribution and thus is sensitive to between the widely scattered remnant populations of rattlesnake-master management activities that are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49428 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

implemented across an entire site, such (2003, p. 19) found better survivorship addition of burning of these small as fire (Panzer 2002, p. 1298). In his on larger patches burned, with patches of prairie habitat, they are 2002 study, Panzer (2002, pp. 1296– individuals surviving in all of the subject to succession and the buildup of 1306) examined the recovery rate of fire- populations that were between 8 m2 and plant litter (Swengel 1998, p. 77). sensitive insects by assessing their post- less than 16 m2 (86 and 172 ft2), and Although found commonly in fire response. Panzer (2002, p. 1306) between 16 m2 and less than 32 m2 (172 undisturbed remnant prairies, identified four life history traits of duff- and 344 ft2) (two out of two for each). rattlesnake-master is a highly dwelling insects such as rattlesnake- A prescribed burn conducted in 1994 conservative species and has been found master borer moth that were good affected the entire population of to have relative frequencies in restored predictors of a negative response to fire: rattlesnake-master borer moth at the and relict prairies of less than 1 percent (1) Remnant dependence (occurring as North Carolina site (Hall 2012, pers. (Danderson and Molano-Flores 2010, p. small, isolated populations); (2) upland comm., Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 351). 235; Molano-Flores 2001, p. 1). Given its inhabitance (dry uplands burn more The subsequent 1995 survey resulted in dependence on its host plant, proper thoroughly than wetter habitats); (3) location of one larva, and the only other fire management relative to the needs of nonvagility (low recolonization rate); survey of the site (conducted in 2002) its host plant and to retain prairie and (4) univoltine (slower recovery rates resulted in the detection of one habitat is very important for rattlesnake- for species with only one generation per potential bore hole (Hall 2012, pers. master borer moths. year). He said that species exhibiting comm.). The presence of individual Of the 16 known rattlesnake-master one or more traits should be considered rattlesnake-master borer moths in areas borer moth sites, 10 are or have been fire-sensitive and species with all four that are completely burned indicates managed with fire. The prairie traits should be considered that in situ survival likely does community on the entire Tallgrass ‘‘hypersensitive’’ to fire (Panzer 2002, p. contribute to the recovery of a Prairie Preserve in Oklahoma is 1306). The rattlesnake-master borer population after a burn (Panzer 2003, p. managed with a randomized prescribed moth exhibits all four of these traits and 20); however, it is unknown if they can fire regime that includes grazing thus, according to Panzer (2002, p. sustain themselves with repeated burns designed to mimic the natural forces 1306), is hypersensitive to fire. without recolonization. found on site prior to settlement He indicated that univoltine, duff- The effects of fire on individual (Hamilton 2013, pers. comm.). In inhabiting species like Papaipema rattlesnake-master borer moth Illinois, six sites are protected (four in moths should be considered especially populations are difficult to ascertain as State ownership, one owned by susceptible to extirpation from fire populations differ in size, density, and Northeastern Illinois University, and (Panzer 2002, p. 1298). Adult type of habitat they occupy. Also, some one private but managed as a natural rattlesnake-master borer moths are not populations may be under stress from area) and managed with prescribed fire, known to disperse widely and are other threats making the effects of fire and all have extant populations that are thought to be relatively sedentary more detrimental (Panzer 1988, p. 87). considered stable. These sites are making adults more vulnerable to fire The fire sensitivity of rattlesnake-master comparatively large and range from (Panzer 2003, p. 18; LaGesse et. al 2009, borer moth indicates that fire is a threat 1,700 acres (688 hectares) to the p. 4). They lay their eggs close to the in habitats burned too frequently or too smallest at 40 acres (16 hectares), and host plant where they overwinter in the broadly. In order to reap the benefits of all contain scattered populations of duff making the eggs and first instars fire to habitat quality, rattlesnake-master rattlesnake-master borer moths within susceptible to burns conducted from borer moths must either survive in the sites (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.; late fall to late spring before larvae have numbers sufficient to rebuild LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.). a chance to bore into the root of the populations after the fire or recolonize The savanna remnants within the plant (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.; the area from a nearby unburned area Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas where LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 4; Bird 1917, p. (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 251; Panzer rattlesnake-master borer moth are found 126). They are more resistant to the 2003, p. 19; Panzer 1988, p. 88). In are also managed with fire (Zollner effect of fire during summer months addition, the return interval of fires 2013, pers. comm.). This area is after they have bored into the root and needs to be infrequent enough to allow managed yearly with rotational are below ground. for recovery of the populations between prescribed burning usually before April Rattlesnake-master borer moths were burns. Panzer indicates that burn 15 (Zollner 2013, pers. comm.). Annual one of the species included in Panzer’s programs that do not provide surveys at the Pine Bluff Arsenal (2003, p. 18) study of the importance of sanctuaries for fire-sensitive species, indicate that the population has stayed in situ survival, recolonization, and especially on small sites, will contribute stable, with generally the same number habitat gaps in the post-fire recovery of to their loss across the landscape of larvae found, but always fewer than fire-sensitive prairie insects. Panzer (Panzer 2003, p. 20). Prescribed burns 20 individuals (Zollner 2013, pers. studied the in situ survivorship of that are designed to leave some patches comm.). The use of prescribed fire in the rattlesnake-master borer moths after of unburned habitat (by burning when it relatively large prairie remnants burning 100 percent of the available is wet or cool) may provide additional described above appears to be habitat for some small populations that in situ survival, which may be maintaining the prairie ecosystem at the were at least 200 m (656 ft) from important for fire-sensitive species on sites without impacting the overall potential recolonization sources (2003, small sites (Panzer 2003, p. 20). population of rattlesnake-master borer p. 18). Larval surveys were conducted to Complete fire suppression, however, moths. The pine barrens site in North detect the presence of rattlesnake-master can lead to the decline of prairie habitat, Carolina is comparably smaller and is borer moths in order to eliminate the as well as savanna and pine barrens, as all located within one burn unit (Hall potential of detecting adults that may be woody species become established 2013, pers. comm.). The entire area was recolonizing from other areas. Larvae (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 40; Panzer burned in 1994, which may have were found in one out of two of the and Schwartz 2000, p. 363). The natural impacted the rattlesnake-master borer smallest populations burned that were fire processes that once maintained moth population as only one larva was between 4 m2 and less than 8 m2 (43 prairie habitat have been altered by the found during the subsequent survey in and 86 ft2) (Panzer 2003, p. 19). Panzer modern landscape and without the 1995, and evidence of only one borer

