Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32911

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31151, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR deaf (TDD), please call the Federal and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. Information Relay Service (FIRS) at Fish and Wildlife Service 800–877–8339. 4. Revise § 396.11(b) to read as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: follows: 50 CFR Part 17 Background § 396.11 Driver vehicle inspection [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0007; MO report(s). 92210–0–0008 B2] Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for * * * * * Endangered and Threatened Wildlife any petition to revise the Federal Lists (b) Report content. (1) The report shall and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife identify the vehicle and list any defect Petition To List the Striped Newt as and Plants that contains substantial or deficiency discovered by or reported Threatened scientific or commercial information to the driver that would affect the safety that listing a species may be warranted, of operation of the vehicle or result in AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, we make a finding within 12 months of its mechanical breakdown. Interior. the date of receipt of the petition. In this ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding, we determine whether the (2) For vehicles other than intermodal finding. petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted, equipment tendered by intermodal (b) warranted, or (c) warranted, but equipment providers, if no defect or SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and immediate proposal of a regulation deficiency is discovered by or reported Wildlife Service (Service), announce a implementing the petitioned action is to the driver, the written report shall so 12-month finding on a petition to list precluded by other pending proposals to indicate. the striped newt (Notophthalmus determine whether species are (3) For intermodal equipment perstriatus) as threatened under the threatened or endangered, and tendered by intermodal equipment Endangered Species Act of 1973, as expeditious progress is being made to providers, if no defects or deficiencies amended (Act). After review of all add or remove qualified species from are discovered by or reported to the available scientific and commercial the Federal Lists of Endangered and information, we find that listing the driver, no written report is required. Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section striped newt as endangered or 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we (4) In all instances where a written threatened is warranted. Currently, treat a petition for which the requested driver vehicle inspection report is however, listing the striped newt is action is found to be warranted but required, the driver shall sign the report. precluded by higher priority actions to precluded as though resubmitted on the On two-driver operations, only one amend the Lists of Endangered and date of such finding, that is, requiring a driver needs to sign, provided both Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Upon subsequent finding to be made within drivers agree as to the defects or publication of this 12-month petition 12 months. We must publish these 12- deficiencies identified. If a driver finding, we will add the striped newt to month findings in the Federal Register. our candidate species list. We will operates more than one vehicle during Previous Federal Actions the day, a report shall be prepared for develop a proposed rule to list the each vehicle operated. striped newt as our priorities allow. We On July 14, 2008, we received a petition dated July 10, 2008, from Dr. D. * * * * * will make any determination on critical habitat during development of the Bruce Means, Ryan C. Means, and 5. Revise § 396.12(b)(4) to read as proposed listing rule. During any Rebecca P.M. Means of the Coastal follows: interim period, we will address the Plains Institute and Land Conservancy status of the candidate taxon through (CPI), requesting that the striped newt § 396.12 Procedures for intermodal (Notophthalmus perstriatus) be listed as equipment providers to accept reports our annual Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR). threatened under the Act. Included in required by § 390.42 (b) of this chapter. the petition was supporting information DATES: The finding announced in this * * * * * regarding the species’ taxonomy, document was made on June 7, 2011. (b) * * * biology, historical and current ADDRESSES: This finding is available on distribution, and present status, as well (4) All damage, defects, or the Internet at http:// as a summary of actual and potential deficiencies of the intermodal www.regulations.gov at Docket Number threats. We acknowledged the receipt of equipment must be reported to the FWS–R4–ES–2010–0007. Supporting the petition in a letter to petitioners equipment provider by the motor carrier documentation we used in preparing dated August 15, 2008. In that letter we or its driver. If no defect or deficiency this finding is available for public also stated that we could not address in the intermodal equipment is inspection, by appointment, during their petition at that time because discovered by or reported to the driver, normal business hours at the U.S. Fish responding to existing court orders and no written report is required. and Wildlife Service, North Florida settlement agreements for other listing * * * * * Field Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, actions required nearly all of our listing Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256. funding. Issued on: May 27, 2011. Please submit any new information, Funding became available to begin Anne S. Ferro, materials, comments, or questions processing the petition in early 2010. Administrator, FMCSA. concerning this finding to the above On March 23, 2010, we published a 90- [FR Doc. 2011–13935 Filed 6–6–11; 8:45 am] street address. day finding (75 FR 13720) that the BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petition presented substantial Dave Hankla, Field Supervisor, North information indicating that listing the Florida Field Office (see ADDRESSES); by striped newt may be warranted and that telephone at (904) 731–3336; or by we were initiating a status review, for facsimile at (904) 731–3045. If you use which we would accept public a telecommunications device for the comments until May 24, 2010. This

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32912 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

notice constitutes the 12-month finding 2001, pp. 115–116; May et al. undated, Aquatic and breeding adults occur in on the July 14, 2008, petition to list the unpublished report). One region isolated, temporary ponds associated striped newt as threatened. consists of populations located in with well-drained sands. Sexually peninsular Florida and southeastern mature adults migrate to these breeding Species Information Georgia, and the other region consists of ponds, which lack predatory fish, and Our 90-day finding summarized much populations located in northwestern courtship, copulation, and egg-laying of the current literature regarding the Florida and southwestern Georgia (Dodd take place there. Females lay eggs one striped newt’s distribution, habitat and LaClaire 1995, p. 42; Franz and at a time and attach them to aquatic requirements, and life history, and may Smith 1999, p. 13). May et al. (2010, vegetation or other objects in the water. be reviewed for detailed information (75 undated, unpublished report) found that It may take one female several months FR 13720, March 23, 2010). Below, we there is gene flow between localities to lay all of her eggs (Johnson 2005, p. briefly summarize previously presented within each region, but none were 94). Eggs hatch and develop into information, and provide new shared between regions. Johnson (2001, externally-gilled larvae in the temporary information that we believe is relevant pp. 107, 113–115) found genetic pond environment. to understanding our analysis of the exchange between populations is Once larvae reach a size suitable for factors affecting the striped newt. minimal or nonexistent due to upland metamorphosis, they may either Taxonomy and Species Description habitat fragmentation that has limited undergo metamorphosis and exit the long-distance dispersals and restricted pond as immature, terrestrial efts, or There are three species of gene flow. In 2001, Johnson (2001, p. remain in the pond and eventually Notophthalmus found in North 115) found there was enough genetic mature into gilled, aquatic adults America. These include the eastern red divergence to show that the western (paedomorphs) (Petranka 1998, pp. 449– spotted newt (N. viridescens), the black- 450; Johnson 2005, p. 94). The spotted newt (N. meridionalis), and the region is different than the eastern regions. However, May et al. (2010, immature, terrestrial efts migrate into striped newt (N. perstriatus). The three the uplands where they mature into species are found in different areas unpublished report) did not find that there was sufficient genetic divergence terrestrial adults. Efts will remain in the throughout the United States and uplands until conditions are appropriate Mexico (Reilly 1990, p. 51). Reilly to support splitting eastern and western regions into separate species. (adequate rainfall) to return to the ponds (1990, p. 53), in his study of to reproduce. Johnson (2005, p. 94) May et al. (2010, unpublished report) Notophthalmus spp., found that N. found that 25 percent of larvae became ran niche-based distribution models that perstriatus and N. meridionalis are paedomorphs at his study pond. showed that there were significant distinct species that are more similar Paedomorphs will postpone climatic and environmental differences and phylogenetically more closely metamorphosis until after they have between the two regions when related than either is to N. viridescens. matured and reproduced. At about a In 2008, Zhang et al. (2008, pp. 586 and considering temperature and year old, they will reproduce, 592) looked at the phylogenetic precipitation. The western region is metamorphose, and migrate into the relationship (i.e., evolutionary history of characterized by lower mean uplands adjacent to the pond (Johnson an organism) of the family temperatures and more extreme winter 2005, pp. 94–95). Once there are proper Salamandridae and found that the clade cold, coupled with higher variation in conditions (e.g., adequate rainfall) at the (i.e., group of species that includes all temperature and precipitation. These ponds, the terrestrial adults will move descendents of a common ancestor) differences in temperatures and back to the ponds to court and containing newts was separate from the precipitation between the regions reproduce. Once they return to the clade containing ‘‘true’’ salamanders. should be considered if translocation ponds, they are referred to as aquatic The branching order of the clades for between regions is to be used for adults. newts are: Primitive newts conservation of this species. Striped newts as well as other (Echinotriton, Pleurodeles, and Understanding genetic structure and Notophthalmus spp. have long lifespans Tylototriton), New World newts species ecology will ensure that (approximately 12 to 15 years) in order (Notophthalmus and Taricha), Corisca- genetically similar individuals are to cope with unfavorable stochastic Sardinia newts (Euproctus), modern moved between areas with similar environmental events (e.g., drought) that European newts (Calotriton, Lissotriton, environmental conditions. can adversely affect reproduction (Dodd Mesotriton, Neurergus, Ommatotriton, Life History and Biology 1993b, p. 612; Dodd et al. 2005, p. 889; and Triturus), and modern Asian newts Wallace et al. 2009, p. 139). (Cynops, Pachytriton, and Life-history stages of the striped newt Movement of striped newts by both Paramesotriton). New World newts, are complex, and include the use of emigration and immigration occurs which include Notophthalmus, both aquatic and terrestrial habitats between ponds and surrounding originally evolved from salamandrids throughout their life cycle. Striped uplands. Adult newts immigrate into migrating from Europe to North America newts are opportunistic feeders that ponds from uplands during the fall and via the North Atlantic land bridge prey on frog eggs, worms, snails, fairy winter months, but some newts also during the Mid-Late Eocene (Zhang et shrimp, spiders, and insects (adult and immigrate during the spring and al. 2008, p. 595). larvae) that are of appropriate size summer months as well, when Another genetic study, conducted in (Dodd et al. 2005, p. 889; Christman and environmental conditions (e.g., 2010, looked at whether populations of Franz 1973, pp. 134–135; Christman and adequate rainfall) are conducive to Notophthalmus perstriatus that occur in Means 1992, pp. 62–63). Christman and breeding (Johnson 2005, p. 95). two regions separated by 125 kilometers Franz (1973, p. 135) found that newts Extended breeding periods allow striped (km) (78 miles (mi)) exhibit genetic and were attracted to frog eggs by smell. newts to adapt to temporary breeding ecological differentiation showing that Feeding behavior of newts has only habitats whose conditions fluctuate these two regions are separate been documented with aquatic adults; within seasons (Johnson 2002, p. 395). conservation units (Dodd et al. 2005, p. little is known of the feeding habits in Even with suitable water levels in 887; Dodd and LaClaire 1995, p. 42; the terrestrial stage (Dodd et al. 2005, p. ponds, adults emigrate back into Franz and Smith 1999, p. 12; Johnson 889). uplands after breeding. There is a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32913

staggered pattern of adult immigration striped newts due to persistent drought Habitat into ponds and eft emigration into conditions. Johnson (2002, p. 399) uplands due to the required 6 months found that heavy rainfall in the winter Ephemeral ponds are important for larvae to undergo metamorphosis of 1997 to spring of 1998 filled ponds components of upland habitat in the into efts (Johnson 2002, p. 397). to their maximum depth and southeastern United States (LaClaire Suitability of upland habitat around contributed to the reproductive success and Franz 1990, p. 9). Ephemeral ponds tend to be described as small (typically breeding ponds influences the pattern of at these ponds. At one breeding pond, less than 5 hectares (ha) (12.4 acres immigration and emigration of newts a minimum hydro-period of 139 days (ac)), isolated wetlands with a cyclic and directional movements (Dodd 1996, (Dodd 1993, pp. 609–610) was needed nature of drying and refilling known as p. 46; Dodd and Cade 1998, p. 337; for larvae to reach complete hydroperiods. Ephemeral ponds can Johnson 2003, p. 16). Dodd and Cade metamorphosis. Larvae undergo (1998, p. 337) found that striped newts hold water at various times throughout metamorphosis into efts after a period of a year to allow for reproduction. migrated in a direction that favored high 6 months, and in order for larvae to pine sandhill habitats. Newts migrate Precipitation is the most important mature into paedomorphs, a breeding into terrestrial habitats at significant water source for ephemeral ponds pond must hold water for at least a year distances from their breeding ponds. (LaClaire and Franz 1990, p. 12). The (Johnson 2005, p. 94). For a Dodd (1996, p. 46) found that 82.9 cyclical nature of ephemeral ponds percent of 12 wetland breeding paedormorph to successfully reproduce, prevents predatory fish from inhabiting amphibians (including striped newts) ponds must hold water for an additional breeding ponds (Dodd and Charest were captured 600 meters (m) (1,969 6 months to allow sufficient time for its 1988, pp. 87, 94; LaClaire and Franz feet (ft)) from the nearest wetland, and larvae to undergo metamorphosis. 1990, p. 12; Moler and Franz 1987, p. only 28 percent of amphibians were Striped newts form metapopulations 237). Ephemeral ponds are biologically captured less than 400 m (1,300 ft) from that persist in isolated fragments of unique, because they support diverse the wetland. Johnson (2003, p. 18) longleaf pine-wiregrass ecosystems species that are different than species found that 16 percent of striped newts (Johnson 2001, p. 114; Johnson 2005, p. found in larger, more permanent in his study migrated more than 500 m 95). Within metapopulations, ponds wetlands or ponds (Moler and Franz (1, 600 ft) from ponds. Dodd and Cade function as focal points for local 1987, pp. 234, 236; Kirkman et al. 1999, (1998, p. 337) showed that striped newts breeding populations that experience p. 553). travelled up to 709 m (2,330 ft) from periods of extirpation and The frequency and duration of water ponds. These long-distance movements recolonization through time (e.g., in ephemeral ponds creates different of striped newts from breeding ponds to ‘‘ponds as patches’’) (Johnson 2005, p. zones of vegetation within ponds. One terrestrial habitats suggest that buffer 95; Marsh and Trenham 2001, p. 41). species, maidencane (Panicum zones around ponds should be Striped newts typically have limited hemitomon), has been found at established to protect upland habitats, dispersal, which can lead to pond ephemeral ponds where striped newts as well as breeding ponds (Dodd 1996, isolation when stochastic events (e.g., have been found, and seems be a good p. 49; Dodd and Cade 1998, p. 337, drought) affect rates of colonization and indicator of the extent of previous Johnson 2003, p. 19; Kirkman et al. extinction (Marsh and Trenham 2001, p. flooding in ponds (LaClaire 1995, p. 88; 1999, p. 557; Semlitsch and Bodie 2003, 41). In order for striped newts to LaClaire and Franz 1990, p. 10). p. 1219). Trenham and Shaffer (2005, p. recolonize local breeding ponds within Persistence of maidencane helps to 1166) found that protecting at least 600 the metapopulation, newts must reduce the rate of oxidation of organic m (2,000 ft) of upland habitat would disperse through contiguous upland matter, reduce soil moisture loss, and maintain a population with only a 10 habitat (Dodd and Johnson 2007, p. inhibit growth and establishment of percent reduction in mean population 150). Protecting the connectivity upland plant species (LaClaire 1995, p. size in the California tiger salamander between uplands and breeding ponds of 94). The center of flooded ponds may (Ambystoma californiense). Dodd and diverse hydroperiods is crucial for contain floating-leaved plants, and is Cade (1998, p. 337) suggested that maintaining metapopulations (Dodd and surrounded by vegetation with terrestrial buffer zones need to consider Johnson 2007, pp. 150–151; Gibbs 1993, submerged roots growing along the wet both distance and direction (migratory p. 25; Johnson 2005, p. 95). Only a few edges. Surrounding the wet areas are tall patterns) when created. Johnson (2003, ‘‘ ’’ and short emergents, such as sedges, p. 19) recommended a protected area stronghold locations exist, where there grasses, and rushes such as sandweed extending 1,000 m (3,300 ft) from a are multiple breeding ponds with (Hypericum fasciculatum), followed by breeding site as upland ‘‘core habitat’’ appropriate upland habitat that allow other grasses such as bluestem grass surrounding breeding ponds. dispersal to occur among the ponds Optimal pond hydrology is important (Johnson 2005, p. 95). These (Andropogon virginicus) found in the for maintaining the complex life-history ‘‘stronghold’’ locations represent drier margins of ponds. Water-tolerant pathways of striped newts. If there is different metapopulations across the shrubs or trees are found in some not enough water in ephemeral ponds, range of the striped newt (Johnson 2005, transitional zones between pond and then larvae will not have enough time p. 95). These sites need to be protected uplands (LaClaire 1995, p. 74; LaClaire to reach the minimum size needed for and managed to provide long-term and Franz 1990, p. 10). metamorphosis and will die as ponds protection for newts. In Florida, these Ephemeral ponds are surrounded by dry up (Johnson 2002, p. 398). However, include Apalachicola National Forest, upland habitats of high pine, scrubby permanent ponds could support Ocala National Forest, Jennings State flatwoods, and scrub (Christman and predatory fish that feed on aquatic- Forest, Katherine Ordway-Swisher Means, 1992, p. 62). Longleaf pine- breeding amphibians (Johnson 2005, p. Biological Station, and Camp Blanding turkey oak stands with intact ground 94; Moler and Franz 1987, p. 235). Training Site. In Georgia, they are found cover containing wiregrass (Aristida Variable hydroperiods in breeding at Joseph Jones Ecological Research beyrichiana) are the preferred upland ponds over a long time period could Center and Fort Stewart Military habitat for striped newts, followed by result in varying reproductive success. Installation (Johnson 2005, p. 95; scrub, then flatwoods (K. Enge, Florida Dodd (1993, p. 610) found a decline in Stevenson 2000, p. 4). Fish and Wildlife Conservation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32914 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Commission, personal communication, 11). The impacts of fire on these southeastern Georgia to the north- May 24, 2010). temporary ponds promote species central peninsula of Florida and through Striped newt habitat is fire- richness of grasses and sedges, the Florida panhandle into portions of dependent, and naturally ignited fires especially during droughts (Means 2006, southwest Georgia (Dodd et al. 2005, p. and prescribed burning maintain an p. 196). To eliminate hardwood 887). There is a 125-km (78-mi) open canopy and reduce forest floor encroachment, a prescribed fire regime separation between the western and litter. An open canopy provides sunlight should be used every 1 to 3 years during eastern portions of the striped newt’s necessary for ground cover growth May to June, in order to protect striped range (Dodd et al. 2005, p. 887; Dodd needed by newts for foraging and newt habitat (Means 2006, p. 196). and LaClaire 1995, p. 42; Franz and sheltering. Fire is also an important Striped newts use upland habitats Smith 1999, p. 12; Johnson 2001, pp. factor for wetland vegetation (LaClaire that surround breeding ponds to 115–116). The historical range of the and Franz 1990, p. 10; Means 2008, p. complete their life cycle. Efts move from striped newt was likely similar to the 4). Historically, fire would be naturally ponds to uplands where they mature current range (Dodd et al. 2005, p. 887). ignited in the uplands during the late into terrestrial adults. The uplands also However, loss of native longleaf habitat, spring and early summer, and would provide habitat for the striped newt to fire suppression, and the natural patchy sweep through the dry pond basins, forage and burrow during the non- distribution of upland habitats used by reducing organic matter and killing breeding season (Dodd and Charest striped newts have resulted in encroaching upland plant species 1988, p. 95). Striped newts also use fragmentation of existing populations (Means 2008, p. 4; Myer 1990, p. 189). uplands to access alternative ponds that (Johnson and Owen 2005, p. 2). Lack of fire in uplands that buffer are needed if the original breeding pond In Figure 1, we provide a map breeding ponds allows fire-intolerant is destroyed or the hydroperiod is illustrating the current and historical hardwoods to shade out herbaceous altered (Means 2006, p. 197). This ranges of the striped newt on public understory needed by striped newts for shows the interdependence between lands. The dark-shaded areas represent foraging and sheltering. As a result, fire upland and aquatic habitats in the the currently occupied sites shadows may form along the upslope persistence of populations (Semlitsch documented from 2005 to 2010 surveys wetland and upland boundary. The and Bodie 2003, p. 1219). Semi-aquatic of public lands (Enge, FWC, personal vegetation in this area contains fire- species (such as the striped newt) communication, 2010; Jensen, Georgia intolerant evergreen shrubs (Ilex spp., depend on both aquatic and upland Department of Natural Resources Vaccinium spp., Myrica spp., and habitats for various parts of their life (GDNR), personal communication, Ceratiola spp.) and sometimes xeric oak cycle in order to maintain viable 2010). The light-shaded areas represent hammock zones (LaClaire and Franz populations (Dodd and Cade 1998, pp. the historical range where striped newts 1990, p. 11). Ponds that are completely 336–337; Johnson 2001, p. 47; Semlitsch are now extirpated. There are from 1 to burned from the upland margin to the 1998, p. 1116; Semlitsch and Bodie 30 breeding ponds documented within opposite margin lack this vegetation; 2003, p. 1219). dark shaded areas. However, due to the however, if the ponds are filled with scale of the map, the specific ponds are Distribution water, fire will burn out at the pond, not identified. This map represents the and allow the invasion of fire-intolerant The range of the striped newt extends best available information used to hardwoods (LaClaire and Franz 1990, p. from the Atlantic Coastal Plain of establish the species’ range.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32915