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49429

hole was found in 2001 (Hall 2012, pers. (Hamilton 2013, pers. comm.). The (e.g., smooth brome) (McCabe 1981, p. comm.; Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 351). prescribed fire regime within the bison 191; Dana 1997, p. 5; Higgins et al. 2000, Surveys were also conducted within a unit is randomized, and managers of the p. 21; Skadsen 2003, p. 52). Panzer and railroad prairie on the Pine Bluff Preserve have found that bison generally Schwartz (2000, p. 367) found a higher Arsenal which contains many graze in newly burned areas during the density of rattlesnake-master borer rattlesnake-master plants, but the moth growing season in order to take moths within fire-managed populations has never been found there, either advantage of the increased forage than fire-excluded populations in during the 1997 survey or subsequent quality of the new regrowth (Hamilton Illinois. Several sites with rattlesnake- surveys, and researchers suggested that 2007, p. 168). Researchers have found master borer moths are not managed— the fire regime in this area may be that, before the introduction of the invasive species and woody suppressing the colonization of this area bison, the rattlesnake-master on the encroachment are threats to populations by the moth (Zollner 2013, pers. comm.; Preserve was located in small at those sites (Derkovitz 2013, pers. Weaver and Boos 1998, pp. 16–17). populations (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). At this time, it does not appear that comm.) The rattlesnake-master has The railroad siding prairies in Will, fire prescriptions for any of the spread since the introduction of the Grundy, and Livingston Counties, rattlesnake-master borer moth sites are bison, likely because the seeds of the Illinois, are all unmanaged and are designed to avoid burning while any of plant have evolved small hooks that under threat of invasion by woody plant the life stages (adult, egg, larva) are stick in the fur of the bison and are species, like buckthorn (Rhamnus spp.) located within the prairie duff layer or distributed as they range through the (Derkovitz 2013, pers. comm.). The are designed so that only portions of the Preserve (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.; succession to woody plants changed the rattlesnake-master borer moth LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 3). composition of the plant community on populations or its host plant are burned The cattle unit is approximately 526 one Kentucky site, resulting in the likely at one time. Research has shown that hectares (13,000 acres) and is managed extirpation of rattlesnake-master borer even when entire sites are burned, with experimental treatments including moths (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). rattlesnake-master borer moths can ‘‘patch burn’’ treatments initiated under Lack of management is considered to be survive in situ; however, given their research by Oklahoma State University a threat where the rattlesnake-master sensitivity to fire it is likely that in 2001 (Hamilton 2007, p. 168). It is not borer moth habitat is degraded or likely populations rely on recolonization from known whether there are populations of to become degraded due to secondary unburned sanctuaries. It is possible that rattlesnake-master borer moth or its host succession, invasive species, or both. not all of the populations on the larger plant in the cattle unit of the Preserve. This is likely the case at all six of the sites are being burned at once, given Cattle are used as grazing management sites where there is not ongoing that populations of rattlesnake-master on one of the Illinois DNR properties in management of the prairie. borer moth are not found in single order to create structure for grassland populations, but are scattered within the birds (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.). Flooding sites. Fire is a current and ongoing Cattle are allowed into the property for Flooding is a threat to at least two rangewide threat of high severity. Where approximately 60 days a year to ‘‘flash rattlesnake-master borer moth burns occur, the moths need a sufficient graze’’ the area (LaGesse 2013, pers. populations. Although evidence of amount of contiguous or nearby habitat comm.). In their 2008 survey of this boring was found in rattlesnake-master from which immigrants can reinhabit area, LaGesse and Wiker (2008, p. 8) in Fayette County, Illinois in 2009, the burned areas. found that cattle had consumed most of areas were subsequently flooded due to the flowering rattlesnake-master, but heavy rain events (LaGesse and Walk Grazing found no negative impacts to the 2010, unpaginated). These populations The productivity of prairie decreases rattlesnake-master borer moths. The were reconfirmed in 2010; however, as excess plant litter accumulates researchers note that when cattle were researchers believe this area will likely (Robertson et al. 1997, p. 57). Grazing introduced on a neighboring tract after continue to be affected by flooding in and fire were two natural disturbance the rattlesnake-master flowers had years of heavy rain (LaGesse 2013, pers. factors that historically maintained the hardened, they were not eaten (LaGesse comm.; LaGesse and Walk 2010, prairie ecosystem by removing some of and Wiker 2008, p. 8). They suggest that unpaginated). The two Illinois DNR this biomass (Robertson et al. 1997, p. introduction of cattle to a population of sites in Will and Grundy Counties have 56). Approximately 60 million plains rattlesnake-master after the flowers have been documented with standing water bison (Bison bison) once grazed hardened may protect them from being in wet springs, which may affect the throughout the Midwest prairie (Samson grazed and avoid a decrease in seed rattlesnake-master borer moth and Knopf 1994, p. 419). Wallowing by production (LaGesse and Wiker 2008, p. populations, depending on the duration bison and trampling by bison and cattle 8). In both of these examples, bison and and extent of the flooding (Derkovitz creates open areas that can increase cattle herds are managed so that there is 2013, pers. comm.). species richness and heterogeneity in no overgrazing. prairie (Robertson et al. 1997, p. 58). Herbicide Application Grazing is used as a management tool in Lack of Management, Succession, In 2009, an application of herbicide two of the rattlesnake-master borer moth Invasive Species affected populations of rattlesnake- sites; the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in While inappropriate or excessive master in the railroad siding prairie in Oklahoma and an IDNR owned property burning are threats to rattlesnake-master Marion, Effingham, and Fayette in Illinois. borer populations, the species is also Counties (LaGesse and Walk 2010, Both cattle and bison graze within the under threat where there is no unpaginated). LaGesse and Walk (2010, Tallgrass Prairie preserve, separated into management to maintain prairie unpaginated) found that 2 rattlesnake- two different units with different habitats. Without periodic disturbance, master populations were completely management regimes (Hamilton 2007, prairies are subject to expansion of destroyed and 19 declined between pp. 163–168). The 2,700 bison graze woody plant species (secondary 2009 and 2010. After comparing the freely throughout the entire 23,500 acres succession), litter accumulation, or data from 2009 and 2010, researchers (9,510 hectares) of the bison tract invasion by nonnative plant species found that both the overall population

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49430 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

of rattlesnake-master and the density of mortality to resident rattlesnake-master to the species’ small population size, the plants decline (LaGesse and Walk borer moths, causing a decline in some limited range, and the potential ease of 2010, unpaginated). The impact to the of the populations the following collection of larval individuals, food plant also affected the rattlesnake- summer. recreational collecting of this species master borer moths. Fourteen Of the 16 sites considered to be presents a threat now and in the future populations of rattlesnake-master borer occupied by the rattlesnake-master throughout its range. moths with a total of 112 caterpillars borer, all of the sites have at least one Conservation Efforts To Reduce were detected in 2010 with one-third of documented threat. Some sites have Overutilization for Commercial, the 9 populations of rattlesnake-master more than one threat, and concurrently Recreational, Scientific, or Educational borer moths surveyed declining from acting threats may have more intense Purposes 2009 to 2010 (LaGesse and Walk 2010, effects than any one threat acting unpaginated). independently. Almost all of the sites As discussed in Factor D: The with extant populations of rattlesnake- Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat master borer moth are isolated from one Mechanisms, the rattlesnake-master Destruction, Modification, or another, with populations in Kentucky, borer moths is listed as endangered on Curtailment of Its Range North Carolina, and Oklahoma Illinois’ State threatened and Seven of the 16 rattlesnake-master occurring within a single site for each endangered species list, and Scientific borer moth sites are currently owned State, preventing recolonization from Collectors Permits are required in order and managed by State conservation other populations. Of the sites that are to collect the species throughout the agencies, a university, or management currently protected from development State, providing protection for the entity that protects them from and are under management to maintain populations within the 10 Illinois sites. development. All of these sites have the prairie ecosystem, all of them utilize However, two of these Illinois sites are some sort of management regime that is management regimes (either burning or known to have had illegal collections. being implemented to maintain the grazing or both) that could potentially Seven of the rattlesnake-master borer prairie community that allows the impact individual rattlesnake-master moth populations, in North Carolina, subsistence of the species’ food plant borer moths and whole populations Illinois, and Oklahoma, are within and protects the site from encroachment depending on the timing, extent, and protected areas, and permission is of woody habitat. Six of the seven sites frequency of the events. Two of these required to collect specimens within all are maintained with fire, and the sites are also known to have standing of these sites. The species is not seventh is maintained with fire and water during large rain events in the specifically protected through State grazing. None of the management spring which may impact rattlesnake- laws in Kentucky, Arkansas, Oklahoma, regimes are specifically designed to master borer moths. or North Carolina, and we know of no avoid direct impacts to the species, proposals to add this requirement in the Factor B. Overutilization for although the largest sites (five in Illinois future, leaving the two sites in Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or and one in Oklahoma) have extant Kentucky, and the two sites in Arkansas Educational Purposes populations that appear to be stable. unprotected. Illegal collection of rattlesnake-master Summary of Factor A borer moths has been noted at two IDNR Factor C. Disease or Predation We have identified a number of managed sites in Illinois close to There are no known diseases that are threats to the habitat of the rattlesnake- Chicago (Derkovitz 2012, pers. comm.; specific to rattlesnake-master borer master borer moth that operated in the Illinois Natural Heritage Database 2012). moths, however, there is some evidence past, are impacting the species now, and The locations of these populations are of parasitism in the moth, and known will continue to impact the species in not publicized. Although there have parasitism of the host plant, rattlesnake- the future. The decline of the been no known poaching events within master. While parasitism has been rattlesnake-master borer moth is the the Kentucky sites, managers are found by researchers in rattlesnake- result of the long-lasting effects of concerned and indicate that this species master borer moth larvae, the species of habitat loss, fragmentation, degradation, is sought after by lepidopterists in that parasite is unknown (LaGesse 2013, and modification from agriculture, State and keep the location of that site pers. comm.). Eggs and larvae of development, flooding, invasive species, undisclosed (Laudermilk 2012, pers. parasitic species have been found using and secondary succession. Although comm.). Adult rattlesnake-master borer rattlesnake-master borer moth efforts have been made to effectively moths have been noted as hard to caterpillars as hosts, although at this manage habitat in some areas, the long- collect (see life history section); time there is no conclusive evidence of term effects of large-scale and wide- however, the host plant is easy to potential effects to the species or ranging habitat modification, identify, which could make locating the populations as a whole. destruction, and curtailment will last larvae easier and the species more Second and third instar rattlesnake- into the future. Development of a high- susceptible to collection (Schwietzer master borer moths have also been speed rail project in Illinois will likely 2011, p. 45). known to cannibalize each other. During impact three known populations of Some extant populations of the time that the larvae are actively rattlesnake-master in three counties, and rattlesnake-master borer moths are boring into the host plant, researchers development on the two military known to be very small and made up of have detected cannibalistic behavior installations in Arkansas has destroyed very few individuals. Because the host with some caterpillars moving into one population of the species and may plant is easily identifiable, it is already occupied bore holes, killing the impact the other. Fire and grazing cause conceivable that an entire population occupant, and pushing them back out direct mortality of the moth or destroy could be impacted by one collector if (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 4). food plants if the intensity, extent, or enough host plants are removed. The caterpillars of another species of timing is not conducive to the species’ Collection from the remaining small and moth, Coeotechnites eryngiella, are biology. The application of herbicides isolated populations could have known to bore into the seeds of affected several populations of deleterious effects on this species’ rattlesnake-master, sometimes affecting rattlesnake-master and caused direct reproductive and genetic viability. Due up to 60–70 percent of rattlesnake-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49431

master seeds (Danderson and Molano- proponents to assess the potential The U.S. Forest Service has Flores 2010, p. 235; LaGesse et al. 2009, effects of projects and potentially designated the rattlesnake-master borer p. 3; Molano-Flores 2001, p. 5). mitigate them (Illinois DNR Web site moth as a sensitive species in Region 9, Danderson and Molano-Flores (2010, p. 2013, http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/espb/ which includes the State of Illinois (U.S. 242) found that the herbivory of Pages/default.aspx). For development or Forest Service 2003, p. 4). At this time rattlesnake-master by C. eryngiella agency projects that are determined to there are no known populations of the causes a change in physical appearance affect listed species, an incidental take species within the Forest Service’s of the inflorescence and resulted in a permit is required (Illinois DNR Web lands, so the designation of sensitive decrease in flower visitation by site 2013, http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/ species status for this species will have pollinators. ESPB/Pages/EndangeredSpeciesPermits no benefit at this time. However, it may Summary of Factor C andIncidentalTake.aspx). be beneficial if populations are Project proponents for the proposed identified on Forest Service lands in the Available information indicates High Speed Rail project from Chicago, future. disease is not a threat to the rattlesnake- Illinois, to St. Louis, Missouri, are To summarize, existing regulatory master borer moth. There is evidence currently working through the State’s mechanisms, including State that parasitism and predation occur; consultation process, including endangered species statutes, provide however, the impacts to this species and requesting an incidental take permit for protection for 12 of the 16 sites its host plant rattlesnake-master are potential effects to rattlesnake-master containing rattlesnake-master borer unclear. Researchers have found that the borer moths in the alignment (LaGesse moth populations. Illinois provides parasitism of rattlesnake-master by 2013, pers. comm.). For researchers, a regulatory mechanisms to protect the rattlesnake-master borer moths and C. collection permit is required for the species from potential impacts from eryngiella can affect individual plants possession of specimens or products of actions such as development and and potentially whole populations. Illinois that are listed as threatened or collecting; however, illegal collections Some extant populations of rattlesnake- endangered, and additional permits are of the species have occurred at two master borer moths are known to be required for collection of any species sites. A permit is required for collection very small, made up of very few within the State’s parks, forests, and by site managers within the sites in individuals. It is possible that conservation areas, or Illinois Nature North Carolina and Oklahoma, although parasitism of the species by wasps and Preserves or registered Illinois Land and no statutory mechanisms protect the potentially the cannibalism by Water Reserves (IDNR Web site 2013, populations in North Carolina, individuals competing for host plants http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/ESPB/ Kentucky, Arkansas, or Oklahoma, may impact small populations of Pages/EndangeredSpeciesPermitsand which leaves privately owned sites in rattlesnake-master borer moths, IncidentalTake.aspx). Arkansas and Kentucky unprotected especially those that are also under from collection. stress from other threats. Available The rattlesnake-master borer moth is information indicates that disease, also listed as endangered in Kentucky Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade parasitism, and predation are not threats by the State’s Nature Preserves Factors Affecting Its Continued that have substantial impacts to Commission (Kentucky State Nature Existence Preserves Commission 2013, p. 35). At rattlesnake-master borer moth Habitat Fragmentation and Population individuals or populations. this time Kentucky legislature has not enacted any statute that provides legal Isolation Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing protection for species listed as Rattlesnake-master borer moths are Regulatory Mechanisms threatened or endangered (Laudermilk habitat specialists, which has a strong The rattlesnake-master borer moth is 2013, pers. comm.). negative effect on their distribution and listed as endangered by two States in The rattlesnake-master borer moth is abundance. The species is completely which it is found, Illinois and Kentucky. not protected in Arkansas as it has not dependent on prairie habitat and, more In Illinois, the moth is listed as been named to the State list of specifically, on a single larval food plant endangered under the Illinois threatened or endangered species and is species, rattlesnake-master. Habitat Endangered Species Protection Act, not named in the State’s Wildlife Action fragmentation has reduced the once which ‘‘prohibits the possession, taking, Plan as a Species of Greatest extensive prairie habitat to a collection transportation, sale, offer for sale, or Conservation Need (Arkansas Game and of isolated patches of varying quality. disposal of any listed animal or Fish Commission Web site 2013, http:// Most prairie remnants that remain have products of listed animals without a www.agfc.com/species/Pages/Species been or continue to be subjected to permit issued by the Department of Endangered.aspx; Anderson 2006, p. haying, grazing, dumping, fire Conservation’’ (Illinois Endangered 2028). It is also not protected under suppression, or succession, all of which Species Protection Board 2011, p. 7). State threatened and endangered species degrade prairie quality (Panzer 1988, p. The Illinois Endangered Species statutes in Oklahoma and North 83). Protection Board is responsible for Carolina (Oklahoma Department of Prairie remnant-dependent species, determining which species are listed in Wildlife Conservation Web site 2013, such as rattlesnake-master borer moths, the State and for advising the Illinois http://wildlifedepartment.com/wild are more susceptible to extinction from DNR on methods of protection and lifemgmt/endangeredspecies.htm; North stochastic events than other insects, due management of listed species (Illinois Carolina Wildlife Resources to their fluctuating population densities, DNR Web site 2013, http:// Commission 2008, p. 8). However, the poor dispersal abilities, and patchy www.dnr.illinois.gov/espb/Pages/ sites within these States are owned and distribution (Panzer 1988, p. 83). The default.aspx). The Illinois DNR office of managed by the State (in North potential for extirpation within patches Realty and Environmental Planning Carolina) and The Nature Conservancy is intensified by the addition of other administers the State’s threatened and (in Oklahoma) and require a collection threats such as development, fire, endangered species consultation permit within these two sites (Hall grazing, and succession. Rattlesnake- program and works with agencies, 2013, pers. comm.; Hamilton 2013, pers. master borer moths are not known to developers, and other project comm.). disperse widely and have been

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49432 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