To determine where there may be The GIS analysis found a total of Florida (Enge, FWC, personal additional unsurveyed suitable habitat 244,576 ha (604,360 ac) of potential communication, 2010). Striped newts for striped newts in Florida, Endries et habitat (Endries et al. 2009, p. 45). Of are also found in ponds throughout al. (2009, pp. 45–46) developed a the potential habitat, 122,724 ha Peninsular Florida at Ordway-Swisher striped newt habitat model. The model (303,257 ac) occurred on 124 sites Biological Station, Camp Blanding Joint was developed using Florida Fish and within public lands, but only 64 of these Training Center, Jennings State Forest, Wildlife Conservation Commission sites had greater than 40 ha (100 ac) of Goethe State Forest, Rock Springs State (FWC) 2003 landcover classes. Three potential habitat. The remaining habitat Park, Ft. White Mitigation Park, Faver- classes were identified: (1) Breeding was found on privately owned lands in Dykes State Park, and Pumpkin Hill (bay, cypress swamp, freshwater marsh, patches that were greater than 79 ha Creek Preserve State Park. wet prairie), (2) primary upland (195 ac) (Endries et al. 2008, pp. 45–46). Within the panhandle of Florida, (sandhill, xeric oak scrub, sand pine Of the potential habitat found on public striped newts have been found within scrub), and (3) secondary upland lands, 55 percent occurred on Ocala the Munson Sandhills. This site (hardwood hammocks and forests, National Forest (ONF), 8 percent on represents a small physiographic region pinelands, and shrub and brushlands). Camp Blanding Military Installation, 6 within the Gulf Coastal Plains in Florida Then potential habitat was evaluated for percent on Withlacoochee State Forest, (Means and Means 1998a, p. 3). Striped 5.3 percent on Apalachicola National each class. Breeding habitat was limited newts have only been located in the Forest (ANF), and 2.9 percent on to patches that were less than 9 ha (22 western portion of the Munson Jennings State Forest (Enge, FWC, ac) in size and which were contiguous Sandhills within the ANF. No newts personal communication, 2010). have been found in the eastern portion with upland habitats. The primary However, no records of striped newt of the sandhills since the 1980s, when upland habitats included in the model occurrences have been found at the area was converted to a dense sand were those areas contiguous and within Withlacoochee State Forest, even pine (Pinus clausa) plantation (Means 1,000 m (3,300 ft) of breeding habitat. though this appears to be suitable and Means 1998a, p. 6). Striped newt Secondary upland habitat was included habitat. Ocala National Forest has distribution continues north of this site for areas that were contiguous and 67,514 ha (166,831 ac) of potential to the Tallahassee Red Hills and Tifton within 500 m (1,600 ft) of primary habitat and 39 occupied ponds, making Uplands, and finally to the Dougherty uplands and 1,000 m (3,300 ft) of it the largest ‘‘stronghold’’ for Plain in southwestern Georgia. breeding habitat. metapopulations for striped newts in However, the Tallahassee Red Hills no

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS EP07JN11.009 32916 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

longer support the newt. Striped newts but also found 34 new ponds containing survey 8 ponds on 2 private lands, and were documented once in a breeding newts were that were not part of the found newts on at least one site. pond found in the Red Hills, but this historical records. All 38 breeding Striped newt breeding ponds at ANF site was dredged, deepened, and ponds were found on 7 public lands that and other areas within the Munson stocked with game fish in the 1980s, included ANF, Camp Blanding Military Sandhills region in Leon County, and no longer supports newts (Means Reservation, Favor-Dykes State Park, Florida, have seen a decline. ANF was and Means 1998b, pp. 6, 15). Jennings State Forest, Katharine Ordway once considered a metapopulation for The striped newt is currently known Preserve-Swisher Memorial Sanctuary, striped newt (Johnson 2005, p. 95; to occur in five separate locations in ONF, and Rock Springs State Preserve Johnson and Owen 2005, p. 7; Enge, Georgia, including Fort Stewart, Lentile (Franz and Smith, 1999, pp. 8–9). FWC, personal communication, 2010). Property, Joseph W. Jones Ecological Johnson and Owen (2005, p. 7) visited However, the western Munson Research Center (JJERC), Fall Line 51 sites in 11 counties in Florida from Sandhills in ANF was surveyed from Sandhills Natural Area, and Ohoopee 2000 to 2003 that overlapped with the 1995–2007, and researchers were only Dunes Natural Area (J. Jensen, GDNR, sites visited by Franz and Smith. They able to locate 18 breeding ponds personal communication, September 14, found that of 51 sites visited (totaling 64 (containing larvae or breeding adults) in 2010; L. Smith, JJERC, personal ponds), only 26 ponds and adjacent 265 ephemeral ponds surveyed (Means communication, September 11, 2010; upland habitat had excellent habitat and Means 1998a, p. 5). Means et al. Stevenson 2000, p. 4; Stevenson and quality (e.g., multiple ephemeral ponds (2008, p. 6) found only 5 adult striped Cash 2008, p. 252; Stevenson et al. surrounded by fire-maintained native newts and no larvae in the past 10 years. 2009a, pp. 2–3). Most of these locations uplands) capable of supporting striped Since 2000, severe drought conditions are within the Dougherty Plain (Baker newts. Only 4 of these 26 sites had were experienced at these ponds, and Co.), Tifton Uplands (Irwin, Lanier, and multiple breeding ponds needed to newts were shown to be declining. Lowndes Counties), and the Barrier comprise metapopulations. They were Recent surveys conducted in the Island Sequence (Bryan, Camden, found in Clay, Marion, and Putnam Munson Sandhills in 2010 were not able Charlton, Evans, and Long Counties) Counties in Camp Blanding Military to locate any striped newts at any of the (Dodd and LaClaire 1995, pp. 40–42). Reservation (Clay), Jennings State Forest breeding ponds (Means, CPI, personal From 1993 to 1994, Dodd and LaClaire (Clay), Ocala National Forest (Marion), communication, 2010). The precipitous (1995, p. 40) found striped newts in one and Katherine Ordway Preserve-Swisher apparent declines now being seen at pond each at five sites in Irwin, Baker, Memorial Sanctuary (Putnam) (Johnson ANF could occur elsewhere on and Charlton Counties, and a series of and Owen 2005, p. 7). protected lands within the striped ponds at Ft. Stewart in Bryan and Evans newt’s range, despite the protection of From 2005 to 2010, Enge (FWC, Counties. A pond in Baker County at habitat. This indicates that perhaps personal communication, 2010) JJERC was found to be a new location, other threats (e.g., disease and drought) surveyed ponds in suitable habitat on 32 and extends the known range west of may continue to act on the species at conservation lands in Florida. He found the Flint River approximately 115 km these sites. (71 mi) farther from the nearest recorded breeding ponds with newts in 58 ponds As mentioned above, striped newts site (LaClaire et al. 1995, pp. 103–104; on 11 of the 32 conservation lands. He have only been found at five locations Franz and Smith 1999, p. 13). Striped also found that although newts had a in Georgia, and these sites are highly newts were first found on Trail Ridge in wider range in Florida than Georgia, fragmented and isolated (Stevenson 1924 near Okefenokee National Wildlife they remained abundant only on public 2000, p. 4). An amphibian survey on Refuge (ONWR), but this area has been lands in Clay, Marion, and Putnam 196 ephemeral ponds in 17 counties on highly modified since the 1940s (Dodd Counties. This is consistent with the timber company lands in the Coastal 1995, p. 44; Dodd and LaClaire 1995, surveys conducted by Franz and Smith Plain of southeastern Georgia did not pp. 39–40), and newts are no longer (1999, pp. 8–9) and Johnson and Owen locate any striped newts in Georgia; found in this area, except for possibly in (2005, p. 7). He found that there were however, striped newts were found in the ONWR. In 2008, a new striped newt a total of 49 extant populations known four ponds in Florida (Wigley 1999, pp. site was found in Georgia in Camden from the peninsula of Florida and 7 5–10). Stevenson (2000, p. 3) looked at County, which is the first record for this populations from the panhandle. An 25 historic striped newt localities in county since 1953 (Stevenson et al. isolated breeding pond farther than Georgia and was only able to find 2 sites 2009b, p. 248). 1,000 m (3,300 ft) from the closest other (8 percent) that had multiple breeding breeding pond represents a separate ponds and upland habitat that would Population Status and Trends population (Enge, FWC, personal support striped newt populations. As of Surveys have been conducted for communication, 2010). The striped 2010, only 2 properties in the State are striped newts at many sites within newt metapopulations (i.e., multiple known to support viable populations: Florida and Georgia. These surveys have breeding ponds with enough upland to JJERC and Fort Stewart Army Base found that the number of known allow for dispersal) are now only found (Jensen, GDNR, personal occupied sites has declined and on public lands in Clay, Putnam, and communication, 2010; Stevenson et al. occupied sites are limited to just a few Marion Counties. Populations still exist 2009a, p. 2). The Fort Stewart counties. However, historical in 10 other counties in Florida, but population lies within the range of the information on the location of striped these counties have fewer than 3 eastern genetic group on the Atlantic newts is difficult to confirm, as most of breeding ponds and these populations Coastal Plain and was represented by these sites underwent substantial land are considered vulnerable to extirpation approximately 10 known wetlands. use changes since newts were first (Enge, FWC, personal communication, Since 2002, striped newts have been collected (Dodd et al. 2005, p. 887). 2010). found at only one wetland at Fort Franz and Smith (1999, p. 8) reviewed The status of the striped newt is Stewart (Stevenson et al. 2009, p. 2). 100 records from 20 counties in Florida unknown on private lands due to the The JJERC population lies within the between 1922 and 1995, and conducted difficulty in accessing these lands; range of the western genetic group on surveys between 1989 and 1995. They however, Enge (FWC, personal the Gulf Coastal Plain, and is found that 4 historical ponds had newts, communication, 2010) was able to represented by 5 known wetlands. In

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32917

annual surveys from 2002 to 2010, habitats have been destroyed or Silvicultural practices, including researchers confirmed striped newts modified in the past due to: (1) mechanical site preparation, pond from only 3 of these 5 known wetlands Conversion of habitat to intensely ditching, soil disturbance, and the use (Smith, JJERC, personal communication, managed, planted pine plantations or of fertilizer and herbicides, can interfere 2010). Evidence suggests that both the naturally regenerated stands (Dodd with migration and successful eastern and western striped newt 1995b, p. 129; Wear and Greis 2002, p. reproduction (Dodd 1995b, p. 130; Dodd populations in Georgia are rare and 46); (2) loss of habitat resulting from and LaClaire 1995, pp. 43–44; Means declining. Most suitable striped newt urban development (Zwick and Carr and Means 2005, pp. 59–60; Means habitat in Georgia has been lost to 2006, pp. 4–6); (3) degradation of habitat 2008, p. 29). Pond ditching, which is development or converted to pine due to fire suppression (Means 2008, used to drain ponds to create ideal plantations and silviculture (Dodd and pp. 27–28); and (4) degradation of the conditions for silvicultural operations, LaClaire 1995, p. 43). habitat by the use of off-road vehicles is detrimental to striped newts, because and road construction (Means 1996, p. it alters pond hydrology and facilitates Summary of Information Pertaining to 2; Means 2001; p. 31, Means 2003 p. 6; predatory fish movement into otherwise the Five Factors Means et al. 1994a., pp. 5–6). fishless ponds (Means 2008, p. 30). Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) Ditching creates a shortened Natural Pine Forest Conversion and its implementing regulations (50 hydroperiod, reducing the amount of CFR 424) set forth procedures for adding Natural pine forests (i.e., longleaf pine time striped newts have to undergo species to the Federal Lists of forest) that once were found from metamorphosis, which can eventually Endangered and Threatened Wildlife southeastern Virginia through eastern decrease the number of reproducing and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Texas have declined to about 13 million adults (Means 2008, p. 31). ha (33 million ac), and planted pine Act, a species may be determined to be Urban Development endangered or threatened based on any plantations increased to more than 12 of the following five factors: million ha (30 million ac) by 1999 Alteration of upland habitat to urban (A) The present or threatened (Dodd 1995b., p. 129; Wear and Greis development can create habitat destruction, modification, or 2002, p. 46). There are presently about fragmentation and loss of curtailment of its habitat or range; 11 million ha (27 million ac) of metapopulations of striped newts. In 10 (B) Overutilization for commercial, managed pine plantations where natural coastal Georgia counties, the human recreational, scientific, or educational longleaf pines were once found (Frost population is expected to increase 51 purposes; 2006, p. 36). Within the longleaf pine percent by 2030 (Center for Quality (C) Disease or predation; ecosystem in the South’s coastal plains, Growth and Regional Development (D) The inadequacy of existing only 2.2 percent of the original range 2006, p. 4), but no estimate of impact on regulatory mechanisms; or exists (Frost 2006, p. 13; Wear and Greis native habitats was provided. Striped (E) Other natural or manmade factors 2002, p. 66). Between 1936 and 1989, newts have been found within 5 of these affecting its continued existence. longleaf pine forests within the range of counties in Georgia, including Bryan, In making this finding, information the striped newt in Florida decreased Camden, Long, Liberty, and Screven pertaining to the striped newt in from more than 3 million ha (7.6 million Counties (Franz and Smith 1999, p. 13, relation to the five factors provided in ac) to only 384,500 ha (950,000 ac), an Stevenson 2000, pp. 6–7). Zwick and section 4(a)(1) of the Act is discussed 88 percent decrease (Dodd 1995b., p. Carr (2006, pp. 4–6) modeled human below. 129). Longleaf pine forest in Georgia population growth in Florida, and In considering whether a species may declined 36 percent between 1981 and concluded that 2.8 million ha (7 million warrant listing under any of the five 1988 (Dodd 1995b., p. 129). ac) of land will be converted to urban factors, we look beyond the species’ Habitat loss from the conversion of use by 2060. Of the 2.8 million ha (7 exposure to a potential threat or natural pine forests to intensely million ac), they estimated that about aggregation of threats under any of the managed, planted pine plantations has 1.1 million ha (2.7 million ac) of native factors, and evaluate whether the greatly disrupted the dispersal of striped habitat would be destroyed to species responds to those potential newts between breeding ponds and accommodate urban development threats in a way that causes actual upland habitat. Means and Means (Zwick and Carr 2006, p. 2). It is impact to the species. The identification (1998a, p. 6) found that striped newt predicted that more than 800,000 ha (2 of threats that might impact a species habitat at the Munson Sandhills varied million ac) of native habitat in Florida negatively may not be sufficient to due to differences in silvicultural will be developed by 2060 within a mile compel a finding that the species practice between the eastern and of public conservation lands (Zwick and warrants listing. The information must western portions of the Sandhills. In the Carr 2006, p. 19; FWC 2008, p. 8). Urban include evidence indicating that the western portion of the Sandhills found sprawl where newts occur will fragment threats are operative and, either singly within ANF, native groundcover striped newt ponds from upland or in aggregation, affect the status of the remains in the second-growth longleaf habitats. This will limit movement of species. Threats are significant if they pine forests, where striped newts spend newts between breeding ponds and drive, or contribute to, the risk of most of their adult life. However, the make them more vulnerable to extinction of the species, such that the eastern portion of the Munson Sandhills extinction, as the genetic viability of the species warrants listing as endangered has been clear-cut and roller-chopped, newts declines (FWC 2008, p. 8). or threatened, as those terms are defined and planted in sand pine (Pinus clausa), Powerlines and natural gas rights-of- in the Act. which is now a closed canopy with little ways impact groundcover associated native groundcover. Surveys of ponds with longleaf pine adjacent to breeding Factor A. The Present or Threatened located in the eastern Munson Sandhills ponds, creating barriers to dispersal and Destruction, Modification, or found no striped newts after the site was eventually decreasing populations Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range converted to sand pine plantations (Means 2001, pp. 31–32). Striped newt Striped newts have been found to use (Means and Means 1998a, p. 4; Means habitat in the Tallahassee Red Hills has both aquatic and upland habitats and Means 2005, pp. 58–59; Means been impacted by urban sprawl and throughout their life cycle. Most of these 2008, p. 30). land conversion from 1824 to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32918 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

present, and has resulted in the grasses used by the newts along the Summary of Factor A extirpation of striped newts from this pond margins (Means 2006, p. 196). We have identified a number of area (Means and Means 1998b, p. 8). In Florida, some public land managers threats to striped newt habitat that have Small, isolated wetlands support do not currently have the resources to resulted in the destruction and breeding populations of striped newts. implement effective habitat modification of habitat in the past, are However, small, ephemeral wetlands management programs (Howell et al. continuing to threaten habitat now, and (less than 0.2 ha (0.5 ac)) receive no 2003, p.10). In a questionnaire to State, are expected to continue to threaten protection from development (Johnson Federal, and local land managers striped newt habitat in the future. 2003, p. 19; Dodd and Cade 1998, p. throughout Florida, the Service asked Indications are that the loss of habitat 337; see discussion under Factor D what impediments they had in due to conversion of natural pine forests below). The loss of these small, effectively using prescribed fire to to more intense silvicultural ephemeral wetlands can potentially manage scrub, a fire-maintained management regimes will continue in increase extinction rates of newts by ecosystem. Many respondents indicated interior portions of the range of the limiting migration between ponds and that funding, staff, and smoke striped newt. Striped newt habitat corridors, thus decreasing management issues substantially recolonization of local populations within the species’ range in Florida and reduced their ability to burn (Service Georgia is currently threatened with (Gibbs 1993, pp. 25–26; LaClaire and 2006, Excel spreadsheet; Thomson 2010, Franz 1990, p. 13; Semlitsch and Bodie habitat loss and modification resulting p. 12). Less than 25 percent of public from urban development. Habitat loss 1998, pp. 1131–1132). Green (2003, p. land managers had been ranked as 341) concluded that pond-breeding and fragmentation due to urban having an excellent prescribed burn development and road construction is amphibians, like striped newts, that program (Florida Department of have highly fluctuating populations and expected to continue in the future. Lack Environmental Protection 2007, p. 1). of, or inappropriate use of, prescribed high frequencies of local extinctions are On most public lands in Florida, striped likely to be affected rapidly by habitat fire is ongoing and likely to continue in newt habitat is likely to continue to the future, and has adverse effects on fragmentation. The loss of breeding degrade unless land management ponds due to habitat destruction will striped newt habitat and extant funding and staffing increase in the populations. On the basis of this reduce corridors and limit migration future. between the ponds and the uplands. analysis, we find that the destruction, Off-Road Vehicles and Road Impacts modification, or curtailment of the Prescribed Fire striped newt’s habitat is currently a Prescribed fire plays an important role Means et al. (1994, pp. 6–7; 2008, pp. threat and is expected to persist and in maintaining productive breeding 11 and 16) found that their study ponds possibly escalate in the future. Because ponds for striped newts (Kirkman et al. at the Munson Sandhills in ANF off- this threat is ongoing and we expect it 1999, p. 556). Burning in dry ponds is road vehicle (ORV) use had degraded will continue over the coming decades; also necessary to maintain the quality of the littoral zone of the breeding ponds we consider the threat to be imminent. vegetation needed for striped newts into barren sandy beaches unsuitable for However, based on the large amount of (Johnson 2005, p. 97). Fire suppression striped newts. The littoral zone provides potential habitat that is currently in at many sites with newt breeding ponds shallow, warm water where small public ownership, and fact that most of has been concurrent with the aquatic invertebrates are concentrated, the known striped newt ponds are on conversion of uplands to pine providing food for newts. ORV use also conservation lands, we believe the plantations (Johnson 2005, p. 97). Lack destroys the grasses and grass-like magnitude of this threat is moderate. of fire can result in the succession of vegetation around the ponds needed by Based upon our review of the best natural pine forests converting to fire- newts for protection from predators commercial and scientific data intolerant species, dominated by such as wading birds (Means et al. 2008, available, we conclude that the present hardwoods (Means 2008, pp. 27–28). p. 11). In 1994, 27 of 100 ponds at ANF or threatened destruction, modification, Wear and Greis (2002, pp. 46–47) found were found to be damaged by ORV use, or curtailment of its habitat or range is that 3.9 million ha (9.7 million ac) of including 3 of 18 striped newt ponds an imminent threat of moderate natural pine forest throughout the (Means et al. 1994, pp. 6–7). By 2006, magnitude to the striped newt, both Southeast were reclassified to hardwood ORV impacts were documented at now and in the foreseeable future. and natural oak-pine forests. Of the nearly every pond at ANF (Means et al. remaining longleaf pine habitat in the 2008, p. 16). However, by 2010, the ANF Factor B. Overutilization for southeast, only 0.2 percent is managed closed the Munson Sandhills to ORV Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or with fire and can support native use to protect the striped newt ponds Educational Purposes longleaf pine species of plants and (Petrick, USFS, personal The petition provided information animals, including striped newts (Frost communication, 2010; see discussion that striped newts were collected and 2006, p. 38). The succession of natural under Factor D below). sold during the 1970s and 1980s. pine forest to more shade-tolerant Striped newts dispersing from However, in our 90-day finding (75 FR species, such as oaks and hickories, can breeding ponds to upland habitat are 13720, March 23, 2010), we determined result in the loss of ground cover, such also impacted by roads and highways. that there was no evidence to support as wire grass, needed by striped newts These impacts usually result in direct the existence of any threat under this for shelter and foraging (Means 2001, p. road mortality; desiccation of small, factor. We obtained no additional 31). Frequencies of prescribed burns in moist-bodied animals (like newts) on information during the status review to these uplands need to take place in a 1- dry asphalt; and increased exposure of indicate that this factor is currently a to 3-year cycle to provide suitable these small animals to aerial predation threat to the species or will become a habitat for striped newts (Johnson and (Means 1996, p. 2). At one study pond threat in the foreseeable future. Gjerstad 2006, pp. 287–292). This would in ANF, Means (2003, p. 6) found that Therefore, based on our review of the also reduce the naturally woody most striped newts were emigrating and best available scientific and commercial components around the ephemeral immigrating to and from the breeding information, we conclude that the ponds, and stimulate flowering of pond across a major highway, U.S. 319. striped newt is not threatened by