described as ‘‘relatively sedentary’’ enough population sizes when they are climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ and (Panzer 2003, p. 18; LaGesse et al. 2009, under pressure from other threats to be ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the p. 4). Researchers believe that the able to produce enough adults to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate species will remain within a habitat immigrate to new areas. Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the patch unless the amount of rattlesnake- Even with proper prairie mean and variability of different types master becomes limiting and the moths management, extreme weather patterns of weather conditions over time, with 30 are forced to seek out additional food or severe weather events have the years being a typical period for such plants (LaGesse 2013, pers. comm.). The potential to significantly impact measurements, although shorter or moths also have relatively short flight rattlesnake-master borer moth longer periods also may be used (IPCC times of approximately 2 weeks and populations, because they can occur 2007, p. 78). The term ‘‘climate change’’ may only fly during the pheromone across a large geographic area. These thus refers to a change in the mean or ‘‘calling’’ times of the female, which events include extremely harsh winters, variability of one or more measures of may be only a couple of hours a night late hard frosts following a spring thaw, climate (e.g., temperature or (Wiker 2013, pers. comm.). Rattlesnake- severe storms, flooding, fire, or cool precipitation) that persists for an master borer moths within the Tallgrass damp conditions. Habitats isolated as a extended period, typically decades or Prairie Preserve in Oklahoma may have result of fragmentation will not be longer, whether the change is due to recolonized to habitat that was 2 miles recolonized naturally after local natural variability, human activity, or (3.2 km) from their original patch of extirpations, as described above, and both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types rattlesnake-master when the food plant extirpation of individual populations of changes in climate can have direct or became scarce (LaGesse 2013, pers. from catastrophic events is more likely indirect effects on species. These effects comm.). Recolonization like this is when they are isolated and widely may be positive, neutral, or negative and likely not possible for many of the spread. they may change over time, depending remaining populations of the species as Isolated populations like those of the on the species and other relevant they are isolated from one another, most rattlesnake-master borer moth likely do considerations, such as the effects of are surrounded by agricultural fields or not receive any immigration of interactions of climate with other urban areas with no connecting habitat, individuals from other populations. variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) and most are separated by distances Without sufficient gene flow, (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). In our greater than 2 miles (3.2 km). Species populations in small, fragmented analyses, we use our expert judgment to that are widely distributed in small habitats are unlikely to remain viable weigh relevant information, including populations are more susceptible to over the long term (Frankham et al. uncertainty, in our consideration of catastrophic events, and extirpations at 2009, p. 309). There have been no various aspects of climate change. genetic studies of the rattlesnake-master individual sites will be permanent if As is the case with all stressors that borer moth to date; however, there are no populations close enough we assess, even if we conclude that a populations within fragmented habitats, that can recolonize the area. species is currently affected or is likely like the rattlesnake-master borer moth, to be affected in a negative way by one Railroad siding prairies may afford are predicted to have lower genetic or more climate-related impacts, it does the species the most likely opportunity diversity than those that occur in not necessarily follow that the species for migration between populations or contiguous habitat, due to restricted meets the definition of an ‘‘endangered into new patches of rattlesnake-master, gene flow, genetic drift, and increased species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ as they contain the most contiguous inbreeding (Frankham et al. 2009, pp. under the Act. If a species is listed as habitat, sometimes spanning many 334–335). Reduced fitness (reduced endangered or threatened, knowledge miles. The large railroad prairie in genetic diversity) results in a reduced regarding the vulnerability of the Marion, Fayette, and Effingham ability to adapt to environmental change species to, and known or anticipated Counties contains long stretches of (Frankham et al. 2009, p. 523). impacts from, climate-associated connected habitat, with the entire Twelve of the known sites containing changes in environmental conditions prairie corridor stretching for 22 miles rattlesnake-master borer moth are can be used to help devise appropriate (35 km) (LaGesse et al. 2009, p. 6). considered isolated, as they are not strategies for its recovery. Although populations of the food plant connected by contiguous habitat to Global climate change, with are described as patchy within the other prairie containing rattlesnake- projections of increased variability in prairie habitat, this linear area affords master and are not likely to be weather patterns and greater frequency the species the opportunity to disperse recolonized by the low dispersing adult of severe weather events, as well as without having to traverse urban or rattlesnake-master borer moths. The warmer average temperatures, would agricultural environments. The railroad Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in Oklahoma affect remnant prairie habitats and may siding prairies in Will, Grundy, and represents the largest area of contiguous be a significant threat to prairie species Livingston Counties occur along the prairie habitat in which the rattlesnake- such as the rattlesnake-master borer same corridor, but the remnant prairie master borer moth exists, but there are moth (Royer and Marrone 1992b, p. 12, here is patchy and populations are no other known populations in 1992a, pp. 22–23, Swengel et al. 2011, described as being very small (Derkovitz Oklahoma. Due to the few numbers and p. 336, Landis et al. 2012, p. 140). 2013, pers. comm.; Illinois Natural small size of remaining populations, Rattlesnake-master borer moth habitat Heritage Database, 2012). Although the and their degree of isolation, habitat may experience the effects of gradual railroad prairies may afford the species fragmentation and isolation is a threat shifts in plant communities and an the most likely opportunity for that has significant impacts to the increase in catastrophic events (such as migration between populations, these rattlesnake-master borer moth across its severe storms, flooding, and fire) due to sites are not protected, are subject to range. climate change, which is exacerbated by development and other disturbance, and habitat fragmentation. The isolation of receive minimal or no management to Climate Change rattlesnake-master borer moth maintain the prairie habitat. Also, small Our analyses under the Endangered populations makes them unlikely to populations of rattlesnake-master borer Species Act include consideration of recover from local catastrophes without moths may not be able to maintain large ongoing and projected changes in artificial reintroduction or propagation,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49433

because they are not close enough to rattlesnake-master below the soil climate change to rattlesnake-master other populations for recolonization to surface. borer moths. occur. If not appropriately managed with Summary of Factor E Documentation of climate-related fire, grazing, or haying, rattlesnake- changes that have already occurred master borer moth habitat is degraded Rattlesnake-master borer moths are throughout the range of the rattlesnake- due to reduced diversity of native significantly affected by habitat master borer moth (e.g., Johnson et al. prairie plants and eventually succeeds fragmentation and population isolation. 2005, pp. 863–871) and predictions of to shrubby or forested habitats that are Most of the remaining populations of changes in annual temperature and not suitable for rattlesnake-master. the species are small and isolated, precipitation in the Midwest region of Rattlesnake-master borer moth has been making them vulnerable to stochastic the United States (Galatowitsch et al. extirpated from one site in Kentucky, events and increasing the potential for 2009, p. 2017), and throughout North likely due to the succession to woody extirpation from catastrophic events as America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) indicate that plants, which changed the composition natural recolonization from other populations is not possible. These increased severity and frequency of of the plant community on site making small, isolated populations are likely to droughts, floods, fires, and other it no longer suitable for the moth become unviable over time due to lower climate-related changes will continue in (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). Indiscriminate use of insecticides and genetic diversity reducing their ability the future. Recent studies have linked herbicides to control invasive species to adapt to environmental change climate change to observed or predicted and agricultural pests is also a threat to (Frankham et al. 2009, pp. 309–335). changes in distribution or population the species. In 2009, an application of Environmental effects resulting from size of insects, particularly Lepidoptera herbicide affected populations or climatic change, including increased (Wilson and Maclean 2011, p. 262). rattlesnake-master in the railroad siding flooding and drought, are expected to Climate change is an emerging threat prairie in Marion, Effingham, and become severe in the future and result and has the potential to have severe Fayette Counties (LaGesse and Walk in additional habitat losses. Although impacts on the species; however, at this 2010, unpaginated). LaGesse and Walk necessary for maintaining diverse time our knowledge of how these (2010, unpaginated) found that 2 prairie habitat and avoiding succession impacts may play out is limited. All of rattlesnake-master populations were and invasive species, some prairie the sites within the range of the species completely destroyed and 19 declined management techniques, such as fire are in an area that could experience the between 2009 and 2010. The decline in and grazing, may cause mortality and effects of climate change. the food plant impacted the rattlesnake- impact rattlesnake-master borer moth Prairie Management Techniques master borer moths populations, as populations if not administered three declined from 2009 to 2010 carefully. Collectively, these threats Native prairie must be managed to (LaGesse and Walk 2010, unpaginated). have operated in the past, are impacting prevent the indirect effects of invasive In summary, efforts to manage the species now, and will continue to species and succession from affecting invasive species and woody impact the species in the future across rattlesnake-master borer moth encroachment, such as fire, grazing, and its range. populations. If succession has herbicide use, is a threat to the Cumulative Effects From Factors A progressed too far, established shrubs or rattlesnake-master borer moth. These Through E. trees must be removed in a way that management techniques, if not avoids or minimizes damage to the administered with the species in mind, Many of the threats described in this native prairie. When succession is well can cause direct mortality and may finding may cumulatively or advanced, managers must use intensive impact whole populations. At least one synergistically impact rattlesnake- methods, including intensive fire management technique is being used or master borer moth beyond the scope of management, to restore prairie plant has been used on 10 of the 16 sites with each individual threat. For example, the communities. If not administered known populations of rattlesnake- use of prescribed fire may impact only carefully prescriptive methods such as master borer moths, and is occurring in some individual rattlesnake-master fire and grazing themselves can harm all 5 States. borer moths or small populations. local populations of rattlesnake-master However, populations that are small and borer moths (for example, see Factor A. Conservation Efforts To Reduce Other potentially unviable, that are already The Present or Threatened Destruction, Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting under threat from succession or invasive Modification, or Curtailment of Its Its Continued Existence species, coupled with an extensive Habitat or Range). Rattlesnake-master The conservation activities discussed drought, may collectively result in the borer moths are susceptible to the under Factor A Habitat Destruction, extirpation of individual populations, effects of prairie management Modification, or Curtailment of Its and potentially the continued loss or techniques much of the year because the Range may address some factors fragmentation of habitat across all of the eggs overwinter in the prairie duff, and discussed under Factor E. Of the sites species’ range. In turn, climate change early instars are located on the leaves that are protected and managed (four may exacerbate those effects, further and stems of the food plant and do not Illinois DNR sites, one Northeast Illinois diminishing habitat and increasing the bore beneath the surface of the soil into University site, the North Carolina site, isolation of already declining and the root ball until late June (LaGesse et and the Oklahoma Tallgrass Prairie isolated populations, making them more al. 2009, p. 4). The above life history Preserve site) all have some sort of susceptible to genetic drift or traits and the adults’ low dispersal management that is being implemented catastrophic events such as fire, ability make them susceptible to in order to maintain the prairie flooding, and drought. Almost all of the mortality from prescribed fires, except community in which the rattlesnake- 16 known rattlesnake-master borer moth when they have bored into the root of master borer moth lives. However, those populations are subject to two or more the host plant. Eggs and first instar plans are not specifically designed to threats outlined in Factors A through E. caterpillars are also more susceptible to avoid direct impacts to the moth. We are One site is isolated and surrounded by the effects of grazing cattle and bison unaware of any conservation efforts that urban landscape, has been subjected to before they bore into the root of the would directly address the impacts from illegal collecting, is managed with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49434 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