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32919

overutilization for commercial, the disease. The presence of this disease become more susceptible to disease recreational, scientific, or educational in the range of the striped newt is not outbreaks, which could potentially purposes now or in the foreseeable confirmed, but is a potential cause for result in some localized population future. concern, given the deleterious effect of extinctions, as has occurred with similar the disease on other amphibian species. species. Because, from the best available Factor C. Disease or Predation A group of viruses belonging to the information, we do not know if disease In our 90-day finding (75 FR 13720, genus Ranavirus has been shown to is currently affecting the striped newt March 23, 2010), we found no evidence affect some local populations and cause populations, but we believe it is likely that predation was a threat to the striped localized die-offs of amphibians (Gray et that it will in the coming decades, we newt, and we obtained no additional al. 2009a, p. 244). The Ranavirus could consider this threat to be nonimminent. information during the status review be affecting populations of the striped Since disease has resulted in loss to that would change that finding. As to newt, but it is difficult to detect in less similar amphibian species, and disease, below we summarize what was abundant species (Gray et al. 2009a, p. additional stressors (e.g., habitat loss, previously stated in the 90-day finding 244), and we do not have confirmation drought, and climate change) might (75 FR 13720, March 23, 2010), as well that it is present in striped newt make some populations of striped newts as additional information obtained populations. However, Green et al. more vulnerable to disease, the during the status review. (2002, p. 334) found that Ranavirus was magnitude of this threat is moderate. Disease can be difficult to detect in the most frequent cause of amphibian Based upon our review of the best pond-breeding amphibians. In addition, mortality in at least 10 species, commercial and scientific data the rarity of striped newts increases the including the spotted salamander available, we conclude that disease is a difficulty of documenting mortality in (Ambystoma maculatum) and eastern nonimminent threat of moderate the species. However, there are reasons newt, so this virus may be impacting magnitude to the striped newt within to believe that disease may be a possible striped newt populations in breeding the foreseeable future. factor in the decline of striped newts. ponds where other subspecies of eastern Chytridiomycosis (a disease caused by newts, such as the central newt Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) is (Notophthalmus viridescens Regulatory Mechanisms implicated or documented as a louisianensis), are found. There are two There is currently little Federal and causative agent in many New World reasons for the emergence of Ranavirus State protection of isolated wetland amphibian declines (Blaustein and in amphibian populations: (1) Reduced habitat and surrounding upland Johnson 2003, p. 91). Ouellet et al. amphibian immunity associated with habitats. While many States in the (2005, p. 1434) documented the chytrid increased occurrence of anthropogenic southeastern United States regulate fungal infections in the eastern newts stressors (e.g. drought), and (2) those activities affecting wetlands that (N. viridescens) in North America. A introduction of Ranavirus strains into are exempt from section 404 of the subspecies of the eastern newt, the amphibian populations by humans Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 central or common newt (N. v. (Gray et al. 2009b, p. 2). U.S.C.1251 et seq.), Florida is the only louisanensis), has been found in the Another recently described disease, State known to regulate isolated same ponds as the striped newt at ANF caused by a fungus-like protist wetlands. In Georgia, there are no State and other ponds in North Florida (Amphibiocystidium viridescens), has laws that protect isolated wetlands. (Means 2007, p. 19; Means 2001, pp. been reported in eastern newt Lack of protection for upland habitat 19–21; Means et al. 1994, pp. 9–10 and populations (Raffel et al. 2008, p. 204). under wetland statutes can result in loss 30–32). The effect of the disease on Specifically, evidence of mortality and of recruitment of efts and paedomorphs striped newts is unknown; however, morbidity due to infection with this into the breeding adult population, California newts (Taricha torosa) have disease, and the potential importance of which would reduce the potential for tested positive for the pathogen in secondary infections as a source of the population to persist (Semlitsch ponds where a die-off of the species was mortality, were reported (Raffel et al. 1998, p. 1116). previously reported (Padgett-Flohr and 2008, p. 204). Also, Cook (2008) found Federal Statutes and Regulations Longcore 2007, p. 177). a striped newt in captivity to be infected Some researchers believe that disease with a protistan parasite that has caused The CWA regulates the dredge and fill pathogens represent one of the potential disease in other species of amphibians. activities that adversely affect wetlands. causes of decline of the striped newt This parasite, currently identified as Section 404 of CWA regulates the (Blaustein and Johnson 2003, pp. 87– Demomycoides spp. (Cook 2007, p. 2), discharge of dredge or fill materials into 92). The presence of chytrid fungal caused disease resulting in a complete wetlands. Discharges are commonly infections could particularly threaten loss of recruitment of the Mississippi associated with projects to create dry populations of striped newts, as they gopher frog population in Harrison land for development sites, water- may not have the resiliency to recover County, Mississippi, in 2003. control projects, and land clearing. The after a population crash caused by this U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) disease (Ouellet et al. 2005, p. 1437). Summary of Factor C and the U.S. Environmental Protection Further, the effect of this disease could We have found that several of the Agency (EPA) share the responsibility be exacerbated by other stressors, such diseases mentioned above have resulted for implementing the permitting as habitat degradation and climate in mortality of species similar to the program under section 404 of the CWA. change (Blaustein and Johnson 2003, p. striped newt, such as the eastern newt EPA and COE provided a guidance 91; Ouellet et al. 2005, p. 1432; (which is in the same genus as the memorandum for implementing recent Rothermel et al. 2008, pp. 3, 13). Daszak striped newt). Drought conditions are court cases addressing jurisdiction over et al. (2005, p. 3236) found that the predicted to be more severe and longer waters of the United States under the impact of Batrachochytrium in the coming years. As drought (see CWA, specifically addressing the term dendrobatidis on amphibians can vary discussion under Factor E below) and ‘‘navigable waters’’ (EPA and COE 2001, among species, and several factors, such loss of habitat (see discussion under pp. 1–7; EPA and COE 2008, pp. 1–13). as climate (i.e., drought) and life-history Factor A above) continue to act as It is clear from this guidance that traits, can affect the species’ response to stressors, striped newt populations may isolated wetlands are not considered

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32920 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

waters of the United States under the management activities within the refuge Mayport, and Naval Submarine Base ‘‘navigable waters’’ definition and thus system. Kings Bay. However, the INRMPs do not are not provided protection under the On military installations, the include specific management measures CWA. Further wetland regulations are Department of Defense (DOD) must for the striped newt. reviewed by the COE for the conserve and maintain native The Forest and Rangeland Renewable development of wetlands less than 1.2 ecosystems, viable wildlife populations, Resources Planning Act (16 U.S.C. 36),of ha (3 ac) under a permit called Federal and State listed species, and 1974, as amended by the National Forest Nationwide Permit 26 (Kirkman et al. habitats as vital elements of its natural Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1999, p. 553; Snodgrass et al. 2000, p. resource management programs, to the 1600 et seq.), requires that each national 415). extent these requirements are consistent forest be managed under a forest plan The Department of the Interior, with the military mission (DOD which must be revised every 10 years. through the Service, administers the Instruction 4715.3). Amendments to the Regulations governing preparation of National Wildlife Refuge System. The Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670 et seq.) require forest plans are found in 36 CFR 219. National Wildlife Refuge System each military department to prepare and The purpose of a forest plan is to Administration Act of 1966 (NWRAA; implement an integrated natural provide an integrated framework for 16 U.S.C. 668dd–668ee) provides resources management plan (INRMP) for analyzing and approving future, site- legislation for the administration of a each installation under its jurisdiction. specific projects and programs, national network of lands and water for The INRMP must be prepared in including conservation of listed species. cooperation with the Service and State Identification and implementation of the conservation, management, and fish and wildlife agencies, and must land management and conservation restoration of fish, wildlife, and plant reflect the mutual agreement of these measures to benefit striped newts vary resources and their habitats for the parties concerning conservation, between forests. For example, on the benefit of the American people. protection, and management of wildlife National Forests in Florida, striped Amendment of the NWRAA in 1997 resources (16 U.S.C. 670a). Each INRMP newts are not designated as a species for requires the refuge system to ensure that must provide for wildlife, land and which special management the biological integrity, diversity, and forest management, wildlife-oriented prescriptions are implemented. There environmental health of refuges be recreation, wildlife habitat are no specific land management maintained and requires development enhancement, wetland protection, objectives for striped newts on the and implementation of a comprehensive sustainable public use of natural National Forests in Florida. The Land conservation plan (CCP) for each refuge. resources that are not inconsistent with and Resource Management Plan for the The CCP must identify and describe the the needs of wildlife resources, and National Forests in Florida (U.S. Forest wildlife and related habitats in the enforcement of natural resource laws Service 1999, entire) provides for the refuge and actions needed to correct (16 U.S.C 670a). DOD regulations restoration of longleaf pine forest significant problems that may adversely mandate that resources and expertise through various management areas affect wildlife populations and habitat needed to establish and implement an located at Apalachicola National Forest (16 U.S.C. 668dd(e)). Striped newt integrated natural resources (ANF) and Ocala National Forest (ONF). habitat within national wildlife refuges management program are maintained Metapopulations of striped newts are is protected from loss due to urban (DOD Instruction 4715.3). These found at both of these forests. However, development. Striped newts have regulations further define the INRMP a decline of striped newt populations at historically been observed at St. Marks requirements, and mandate that plans ANF has occurred over the past 10 years National Wildlife Refuge (SMNWR) in be revised every 5 years and that they (Means et al. 2008, p. 6). Florida and Okefenokee National ensure the military lands suitable for State Statutes and Regulations Wildlife Refuge (ONWR) in Georgia. management of wildlife are actually Striped newts were historically found at managed to conserve wildlife resources Generally, State statutes and ONWR in the 1920s, but the only known (DOD Instruction 4715.3). regulations protect striped newts from breeding pond was last occupied by The effectiveness of individual take, but the effectiveness and newts in 1994. Aicher (ONWR, personal INRMPs to protect striped newts vary implementation of regulations vary communication, September 14, 2010) between and within military between States. The striped newt is not has not found striped newts at ONWR, departments. Because the striped newt currently a State-listed species in even though this breeding pond is still is not a protected species in Florida, the Florida. However, the ephemeral ponds in good condition with well-maintained INRMP for Camp Blanding Military in Florida have some protection under uplands surrounding it. At SMNWR, Installation does not specifically Florida State regulations. The five Water surveys conducted in 2002–2005 and address management programs for this Management Districts (WMDs) and the again in 2009 were not able to locate species. However, management Florida Department of Environmental any newts at 34 ponds (Enge, FWC, activities that benefit the red-cockaded Protection (FDEP) regulate wetland personal communication, 2010; Dodd et woodpecker and gopher tortoise, such protection. The WMDs include isolated al. 2007, p. 29). The last known as prescribed burning, should also wetlands in the Environmental Resource observation was in 1978, but now the benefit the striped newt. The striped Permit process, which requires a permit habitat appears to be too degraded to be newt is listed as threatened by the State for any activities that would impact a suitable for striped newts due to the of Georgia, so the INRMP for Fort wetland (SJRWMD 2010, p. 1). Under lack of fire. Striped newts may Stewart Range and Garrison does the WMDs permitting process, indirectly benefit from fire management address the specific conservation and mitigation for impacts to wetlands programs intended to maintain and management of this species. below a minimum permitting threshold restore habitat for species such as the The Navy does incorporate protective size of 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) is not addressed red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides ecosystem management into INRMPs for unless the wetland supports an borealis) and gopher tortoise (Gopherus Naval Air Station Jacksonville (and endangered or threatened species, is polyphemus), but no systematic associated Rodman Bombing Range, connected by standing or flowing monitoring programs are in place to Pinecastle Range, and Outlying Landing surface water at seasonal high water evaluate striped newt responses to land Field Whitehouse), Naval Station level to one or more wetlands that total

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32921

more than 0.2 ha (0.5 ac), or is of more rules and regulations impede However, recent changes at ANF and than minimal value to fish and wildlife construction of any type (Ga. Code Ann. ONF have made ORVs off-limits in the (SJRWMD 2010, p. 1). This minimum section 27–3–132(b)). Georgia’s Munson Sandhills and the ephemeral permitting threshold size was adopted Endangered Wildlife Act of 1973 ponds in the ONF where striped newt by the WMD, ‘‘based on consensus of establishes statutory protection for ponds were being affected by ORV use scientific and regulatory opinions rather protected species (Ga. Code Ann. (Petrick, USFS, personal than on biological and hydrological section 27–3–130–133). Georgia Board communication, 2006). evidence’’ (Hart and Newman 1995, p. of Natural Resources Rule (Chapter 391– Summary of Factor D 4). However, under Florida Statue Title 4–10) mirrors the statue, but includes XXVIII Chapter 371.406, agriculture permitting for research under a Current Federal, State, and local (which includes silviculture) has scientific collecting permit (Ga. Code regulations do not protect the vast exemptions to alter topography unless it Ann. section 27–2–12). Any majority of striped newts or their habitat is for the sole purpose of impounding or implementing regulations are on private lands. In Georgia, striped obstructing surface waters. constrained by these statutory newt populations on private lands are The size of the wetland is primarily requirements, and therefore can only not protected under State regulations, how the State of Florida and the COE prohibit collection, killing, or selling of even though the striped newt is listed as address wetland regulations. Snodgrass individual newts. There are no threatened in that State. The status of et al. (2000, p. 415) found that wetland regulatory or permitting mechanisms in striped newts on private lands is values were based on four assumptions: place in Georgia to address habitat unknown, but is likely threatened by (1) That small wetlands are ephemeral; destruction or striped newt mortality ongoing land uses, such as development (2) because wetlands are ephemeral, resulting from development projects on and silviculture. Regulatory they support few species; (3) species private lands. Consequently, striped mechanisms at the local, State, and supported by small wetlands are also newts and their habitat in private Federal levels provide varying degrees found in large wetlands; and (4) ownership in Georgia are vulnerable to of protection to wetlands, but do not populations found in individual ongoing and future habitat loss and protect the small, ephemeral wetlands wetlands are independent from other mortality. that striped newts use for breeding sites. wetlands. Snodgrass et al. (2000 p. 219) Many regulations do not address concluded that these assumptions are Local Laws and Ordinances management needs of the striped newt. not accurate and that there is no Florida’s State Comprehensive Plan We find that existing regulatory relationship between wetland size and and Growth Management Act of 1985 mechanisms are insufficient to reduce species richness. Instead, wetland (F.A.C. 163 Part II) requires each county or remove threats to striped newts on regulations should include a diversity of to develop local comprehensive public and private lands, including hydroperiods and connectedness of planning documents. Comprehensive wetlands that may support striped newt wetlands (Snodgrass et al. 2000, p. 219). plans contain policy statements and populations, and we therefore find that Protecting these small wetlands will natural resource protection objectives, the inadequacy of existing regulatory help maintain biodiversity with respect including protection of State and mechanisms is an imminent threat to to the number of plant, invertebrate, and federally listed species, but they are this species throughout all of its range, vertebrate species, including striped only effective if counties develop, as it is occurring now and not expected newts (Moler and Franz 1987, pp. 236– implement, and enforce ordinances. to change in the near future. This threat 237). The loss of these small, ephemeral Some Florida county governments have is pervasive throughout the species’ wetlands changes the metapopulation developed protective ordinances for entire range, so the magnitude of this dynamics of striped newts by reducing State and federally listed species, but all threat is moderate. Therefore, based on the number of individuals that can such ordinances are based on our review of the best available disperse and reproduce successfully, compliance with the State or Federal scientific and commercial information, and by increasing the dispersal distance law, rather than enacting more stringent we conclude that the inadequacy of among wetlands (Semlitsch and Bodie local laws. Consequently, Florida’s local existing regulatory mechanisms is an 1998, p. 1131). The reduction in governments provide no additional imminent threat of moderate magnitude wetland densities decreases the protection to striped newts. We are to the striped newt, both now and in the probability that populations can be aware of no county or local regulations foreseeable future. or ordinances that protect the striped recovered by adjacent source Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade newt beyond existing State law in populations, due to greater distances Factors Affecting the Species’ Continued between wetlands, which eventually Georgia. Existence leads to population extinctions (Gibbs Conservation Efforts To Increase 1993, pp. 25–26; Semlitsch and Bodie The effects of a long-term drought Adequacy of Existing Regulations 1998, pp. 1131–1132). This makes it have contributed to the decline of important to not only consider local and As we indicated above, the striped newts from breeding ponds at regional wetland distribution in wetland inadequacies of existing regulations are not only the Munson Sandhills of the regulations, but also the protection of inextricably linked to threats associated ANF in Florida, but at breeding sites the surrounding non-breeding uplands, with the present or threatened throughout Florida and Georgia. in which the newts complete their destruction, modification, or Droughts normally occur in cycles and metamorphosis from efts to adults, and curtailment of the striped newt’s habitat amphibian populations fluctuate with from which the adults emigrate back to or range, explained under Factor A drought conditions (Dodd 1992, pp. the breeding ponds. above. However, the U.S. Forest Service 138–139). However, droughts lasting In Georgia, a State statute requires (USFS) has now restricted or closed several years (more than 4) were found that any rule and regulation ORV use in sensitive biological to have affected reproductive success, promulgated for protected species communities, such as wetlands (USFS resulting in population decline (Dodd (including the striped newt) shall not 2010, p. 1), at both ANF and ONF. ORVs 1992, p. 139; Dodd and Johnson 2007, affect rights on private property or in have historically been a recurring issue p. 150; Petranka 1998, p. 450). Surveys public or private streams, nor shall such in or around ponds at ANF and ONF. conducted at the Camp Blanding