prescribed burning, and is known to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened magnitude, such as habitat conversion have standing water during high rain Wildlife and Plants. and fragmentation, and population events. Numerous threats are likely We reviewed the available isolation. These threats with the highest acting cumulatively and rangewide on information to determine if the existing magnitude occur in many of the the species. and foreseeable threats render the populations throughout the species’ species at risk of extinction now such range, but although they are likely to Finding that issuing an emergency regulation affect each population at some time, As required by the Act, we considered temporarily listing the species under they are not likely to affect all of the the five factors in assessing whether the section 4(b)(7) of the Act is warranted. populations at any one time. rattlesnake-master borer moth is a We determined that issuing an Rattlesnake-master borer moths are threatened or endangered species emergency regulation temporarily habitat specialists, feeding solely on throughout all of its range. We listing the species is not warranted for rattlesnake-master. Although examined the best scientific and this species at this time, because 5 of the rattlesnake-master is found in 26 States, commercial information available 16 known populations have some sort of the amount of tallgrass prairie in the regarding the past, present, and future protections or management in place. United States has declined by threats faced by the rattlesnake-master However, if at any time we determine approximately 82–99 percent (Samson borer moth. We reviewed the petition, that issuing an emergency regulation and Knopf 1994, p. 418), and information available in our files, and temporarily listing the rattlesnake- rattlesnake-master is generally not other available published and master borer moth is warranted, we will found in disturbed prairie. Much of the unpublished information, and we initiate this action at that time. remaining potential habitat that has not consulted with recognized rattlesnake- Listing Priority Number been converted for agricultural purposes master borer moth experts and other or developed in other ways is made up The Service adopted guidelines on Federal, State, and tribal agencies. of small remnant prairies that are September 21, 1983 (48 FR 43098), to widely scattered. These populations are This status review identified threats establish a rational system for using isolated, making each one individually to the rattlesnake-master borer moth available resources for the highest more likely to be extirpated if subjected attributable to Factors A, B, and E. The priority species when adding species to to stochastic and catastrophic events. primary threat to the species is from the Lists of Endangered or Threatened The small, isolated populations are also habitat destruction and modification Wildlife and Plants or reclassifying under threat of becoming unviable, as resulting in small, isolated populations species listed as endangered or they receive limited or no immigration that are subject to a greater risk of threatened species. These guidelines, of individuals from other populations. extirpation with little chance of titled ‘‘Endangered and Threatened recolonization (Factors A and E). The Species Listing and Recovery Priority Without sufficient gene flow, these species has been found to be fire- Guidelines’’ address the immediacy and populations will lose genetic diversity. sensitive and potentially affected by magnitude of threats, and the level of Other threats, such as agricultural and grazing activities, if they are conducted taxonomic distinctiveness by assigning nonagricultural development, mortality when life stages of the species are priority in descending order to from implementation of some prairie vulnerable, which is much of the year. monotypic genera (genus with one management tools, flooding, succession, Rattlesnake-master borer moths are species), full species, and subspecies (or and climate change are moderate to low dependent on one food plant, equivalently, distinct population threats because they affect only some rattlesnake-master, which is a segments of vertebrates). We assigned populations throughout the range. The conservative prairie species and not the rattlesnake-master borer moth a life history of rattlesnake-master borer generally found in disturbed habitats. Listing Priority Number (LPN) of 8 moths makes them highly sensitive to Rattlesnake-master borer moths are based on our finding that the species fire. Although a useful tool in currently not protected from collection faces threats that are moderate to low in maintaining prairie habitat and fighting or ‘‘take’’ in four of the five States in magnitude and are imminent. These succession, prescribed burning has the which it is found. Furthermore, threats include the destruction, potential to cause mortality of poaching has been documented at two modification, or curtailment of its individuals through most of the year sites owned by the Illinois DNR, where habitat and range, overutilization for and can affect entire populations. Ten of it is listed as a State endangered species. recreational or scientific purposes, the 16 sites with rattlesnake-master Due to the historical habitat loss, habitat fragmentation and population borer moths use fire as a management current populations are small and isolation, and the direct mortality from tool. Research has shown that even isolated and thus are not resilient to some prairie management techniques. when entire sites are burned, ongoing threats. This is the highest priority that can be rattlesnake-master borer moths can On the basis of the best scientific and provided to a species under our survive in situ. However, given their commercial information available, we guidance. Our rationale for assigning the sensitivity to fire, populations likely find that the petitioned action to list the rattlesnake-master borer moth an LPN of rely on recolonization from unburned rattlesnake-master borer moth as 8 is outlined below. areas. It is possible that not all of the threatened or endangered is warranted. Under the Service’s LPN Guidance, populations on the larger sites are being We will make a determination on the the magnitude of threat is the first burned at once, because populations of status of the species as an endangered criterion we look at when establishing a rattlesnake-master borer moth are or threatened species when we do a listing priority. The guidance indicates scattered within the sites. The proposed listing determination. that species with the highest magnitude population within the North Carolina However, as explained in more detail of threat are those species facing the site may have been impacted by this below, an immediate proposal of a greatest threats to their continued management tool as surveys conducted regulation implementing this action is existence. These species receive the after the 1994 fire that affected the precluded by higher priority listing highest listing priority. entire site showed evidence of only one actions, and progress is being made to Some threats that the rattlesnake- individual larva (Hall 2012, pers. add or remove qualified species from master moth faces are high in comm.). Conversely, complete fire

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49435

suppression can also be a threat to fragmentation and population isolation. Work on a proposed listing rattlesnake-master borer moths as One Arkansas population of the species determination for the rattlesnake-master prairie habitat declines and woody or was impacted by construction of an borer moth is precluded by work on invasive species become established incinerator on the Pine Bluff Arsenal, higher priority listing actions with (Schweitzer et al. 2011, p. 40; Panzer and three known populations in Illinois absolute statutory, court-ordered, or and Schwartz 2000, p. 363). The are under threat from the development court-approved deadlines and final rattlesnake-master is a conservative of a high-speed rail project. Fire is used listing determinations for those species plant species and not found in disturbed as a management tool on 10 of the that were proposed for listing with prairies (Danderson and Molano-Flores known populations, is not prescribed in funds from Fiscal Year 2013. This work 2010, p. 235; Molano-Flores 2001, p. 1). a way to avoid direct mortality to the includes all the actions listed in the The population of rattlesnake-master species, and is thought to have tables below under expeditious borer moth on one Kentucky site is adversely impacted the North Carolina progress. thought to have been extirpated due to population when it was burned entirely Preclusion and Expeditious Progress succession of the prairie to woody (Hall 2012, pers. comm.). species (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.) For those sites with no management, To make a finding that a particular Although conversion of prairie to succession is an ongoing threat. For action is warranted-but-precluded, the agricultural purposes has been example, experts believe that specific Service must make two findings: (1) precipitous, we have no indication that rattlesnake-master borer moths That the immediate proposal and timely it is currently a threat of high populations have been extirpated due to promulgation of a final regulation is magnitude. Flooding and the the change in habitat from the precluded by pending listing proposals, application of herbicide are additional succession to woody species and (2) that expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to threats to the species, although their (Laudermilk 2012, pers. comm.). Illegal either of the lists and to remove species incidence has been localized and so are collection is known from two Illinois from the lists. 16 U.S.C. not considered of high magnitude. DNR sites, and these two populations 1533(b)(3)(B)(iii). Climate change is an emerging threat, and one in Kentucky are kept although it is not currently known to be undisclosed for fear of additional Preclusion affecting any of the populations of collection. Twelve of the known sites A listing proposal is precluded if the rattlesnake-master borer moths. containing rattlesnake-master borer Regulatory mechanisms provide Service does not have sufficient moth are considered isolated, as they protection for 12 of the 16 known sites resources available to complete the are not connected by contiguous habitat that contain rattlesnake-master borer proposal, because there are competing to other prairie containing rattlesnake- moths. Seven of these sites are owned demands for those resources, and the master and are not likely to be and managed by State agencies, relative priority of those competing recolonized by the poorly dispersing nongovernmental organizations, and a demands is higher. Thus, in any given adult rattlesnake-master borer moths. university, and all rattlesnake-master fiscal year (FY), multiple factors dictate borer moths in Illinois are protected Thus, the continuing effects of habitat whether it will be possible to undertake from collection through the State’s fragmentation and isolation are a threat work on a listing proposal regulation or threatened and endangered species to the rattlesnake-master borer moth whether promulgation of such a statute. Although regulatory across its range. Although not all of the proposal is precluded by higher priority mechanisms are in place, several sites threats are found within each site that listing actions—(1) The amount of are currently under threat by contains populations of rattlesnake- resources available for completing the development, and known illegal master borer moth, the collective threats listing function, (2) the estimated cost of collections of the moth have occurred are impacting all of the known sites, and completing the proposed listing, and (3) within two of the protected sites in we believe the impacts will continue to the Service’s workload and Illinois. Although some threats to the impact the remaining populations. prioritization of the proposed listing in rattlesnake master borer moth are high The third criterion in our LPN relation to other actions. in magnitude, we consider most threats guidance is intended to devote Available Resources to the species to be of moderate to low resources to those species representing magnitude. highly distinctive or isolated gene pools The resources available for listing Under our LPN Guidance, the second as reflected by taxonomy. The actions are determined through the criterion we consider in assigning a rattlesnake-master borer moth is a valid annual Congressional appropriations listing priority is the immediacy of taxon at the species level, and, process. In FY 1998 and for each fiscal threats. This criterion is intended to therefore, receives a higher priority than year since then, Congress has placed a ensure that the species that face actual, subspecies or Distinct Population statutory cap on funds that may be identifiable threats are given priority Segments (DPSs), but a lower priority expended for the Listing Program. This over those for which threats are only than species in a monotypic genus. The spending cap was designed to prevent possible or species that are intrinsically rattlesnake-master borer moth faces high the listing function from depleting vulnerable but are not known to be magnitude, imminent threats, and is a funds needed for other functions under presently facing such threats. Every valid taxon at the species level. Thus, in the ESA (for example, recovery known population of rattlesnake-master accordance with our LPN guidance, we functions, such as removing species borer moth has at least one imminent have assigned the rattlesnake-master from the Lists), or for other Service threat, and some have several working borer moth an LPN of 8. programs(see House Report 105–163, in tandem. These actual, identifiable We will continue to monitor the 105th Congress, 1st Session, July 1, threats are covered in detail under the threats to the rattlesnake-master borer 1997). The funds within the spending discussion of Factors A, B, and E of this moth and the species’ status on an cap are available to support work finding and currently include annual basis and, should the magnitude involving the following listing actions: conversion of habitat for nonagricultural or the imminence of the threats change, Proposed and final listing rules; 90-day use, fire, flooding, succession, we will revisit our assessment of the and 12-month findings on petitions to overutilization, and habitat LPN. add species to the Lists or to change the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49436 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