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32922 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Training Site in 2000 to 2001, during a systematic translocation of at-risk striped newt experts and other Federal drought, did not find any striped newts, human populations to interior locations and State agencies. due to dry breeding ponds. In previous (Gilkey 2008, pp. 9–12). Florida’s In considering whether a species may years, surveys found 7 to 10 sites with interior natural ecological communities warrant listing under any of the five newts (Gregory et al. 2006, p. 487). will likely be impacted by the factors, we look beyond the species’ Striped newts will respond to drought increasing need of urban infrastructure exposure to a potential threat or conditions in several ways: (1) to support retreating coastal inhabitants. aggregation of threats under any of the Temporary extirpation; (2) migration to While available data are not adequately factors, and evaluate whether the adjacent areas with better habitat specific to evaluate the potential direct species responds to those potential conditions; and (3) survival in upland effects of predicted climate changes on threats in a way that causes actual habitat, with recolonization once water the striped newt or provide information impact to the species. The identification has returned (Dodd 1993, p. 612). on just how much habitat may be lost, of threats that might impact a species Even with the return of water at the any habitat loss related to climate negatively may not be sufficient to Munson Sandhills in ANF, striped newt change would be in addition to the 20 compel a finding that the species populations have not recovered (Means, percent loss projected to occur by 2060 warrants listing. The information must CPI, personal communication, 2010). due solely to people moving into include evidence indicating that the Although droughts are a naturally Florida (FWC 2008, p. 2). threats are operative and, either singly occurring event in the ecology of the or in aggregation, affect the status of the striped newt, prolonged droughts can Summary of Factor E species. Threats are significant if they worsen threats to already small We have identified that long-term drive, or contribute to, the risk of populations, and exacerbate the droughts have resulted in the loss of extinction of the species, such that the degradation and fragmentation of striped newt breeding ponds, species warrants listing as endangered striped newt habitat that is already exacerbating existing population or threatened, as those terms are defined taking place (discussed under Factor A fluctuations and causing local in the Act. This status review identified threats above), leading to extinction of striped extinctions. This threat is ongoing and to the striped newt attributable to newts in many areas. is expected to continue in the future, We expect climate change will result Factors A, C, D, and E. The primary especially because threats to habitat in the loss and degradation of striped threats to the striped newt are habitat continue to affect existing striped newt newt habitat in the future, particularly loss, disease, inadequate regulatory populations and may make them more in Florida. According to the mechanisms, and drought. Habitat susceptible to potential population Intergovernmental Panel on Climate destruction and modification (Factor A) extinction. On the basis of this analysis, Change Synthesis Report (IPCC 2007, p. in the form of conversion of native 2), warming of the earth’s climate is we find that the natural factor of long- longleaf pine forests to intensively ‘‘unequivocal,’’ as is now evident from term droughts is currently a threat and managed pine forests and urban observations of increases in average is expected to persist, and possibly development are occurring on private global air and ocean temperatures, escalate in the future, as a result of lands throughout the range. Disease widespread melting of snow and ice, climate change, although climate change (Factor C) is expected to become more and rising sea level. Temperatures are itself is not an imminent threat. Because problematic for striped newts as predicted to rise from 2.0 degrees we expect this threat will occur over the additional habitat is lost and Celsius (°C) to 5.0 °C (3.6 degrees coming decades, we consider the threat fragmentation increases. Stressors such Fahrenheit (°F) to 9.0 °F) for North to be imminent. Throughout the entire as habitat loss (Factor A) and droughts America by the end of this century range of the striped newt, droughts are (Factor E) are expected to elevate risks (IPCC 2007, p. 9). The IPCC (2007, pp. predicted to be more severe and longer of diseases in newts because this has 2, 6) report outlines several scenarios in duration in the coming years, so we been the case with similar species. that are virtually certain or very likely believe the magnitude of this threat is Regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to occur in the next 50 years, including: high. Based upon our review of the best to prevent further loss of breeding (1) Over most land, there will be fewer commercial and scientific data ponds (Factor D) throughout the striped cold days and nights, and warmer and available, we conclude that other newt’s range. Existing regulations also more frequent hot days and nights; (2) natural or manmade factors affecting the do not protect striped newts on private Areas affected by drought will increase; species’ continued existence is an lands in Florida and Georgia. Long-term and (3) The frequency of heavy imminent threat of high magnitude to regional droughts in Florida and Georgia precipitation events over most land the striped newt, both now and in the (Factor E) have a negative impact on the areas will likely increase. The foreseeable future. long-term persistence of striped newts. Southeastern United States is predicted Finding Since 2000, the striped newt has been to experience more severe and longer monitored at 20 of the best breeding droughts. Other processes to be affected As required by the Act, we conducted ponds on ANF (Means, CPILC, personal by this projected warming include a review of the status of the species and communication, 2010; Means and rainfall (amount, seasonal timing, and considered the five factors in assessing Means 1998a., pp. 9–25; Means et al. distribution), storms (frequency and whether the striped newt is endangered 1994, pp. 14–24; Means et al. 2008, p. intensity), and sea level rise. or threatened throughout all or a 6). Since 2000, severe drought Indirect impacts are expected due to significant portion of its range. We conditions were experienced at these the relocation of people from flood- examined the best scientific and ponds, and newts were shown to be prone urban areas to inland areas commercial information available declining. However, despite improving (Ruppert et al. 2008, p. 127), including regarding the past, present, and future conditions at these ponds, no striped the relocation of millions of people to threats faced by the striped newt. We newts were located in 2010. The currently undeveloped interior natural reviewed the petition, information precipitous apparent declines now areas (Stanton and Ackerman 2007, p. available in our files, and other being seen at ANF could occur 15). Others have proposed available published and unpublished elsewhere on protected lands within the implementation of a large-scale information, and we consulted with striped newt’s range, despite the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32923

protection of habitat. This suggests that magnitude of threats, and the level of listing priority is the immediacy of perhaps other threats (e.g., disease and taxonomic distinctiveness by assigning threats. This criterion is intended to drought) may continue to act on the priority in descending order to ensure that the species that face actual, species at these sites. Drought monotypic genera (genus with one identifiable threats are given priority conditions are predicted to be more species), full species, and subspecies (or over those for which threats are only severe and longer in the coming years. equivalently, distinct population potential or that are intrinsically As described under Factor C, drought segments (DPSes) of vertebrates). We vulnerable but are not known to be and other factors continue to act as assign the striped newt a Listing Priority presently facing such threats. Factors A, stressors on existing striped newt Number (LPN) of 8, based on our D, and E are considered imminent populations and may make them more determination that the primary threats because they are occurring now and are susceptible to disease outbreaks and are moderate and imminent. These expected to continue to occur in the may result in the population extinction threats include habitat destruction, future. These actual, identifiable threats of some metapopulations. There has not disease, inadequate regulatory are covered in detail under the been any evidence of disease at other mechanisms, and droughts. Rationale discussion of Factors A, D, and E of this large metapopulations, such as ONF. for assigning the striped newt an LPN of finding. Because we find that threats On the basis of the best scientific and 8 is outlined below. under three factors (A, D, and E) are commercial information available, we Under the Service’s LPN Guidance, imminent, and the threat under one find that the petitioned action to list the the magnitude of threat is the first factor (C) to be nonimminent, we find striped newt as endangered or criterion we look at when establishing a the overall threats that the striped newt threatened is warranted. We will make listing priority. The guidance indicates is facing to be imminent. a determination on the status of the that species with the highest magnitude The third criterion in our LPN striped newt as endangered or of threat are those species facing the guidance is intended to devote threatened when we complete a greatest threats to their continued resources to those species representing proposed listing determination. existence. These species receive the highly distinctive or isolated gene pools However, as explained in more detail highest listing priority. The primary as reflected by taxonomy. The striped below, an immediate proposal of a threats to striped newt (e.g., habitat loss, newt is a valid taxon at the species regulation implementing this action is disease, inadequate regulatory level, and therefore receives a higher precluded by higher priority listing mechanisms, and drought) are occurring priority than subspecies or DPSes, but a actions, and progress is being made to in populations throughout the species’ lower priority than species in a add or remove qualified species from range. For Factor E, we consider the monotypic genus. The striped newt the Lists of Endangered and Threatened magnitude high because nearly all faces mostly moderate magnitude, Wildlife and Plants. populations are affected, and this factor largely imminent threats, and is a valid We have reviewed the available may lead to possible extirpation. Also, taxon at the species level. Thus, in information to determine if the existing throughout the entire range of the accordance with our LPN guidance, we and foreseeable threats render the striped newt, droughts are predicted to have assigned the striped newt an LPN species at risk of extinction now such be more severe and longer in the coming of 8. that issuing an emergency regulation years, which could have a detrimental We will continue to monitor the temporarily listing the species in effect on the species’ long-term survival. threats to the striped newt, and the accordance with section 4(b)(7) of the With drought as a possible cause for the species’ status on an annual basis, and Act is warranted. We have determined decline in the population at ANF, we should the magnitude or the imminence that issuing an emergency regulation predict that, with continued drought of the threats change, we will revisit our temporarily listing the striped newt is conditions, declines are likely to occur assessment of the LPN. not warranted for this species at this at other protected lands as well, with Work on a proposed listing time because there are no impending possible extirpation in those areas. We determination for the striped newt is actions that might result in extinction of consider the magnitude for Factors A precluded by work on higher priority the species that would be addressed and and C moderate, as most of the known listing actions with absolute statutory, alleviated by emergency listing, and the striped newt metapopulations are on court-ordered, or court-approved severity and timing of the threats are conservation lands, and, although deadlines and final listing such that the risk of extinction will not disease has been found in similar determinations for those species that occur over a short duration, or be species, no known metapopulations of were proposed for listing with funds caused by any one action. However, if striped newts have shown any evidence from Fiscal Year 2011. This work at any time we determine that issuing an of disease. Existing regulatory includes all the actions listed in the emergency regulation temporarily mechanisms at the local, State, and tables below under expeditious listing the striped newt is warranted, we Federal levels provide varying degrees progress. will initiate this action at that time. of protection to wetlands, but do not protect the small, ephemeral wetlands Preclusion and Expeditious Progress Listing Priority Number striped newts use for breeding sites. The Preclusion is a function of the listing The Service adopted guidelines on lack of regulatory protection has not priority of a species in relation to the September 21, 1983 (48 FR 43098), to prevented further loss of breeding ponds resources that are available and the cost establish a rational system for utilizing and adjacent upland habitat throughout and relative priority of competing available resources for the highest the species’ range. We consider this a demands for those resources. Thus, in priority species when adding species to threat that is moderate in magnitude. In any given fiscal year (FY), multiple the Lists of Endangered or Threatened sum, because we find that threats under factors dictate whether it will be Wildlife and Plants or reclassifying three factors (A, C, and D) are moderate, possible to undertake work on a listing species listed as threatened to we find the overall threats that the proposal or whether promulgation of endangered status. These guidelines, striped newt is facing to be moderate in such a proposal is precluded by higher titled ‘‘Endangered and Threatened magnitude. priority listing actions. Species Listing and Recovery Priority Under our LPN Guidance, the second The resources available for listing Guidelines,’’ address the immediacy and criterion we consider in assigning a actions are determined through the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32924 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

annual Congressional appropriations critical habitat designation subcap will maximum extent practicable’’ limitation process. The appropriation for the ensure that some funding is available to on the 90-day deadline for making a Listing Program is available to support address other listing activities’’ (House ‘‘substantial information’’ finding (see 16 work involving the following listing Report No. 107–103, 107th Congress, 1st U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)), that finding is actions: Proposed and final listing rules; Session, June 19, 2001)). In FY 2002 and made at the point when the Service is 90-day and 12-month findings on each year until FY 2006, the Service has deciding whether or not to commence a petitions to add species to the Lists of had to use virtually the entire critical status review that will determine the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife habitat subcap to address court- degree of threats facing the species, and and Plants (Lists) or to change the status mandated designations of critical therefore the analysis underlying the of a species from threatened to habitat, and consequently none of the statement is more relevant to the use of endangered; annual ‘‘resubmitted’’ critical habitat subcap funds have been the warranted-but-precluded finding, petition findings on prior warranted- available for other listing activities. In which is made when the Service has but-precluded petition findings as some FYs since 2006, we have been able already determined the degree of threats required under section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of to use some of the critical habitat facing the species and is deciding the Act; critical habitat petition subcap funds to fund proposed listing whether or not to commence a findings; proposed and final rules determinations for high-priority rulemaking. designating critical habitat; and candidate species. In other FYs, while In FY 2011, on April 15, 2011, litigation-related, administrative, and we were unable to use any of the critical Congress passed the Full-Year program-management functions habitat subcap funds to fund proposed Continuing Appropriations Act (Pub. L. (including preparing and allocating listing determinations, we did use some 112–10) which provides funding budgets, responding to Congressional of this money to fund the critical habitat through September 30, 2011. The and public inquiries, and conducting portion of some proposed listing Service has $22,103,000 for the listing public outreach regarding listing and determinations so that the proposed program. Of that, the Service anticipates critical habitat). The work involved in listing determination and proposed needing to dedicate $11,632,000 for preparing various listing documents can critical habitat designation could be determinations of critical habitat for be extensive and may include, but is not combined into one rule, thereby being already listed species. Also $500,000 is limited to: Gathering and assessing the more efficient in our work. At this time, appropriated for foreign species listings best scientific and commercial data for FY 2011, we do not know if we will under the Act. The Service thus has available and conducting analyses used be able to use some of the critical $9,971,000 available to fund work in the as the basis for our decisions; writing habitat subcap funds to fund proposed following categories: compliance with and publishing documents; and listing determinations. court orders and court-approved obtaining, reviewing, and evaluating We make our determinations of settlement agreements requiring that public comments and peer review preclusion on a nationwide basis to petition findings or listing comments on proposed rules and ensure that the species most in need of determinations be completed by a incorporating relevant information into listing will be addressed first and also specific date; section 4 (of the Act) final rules. The number of listing because we allocate our listing budget listing actions with absolute statutory actions that we can undertake in a given on a nationwide basis. Through the deadlines; essential litigation-related, year also is influenced by the listing cap, the critical habitat subcap, administrative, and listing program- complexity of those listing actions; that and the amount of funds needed to management functions; and high- is, more complex actions generally are address court-mandated critical habitat priority listing actions for some of our more costly. The median cost for designations, Congress and the courts candidate species. In FY 2010, the preparing and publishing a 90-day have in effect determined the amount of Service received many new petitions finding is $39,276; for a 12-month money available for other listing and a single petition to list 404 species. finding, $100,690; for a proposed rule activities nationwide. Therefore, the The receipt of petitions for a large with critical habitat, $345,000; and for funds in the listing cap, other than those number of species is consuming the a final listing rule with critical habitat, needed to address court-mandated Service’s listing funding that is not $305,000. critical habitat for already listed species, dedicated to meeting court-ordered We cannot spend more than is set the limits on our determinations of commitments. Absent some ability to appropriated for the Listing Program preclusion and expeditious progress. balance effort among listing duties without violating the Anti-Deficiency Congress identified the availability of under existing funding levels, it is Act (see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In resources as the only basis for deferring unlikely that the Service will be able to addition, in FY 1998 and for each fiscal the initiation of a rulemaking that is initiate any new listing determinations year since then, Congress has placed a warranted. The Conference Report for candidate species in FY 2011. statutory cap on funds that may be accompanying Public Law 97–304 In 2009, the responsibility for listing expended for the Listing Program, equal (Endangered Species Act Amendments foreign species under the Act was to the amount expressly appropriated of 1982), which established the current transferred from the Division of for that purpose in that fiscal year. This statutory deadlines and the warranted- Scientific Authority, International cap was designed to prevent funds but-precluded finding, states that the Affairs Program, to the Endangered appropriated for other functions under amendments were ‘‘not intended to Species Program. Therefore, starting in the Act (for example, recovery funds for allow the Secretary to delay FY 2010, we used a portion of our removing species from the Lists), or for commencing the rulemaking process for funding to work on the actions other Service programs, from being used any reason other than that the existence described above for listing actions for Listing Program actions (see House of pending or imminent proposals to list related to foreign species. In FY 2011, Report 105–163, 105th Congress, 1st species subject to a greater degree of we anticipate using $1,500,000 for work Session, July 1, 1997). threat would make allocation of on listing actions for foreign species, Since FY 2002, the Service’s budget resources to such a petition [that is, for which reduces funding available for has included a critical habitat subcap to a lower-ranking species] unwise.’’ domestic listing actions; however, ensure that some funds are available for Although that statement appeared to currently only $500,000 has been other work in the Listing Program (‘‘The refer specifically to the ‘‘to the allocated for this function. Although

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32925

there are no foreign species issues by using the following extinction-risk proposed rules for the highest priority included in our high-priority listing type criteria: International Union for the species in the next several years, we are actions at this time, many actions have Conservation of Nature and Natural preparing multi-species proposals when statutory or court-approved settlement Resources (IUCN) Red list status/rank; appropriate, and these may include deadlines, thus increasing their priority. Heritage rank (provided by species with lower priority if they The budget allocations for each specific NatureServe); Heritage threat rank overlap geographically or have the same listing action are identified in the (provided by NatureServe); and species threats as a species with an LPN of 2. Service’s FY 2011 Allocation Table (part currently with fewer than 50 In addition, we take into consideration of our administrative record). individuals, or 4 or fewer populations. the availability of staff resources when For the above reasons, funding a Those species with the highest IUCN we determine which high-priority proposed listing determination for the rank (critically endangered); the highest species will receive funding to striped newt is precluded by court- Heritage rank (G1); the highest Heritage minimize the amount of time and ordered and court-approved settlement threat rank (substantial, imminent resources required to complete each agreements, listing actions with absolute threats); and currently with fewer than listing action. statutory deadlines, and work on 50 individuals, or fewer than 4 As explained above, a determination proposed listing determinations for populations, originally comprised a that listing is warranted but precluded those candidate species with a higher group of approximately 40 candidate must also demonstrate that expeditious listing priority (i.e., candidate species species (‘‘Top 40’’). These 40 candidate progress is being made to add and with LPNs of 1 to 7). species have had the highest priority to remove qualified species to and from Based on our September 21, 1983, receive funding to work on a proposed the Lists of Endangered and Threatened guidelines for assigning an LPN for each listing determination. As we work on Wildlife and Plants. As with our candidate species (48 FR 43098), we proposed and final listing rules for those ‘‘warranted-but-precluded’’ finding, the have a significant number of species 40 candidates, we apply the ranking evaluation of whether progress in with a LPN of 2. Using these guidelines, criteria to the next group of candidates adding qualified species to the Lists has we assign each candidate an LPN of 1 with an LPN of 2 and 3 to determine the been expeditious is a function of the to 12, depending on the magnitude of next set of highest priority candidate resources available for listing and the threats (high or moderate to low), species. Finally, proposed rules for competing demands for those funds. immediacy of threats (imminent or reclassification of threatened species to (Although we do not discuss it in detail nonimminent), and taxonomic status of endangered are lower priority, because here, we are also making expeditious the species (in order of priority: as listed species, they are already progress in removing species from the monotypic genus (a species that is the afforded the protections of the Act and list under the Recovery program in light sole member of a genus); species; or part implementing regulations. However, for of the resource available for delisting, of a species (subspecies, distinct efficiency reasons, we may choose to which is funded by a separate line item population segment, or significant work on a proposed rule to reclassify a in the budget of the Endangered Species portion of the range)). The lower the species to endangered if we can Program. So far during FY 2011, we listing priority number, the higher the combine this with work that is subject have completed one delisting rule; see listing priority (that is, a species with an to a court-determined deadline. 76 FR 3029.) Given the limited LPN of 1 would have the highest listing With our workload so much bigger resources available for listing, we find priority). than the amount of funds we have to that we are making expeditious progress Because of the large number of high- accomplish it, it is important that we be in FY 2011. This progress includes priority species, we have further ranked as efficient as possible in our listing preparing and publishing the following the candidate species with an LPN of 2 process. Therefore, as we work on determinations:

FY 2011 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS

Publication date Title Actions FR pages

10/6/2010 ...... Endangered Status for the Altamaha Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 75 FR 61664– Spinymussel and Designation of Critical Habi- 61690 tat. 10/7/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to list the Sac- Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not war- 75 FR 62070– ramento Splittail as Endangered or Threat- ranted. 62095 ened. 10/28/2010 ...... Endangered Status and Designation of Critical Proposed Listing Endangered (uplisting) ...... 75 FR 66481– Habitat for Spikedace and Loach Minnow. 66552 11/2/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Bay Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substan- 75 FR 67341– Springs Salamander as Endangered. tial. 67343 11/2/2010 ...... Determination of Endangered Status for the Final Listing Endangered ...... 75 FR 67511– Georgia Pigtoe Mussel, Interrupted Rocksnail, 67550 and Rough Hornsnail and Designation of Crit- ical Habitat. 11/2/2010 ...... Listing the Rayed Bean and Snuffbox as Endan- Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 75 FR 67551– gered. 67583 11/4/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Cirsium Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 75 FR 67925– wrightii (Wright’s Marsh Thistle) as Endan- but precluded. 67944 gered or Threatened. 12/14/2010 ...... Endangered Status for Dunes Sagebrush Lizard Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 75 FR 77801– 77817 12/14/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the North Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 75 FR 78029– American Wolverine as Endangered or but precluded. 78061 Threatened.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32926 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

FY 2011 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued

Publication date Title Actions FR pages

12/14/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 75 FR 78093– Sonoran Population of the Desert Tortoise as but precluded. 78146 Endangered or Threatened. 12/15/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Astragalus Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 75 FR 78513– microcymbus and Astragalus schmolliae as but precluded. 78556 Endangered or Threatened. 12/28/2010 ...... Listing Seven Brazilian Bird Species as Endan- Final Listing Endangered ...... 75 FR 81793– gered Throughout Their Range. 81815 1/4/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Red Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substan- 76 FR 304–311 Knot subspecies Calidris canutus roselaari as tial. Endangered. 1/19/2011 ...... Endangered Status for the Sheepnose and Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 76 FR 3392–3420 Spectaclecase Mussels. 2/10/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Pacific Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 7634–7679 Walrus as Endangered or Threatened. but precluded. 2/17/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Sand Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 9309–9318 Verbena Moth as Endangered or Threatened. 2/22/2011 ...... Determination of Threatened Status for the New Final Listing Threatened ...... 76 FR 9681–9692 Zealand-Australia Distinct Population Segment of the