status of a species from threatened to species subcap and the petitions subcap $345,000; and for a final listing rule endangered; annual ‘‘resubmitted’’ to fund proposed listing determinations. with critical habitat, $305,000. petition findings on prior warranted- We make our determinations of Prioritizing Listing Actions. The but-precluded petition findings as preclusion on a nationwide basis to Service’s Listing Program workload is required under section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of ensure that the species most in need of broadly composed of four types of the ESA; critical habitat petition listing will be addressed first and also actions, which the Service prioritizes as findings; proposed and final rules because we allocate our listing budget follows: (1) Compliance with court designating critical habitat; and on a nationwide basis. Through the orders and court-approved settlement litigation-related, administrative, and listing cap, the three subcaps, and the agreements requiring that petition program-management functions amount of funds needed to complete findings or listing or critical habitat (including preparing and allocating court-mandated actions within those determinations be completed by a budgets, responding to Congressional subcaps, Congress and the courts have specific date; (2) section 4 (of the Act) and public inquiries, and conducting in effect determined the amount of listing and critical habitat actions with public outreach regarding listing and money available for other listing absolute statutory deadlines; (3) critical habitat). activities nationwide. Therefore, the essential litigation-related, We cannot spend more for the Listing funds in the listing cap—other than administrative, and listing program- Program than the amount of funds those within the subcaps needed to management functions; and (4) section 4 within the spending cap without comply with court orders or court- listing actions that do not have absolute violating the Anti-Deficiency Act (see 31 approved settlement agreements statutory deadlines. In FY 2010, the U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In addition, since requiring critical habitat actions for Service received many new petitions FY 2002, the Service’s budget has already-listed species, listing actions for and a single petition to list 404 species, included a critical habitat subcap to foreign species, and petition findings— significantly increasing the number of ensure that some funds are available for set the framework within which we actions within the second category of completing Listing Program actions make our determinations of preclusion our workload—actions that have other than critical habitat designations and expeditious progress. absolute statutory deadlines. As a result For FY 2013, on March 26, 2013, (‘‘The critical habitat designation of the petitions to list hundreds of Congress passed a Full Year Continuing subcap will ensure that some funding is species, we currently have over 460 12- Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 113–6) available to address other listing month petition findings yet to be which provides funding through the end initiated and completed. activities’’ (House Report No. 107–103, of the FY 2013. In particular, it included To prioritize within each of the four 107th Congress, 1st Session. June 19, a spending cap of $20,997,000 for the types of actions, we developed 2001)). In FY 2002 and each year until listing program. In addition, no more guidelines for assigning a listing priority FY 2006, the Service had to use than $1,498,000 could be used for number (LPN) for each candidate virtually the entire critical habitat listing actions for foreign species and no species (48 FR 43098, September 21, subcap to address court-mandated more than $1,498,000 could be used to 1983). Under these guidelines, we designations of critical habitat, and make 90-day or 12-month findings on assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to 12, consequently none of the critical habitat petitions. The Service thus had depending on the magnitude of threats subcap funds were available for other $13,453,000 available to work on (high or moderate to low), immediacy of listing activities. In some FYs since proposed and final listing threats (imminent or nonimminent), and 2006, we have been able to use some of determinations for domestic species. In taxonomic status of the species (in order the critical habitat subcap funds to fund addition, if the Service had funding of priority: monotypic genus (a species proposed listing determinations for available within the critical habitat, that is the sole member of a genus); high-priority candidate species. In other foreign species, or petition subcaps after species; or part of a species (subspecies FYs, while we were unable to use any those workloads had been completed, it or distinct population segment)). The of the critical habitat subcap funds to could use those funds to work on listing lower the listing priority number, the fund proposed listing determinations, actions other than critical habitat higher the listing priority (that is, a we did use some of this money to fund designations or foreign species. species with an LPN of 1 would have the critical habitat portion of some Costs of Listing Actions. The work the highest listing priority). A species proposed listing determinations so that involved in preparing various listing with a higher LPN would generally be the proposed listing determination and documents can be extensive, and may precluded from listing by species with proposed critical habitat designation include, but is not limited to: Gathering lower LPNs, unless work on a proposed could be combined into one rule, and assessing the best scientific and rule for the species with the higher LPN thereby being more efficient in our commercial data available and can be combined with work on a work. In FY 2013, based on the Service’s conducting analyses used as the basis proposed rule for other high-priority workload, we were able to use some of for our decisions; writing and species. This is not the case for the critical habitat subcap funds to fund publishing documents; and obtaining, rattlesnake-master borer moth. Thus, in proposed listing determinations. reviewing, and evaluating public addition to being precluded by the lack For FY 2012 Congress also put in comments and peer review comments of available resources, the rattlesnake- place two additional subcaps within the on proposed rules and incorporating master borer moth with an LPN of 8 is listing cap: One for listing actions for relevant information into final rules. also precluded by work on proposed foreign species and one for petition The number of listing actions that we listing determinations for those findings. As with the critical habitat can undertake in a given year also is candidate species with a higher listing subcap, if the Service does not need to influenced by the complexity of those priority. use all of the funds within the subcap, listing actions; that is, more complex Finally, proposed rules for we are able to use the remaining funds actions generally are more costly. The reclassification of threatened species to for completing proposed or final listing median cost for preparing and endangered species are lower priority, determinations. In FY 2013, based on publishing a 90-day finding is $39,276; because as listed species, they are the Service’s workload, we were able to for a 12-month finding, $100,690; for a already afforded the protections of the use some of the funds within the foreign proposed rule with critical habitat, Act and implementing regulations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49437

However, for efficiency reasons, we may species. Paragraph 10 of that settlement assigned an LPN of 8 to the rattlesnake- choose to work on a proposed rule to agreement sets forth the Service’s master borer moth. Therefore, even if reclassify a species to endangered if we conclusion that ‘‘fulfilling the the Service has some additional funding can combine this with work that is commitments set forth in this after completing all of the work required subject to a court-determined deadline. Agreement, along with other by court orders and court-approved Since before Congress first established commitments required by court orders settlement agreements, we would first the spending cap for the Listing Program or court-approved settlement fund actions with absolute statutory in 1998, the Listing Program workload agreements already in existence at the deadlines for species that have lower has required considerably more signing of this Settlement Agreement LPNs. In light of all of these factors, resources than the amount of funds (listed in Exhibit A), will require funding a proposed listing rule for the Congress has allowed for the Listing substantially all of the resources in the rattlesnake-master borer moth is Program. It is therefore important that Listing Program.’’ As part of the same precluded by court-ordered and court- we be as efficient as possible in our lawsuit, the court also approved a approved settlement agreements, listing listing process. Therefore, as we separate settlement agreement with the actions with absolute statutory implement our listing work plan and other plaintiff in the case; that deadlines, and work on proposed listing work on proposed rules for the highest settlement agreement requires the determinations for those candidate priority species in the next several Service to complete additional actions species with a lower LPN. years, we are preparing multi-species in specific fiscal years — including 12- proposals when appropriate, and these month petition findings for 11 species, Expeditious Progress may include species with lower priority 90-day petition findings for 477 species, As explained above, a determination if they overlap geographically or have and proposed listing determinations or that listing is warranted but precluded the same threats as one of the highest- not-warranted findings for 39 species. must also demonstrate that expeditious priority species. In addition, we take These settlement agreements have led progress is being made to add and into consideration the availability of to a number of results that affect our remove qualified species to and from staff resources when we determine preclusion analysis. First, the Service the Lists. As with our ‘‘precluded’’ which high-priority species will receive has been, and will continue to be, finding, the evaluation of whether funding to minimize the amount of time limited in the extent to which it can progress in adding qualified species to and resources required to complete each undertake additional actions within the the Lists has been expeditious is a listing action. Listing Program through FY 2017 function of the resources available for Listing Program Workload. Each FY beyond what is required by the MDL listing and the competing demands for we determine, based on the amount of Settlement Agreements. Second, those funds. (Although we do not funding Congress has made available because the settlement is court- discuss it in detail here, we are also within the Listing Program spending approved, two broad categories of making expeditious progress in cap, specifically which actions we will actions now fall within the Service’s removing species from the list under the have the resources to work on in that highest priority (compliance with a Recovery program in light of the FY. We then prepare Allocation Tables court order): (1) the Service’s entire resource available for delisting, which is that identify the actions that we are prioritized workload for FY 2012, as funded by a separate line item in the funding for that FY, and how much we reflected in its Allocation Table, and (2) budget of the Endangered Species estimate it will cost to complete each completion, before the end of FY 2016, Program. Thus far, during FY 2013, we action; these Allocation Tables are part of proposed listings or not-warranted completed delisting rules for two of our record for this notice and the findings for most of the candidate species.) As discussed below, given the listing program. Our Allocation Table species identified in this CNOR (in limited resources available for listing, for FY 2012, which incorporated the particular, for those candidate species we find that we are making expeditious Service’s approach to prioritizing its that were included in the 2010 CNOR). workload, was adopted as part of a Therefore, each year, one of the progress in FY 2013 in the Listing settlement agreement in a case before Service’s highest priorities is to make Program. the U.S. District Court for the District of steady progress towards completing by We provide below tables cataloguing Columbia (Endangered Species Act the end of 2017 proposed and final the work of the Service’s Listing Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No.10– listing determinations for the 2010 Program in FY 2013. This work includes 377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (‘‘MDL candidate species—based on its LPN all three of the steps necessary for Litigation’’), Document 31–1 (D. DC May prioritization system, preparing multi- adding species to the Lists: (1) 10, 2011) (‘‘MDL Settlement species actions when appropriate, and Identifying species that warrant listing, Agreement’’)). The requirements of taking into consideration the availability (2) undertaking the evaluation of the paragraphs 1 through 7 of that of staff resources. best available scientific information settlement agreement, combined with The MDL settlement agreements about those species and the threats they the work plan attached to the agreement required the Service conduct a status face, and preparing proposed and final as Exhibit B, reflected the Service’s review and make a 12-month finding for listing rules, and (3) adding species to Allocation Tables for FY 2011 and FY the rattlesnake-master borer moth. As the Lists by publishing proposed and 2012. In addition, paragraphs 2 through specified in the Act, the outcome of a final listing rules that include a 7 of the agreement require the Service 12-month finding could be warranted, summary of the data on which the rule to take numerous other actions through not warranted, or warranted but is based and show the relationship of FY 2017—in particular, complete either precluded. The MDL settlement that data to the rule. After taking into a proposed listing rule or a not- agreements did not require a proposed consideration the limited resources warranted finding for all 251 species listing rule be issued if listing the available for listing, the competing designated as ‘‘candidates’’ in the 2010 rattlesnake-master borer moth was demands for those funds, and the candidate notice of review (‘‘CNOR’’) determined to be warranted. As we have completed work catalogued in the tables before the end of FY 2016, and complete determined above the listing of the below, we find that we are making final listing determinations within one rattlesnake-master borer moth is expeditious progress to add qualified year of proposing to list any of those warranted but precluded, we have species to the Lists FY 2013.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49438 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

In addition to the work the Service this Agreement constitute expeditious into the first settlement agreement and has completed towards adding qualified progress in adding qualified species to by completing the listing actions species to the Lists, on May 10, 2011, the lists of threatened and endangered required by both settlement agreements, the Service filed in the MDL Litigation species.’’ The Service also filed a second the Service is making expeditious a settlement agreement that settlement agreement that required even progress to add qualified species to the incorporated the Service’s work plan for more work in FY 2012. The Service had lists. As provided for in the settlement FY 2012; the court approved that already begun in FY 2011 to implement agreements and the work plan settlement agreement on September 9, that work required by the work plan, incorporated into the first agreement, 2011. Paragraph 10 of that settlement and many of these initial actions in our the Service’s progress in FY 2013 agreement provides, ‘‘The Parties agree work plan include work on proposed include completing and publishing the that the timetables for resolving the rules for candidate species with an LPN following determinations: status of candidate species outlined in of 2 or 3. Therefore, both by entering

FY 2013 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS

Publication date Title Actions FR Pages

10/2/2012 ...... Proposed Threatened Status for Coral Pink Sand Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 77 FR 60207– Dunes Tiger Beetle and Designation of Critical 60235. Habitat. 10/2/2012 ...... 12-Month Petition Finding, Listing of the Spring Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 77 FR 60179– Pygmy Sunfish as Threatened, and Designa- Proposed Listing Threatened. 60206. tion of Critical Habitat. 10/3/2012 ...... 12-month Finding for the Lemmon Fleabane; En- Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted 77 FR 60509– dangered Status for the Acun˜a Cactus and the Proposed Listing Endangered. 60579. Fickeisen Plains Cactus and Designation of Critical Habitat. 10/4/2012 ...... Proposed Endangered Species Status for the Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 77 FR 60749– Florida Bonneted Bat. 60776. 10/4/2012 ...... Determination of Endangered Species Status for Final Listing Endangered ...... 77 FR 60777– Coquı´ Llanero Throughout Its Range and Des- 60802. ignation of Critical Habitat. 10/4/2012 ...... Endangered Species Status for the Fluted Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 77 FR 60803– Kidneyshell and Slabside Pearlymussel and 60882. Designation of Critical Habitat. 10/9/2012 ...... 12-Month Finding on Petitions to List the Mexican Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted 77 FR 61375– Gray Wolf as an Endangered Subspecies or 61377. Distinct Population Segment with Critical Habi- tat. 10/10/2012 ...... Determination of Endangered Species Status for Final Listing Endangered and Threatened ...... 77 FR 61663– the Alabama Pearlshell, Round Ebonyshell, 61719. Southern Kidneyshell, and Choctaw Bean, and Threatened Species Status for the Tapered Pigtoe, Narrow Pigtoe, Southern Sandshell, and Fuzzy Pigtoe, and Designation of Critical Habitat. 10/11/2012 ...... Endangered Species Status for Cape Sable Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 77 FR 61835– Thoroughwort, Florida Semaphore Cactus, and 61894. Aboriginal Prickly-apple, and Designation of Critical Habitat for Cape Sable Thoroughwort. 10/11/2012 ...... Listing Taylor’s Checkerspot Butterfly and Proposed Listing Endangered and Threatened .... 77 FR 61937– Streaked Horned Lark and Designation of Crit- 62058. ical Habitat. 10/16/2012 ...... Proposed Endangered Status for the Neosho Proposed Listing Endangered and Threatened .... 77 FR 63439– Mucket, Threatened Status for the Rabbitsfoot, 63536. and Designation of Critical Habitat for Both Species. 10/17/2012 ...... Listing 15 Species on Hawaii Island as Endan- Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 77 FR 63927– gered and Designating Critical Habitat for 3 64018. Species. 11/14/2012 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Heller Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial ...... 77 FR 67784– Cave Springtail as Endangered or Threatened. 67789. 11/28/2012 ...... Status Review for a Petition to List the Ashy Notice Status Review ...... 77 FR 70987– Storm-petrel as Endangered or Threatened. 70988. 12/04/2012 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Phoenix Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial 77 FR 71757– dactylifera ‘Sphinx’ (Sphinx Date Palm). 71758. 12/04/2012 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Prairie Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial 77 FR 71759– Gray Fox, the Plains Spotted Skunk, and a Dis- Substantial. 71771. tinct Population Segment of the Mearn’s East- ern Cottontail in East-central Illinois and West- ern Indiana as Endangered or Threatened Spe- cies. 12/11/2012 ...... Listing the Lesser Prairie-Chicken as a Threat- Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 77 FR 73827– ened Species. 73888.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules 49439

FY 2013 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued

Publication date Title Actions FR Pages

12/11/2012 ...... Listing Four Subspecies of Mazama Pocket Go- Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 77 FR 73769– pher and Designation of Critical Habitat. 73825. 1/11/2013 ...... Endangered Status for Gunnison Sage-grouse .... Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 78 FR 2486–2538. 1/25/2013 ...... Endangered Status for the Zuni Bluehead Sucker Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 78 FR 5369–5385. 2/4/2013 ...... Threatened Status for the Distinct Population Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 78 FR 7863–7890. Segment of the North American Wolverine Oc- curring in the Contiguous United States. 3/19/2013 ...... Status Review of the West Coast Distinct Popu- Notice of Status Review ...... 78 FR 16828– lation Segment of the Fisher as Endangered or 16829. Threatened. 3/28/2013 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Rose- Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted 78 FR 18936– mont Talussnail as Endangered or Threatened. 18938. 4/9/2013 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List Two Popu- Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial ...... 78 FR 21086– lations of Black-Backed Woodpecker as Endan- 21097. gered or Threatened. 4/23/2013 ...... Threatened Status for Eriogonum codium Final Listing Threatened ...... 78 FR 23983– (Umtanum Desert Buckwheat) and Physaria 24005. douglasii subsp. tuplashensis (White Bluffs Bladderpod). 4/25/2013 ...... Endangered Status for the Sierra Nevada Yellow- Proposed Listing Endangered and Threatened .... 78 FR 24471– legged Frog and the Northern Distinct Popu- 24514. lation Segment of the Mountain Yellow-legged Frog, and Threatened Status for the Yosemite Toad. 5/24/2013 ...... Proposed Threatened Status for Leavenworthia Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 78 FR 31498– exigua var. laciniata (Kentucky Glade Cress). 31511. 5/28/2013 ...... Determination of Endangered Status for 38 Spe- Final Listing Endangered ...... 78 FR 32013– cies on Molokai, Lanai, and Maui. 32065. 6/20/2013 ...... Listing Determination for the New Mexico Mead- Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 78 FR 37363– ow Jumping Mouse. 37369. 7/9/2013 ...... Determination of Endangered Species Status for Final Listing Endangered ...... 78 FR 41227– Six West Texas Aquatic Invertebrates. 41258. 7/10/2013 ...... Threatened Status for the Northern Mexican Proposed Listing Threatened ...... 78 FR 41499– Gartersnake and Narrow-headed Gartersnake. 41547.

Our expeditious progress also been working on the second step, settlement agreement. Actions in the included work on listing actions that we necessary for adding species to the Lists. lower section of the table are being funded in previous fiscal years, and in These actions are listed below. Actions conducted to meet statutory timelines, FY 2013, but have not yet been in the top section of the table are being that is, timelines required under the completed to date. For these species, we conducted under a deadline set by a Act. have completed the first step, and have court through a court order or

ACTIONS FUNDED IN PREVIOUS FYS AND FY 2013 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED

Species Action

Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement

Gierisch’s mallow (Sphaeralcea gierischii) ...... Final listing. 4 Texas salamanders (salado, Georgetown, Jollyville plateau, and Austin blind) ...... Final listing. Jemez Mountains salamander ...... Final listing. 2 Texas plants (Texas golden gladecress and Neches River rose-mallow) ...... Final listing. Grotto sculpin ...... Final listing. Mount Charleston blue butterfly ...... Final listing. Spring pygmy sunfish ...... Final listing. Coral pink sand dunes tiger beetle ...... Final listing. 3 Arizona plants (Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis, Erigeron lemmonii, Pediocactus peeblesianus Final listing. fickeiseniae). 2 Tennessee River mussels (fluted kidneyshell and slabside pearly mussel) ...... Final listing. Florida bonneted bat ...... Final listing. 4 Puget trough species (4 subspecies of pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama ssp.) (LPN =3) ...... Final listing. 3 Sierra amphibians (Yosemite toad, mountain yellow-legged frog—Sierra Nevada DPSs) ...... Final listing. 3 southern Florida plants (Florida semaphore cactus, aboriginal prickly-apple, Cape Sable thoroughwort) ...... Final listing. 2 Puget trough species (Taylor’s checkerspot, streaked horned lark) ...... Final listing. Lesser prairie chicken ...... Final listing. Gunnison sage-grouse ...... Final listing. 15 Hawaiian big island species ...... Final listing. 2 Arkansas mussels (neosho mucket and Rabbitsfoot) ...... Final listing. Red knot (LPN = 3) ...... Proposed listing.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 49440 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Proposed Rules

ACTIONS FUNDED IN PREVIOUS FYS AND FY 2013 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED—Continued

Species Action

Dakota skipper (LPN = 8) and Poweshiek skipperling (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. Vandenberg monkeyflower ...... Proposed listing. Yellow-billed cuckoo (western U.S. DPS) ...... Proposed listing. 2 Brazos River fish (smalleyed shiner and sharpnose shiner) ...... Proposed listing. Georgia rockcress ...... Proposed listing. 2 Sierra plants (webber ivesia, soldier meadows cinquefoil) ...... Proposed listing. Oregon spotted frog ...... Proposed listing. 2 Florida butterflies (Bartram’s hairstreak and Florida leafwing) ...... Proposed listing. Greater sage-grouse, bi-State DPS ...... Proposed listing. 3 species Caribbean plants (Cordia rupicola, Gonocalyx concolor, Agave eggersiana) ...... Proposed listing. Canada lynx—New Mexico ...... Proposed listing. White River beardtongue ...... Proposed listing. 2 Florida pine rockland plants (Carter’s small-flowered flax and Florida brickell-bush) ...... Proposed listing. 3 Southeast plants (whorled sunflower, gladecress, and Short’s bladderpod) ...... Proposed listing. Washington ground squirrel ...... Proposed listing. 2 San Diego plants (Orcutt’s hazardia and Brand’s Phacelia) ...... Proposed listing. Xantus’s murrelet ...... Proposed listing. Kittlitz’s murrelet ...... Proposed listing. Yellow-billed loon ...... Proposed listing. Florida bristle fern ...... Proposed listing. Ashy storm-petrel ...... 12-month petition finding/ proposed listing. Eastern small-footed bat and northern long-eared bat ...... 12-month petition finding/ proposed listing. Rattlesnake-master borer moth ...... 12-month petition finding.

Actions with Statutory Deadlines

Alexander Archipelago wolf ...... 90-day petition finding.

Another way that we have been industry, or any other interested party Authority expeditious in making progress to add concerning this finding. The authority for this section is qualified species to the Lists is that we The rattlesnake-master borer moth section 4 of the Endangered Species Act have endeavored to make our listing will be added to the list of candidate of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et actions as efficient and timely as species upon publication of this 12- seq.). possible, given the requirements of the month finding. We will continue to Dated: August 5, 2013. relevant law and regulations, and evaluate this species as new information constraints relating to workload and Rowan W. Gould, becomes available. Continuing review Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. personnel. We are continually will determine if a change in status is considering ways to streamline [FR Doc. 2013–19632 Filed 8–13–13; 8:45 am] warranted, including the need to make processes or achieve economies of scale, BILLING CODE 4310–55–P prompt use of emergency listing such as by batching related actions procedures. together. Given our limited budget for implementing section 4 of the ESA, We intend that any proposed listing DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE these efforts also contribute towards determination for the rattlesnake-master borer moth will be as accurate as National Oceanic and Atmospheric finding that we are making expeditious Administration progress to add qualified species to the possible. Therefore, we will continue to accept additional information and Lists. 50 CFR Part 622 The rattlesnake-master borer moth comments from all concerned will be added to the list of candidate governmental agencies, the scientific [Docket No. 130627573–3573–01] community, industry, or any other species upon publication of this 12- RIN 0648–BD39 month finding. We will continue to interested party concerning this finding. monitor the status of this species as new References Cited Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of information becomes available. This Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish review will determine if a change in A complete list of references cited is Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Red status is warranted, including the need available on the Internet at http:// Snapper Management Measures to make prompt use of emergency listing www.regulations.gov and upon request AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries procedures. from the Rock Island, Illinois Ecological Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES We intend that any proposed listing Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), action for the rattlesnake-master borer section). Commerce. moth will be as accurate as possible. Author(s) ACTION: Proposed rule; request for Therefore, we will continue to accept comments. additional information and comments The primary author(s) of this notice from all concerned governmental are the staff members of the Rock Island, SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to implement agencies, the scientific community, Illinois Ecological Services Field Office. management measures described in a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:04 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS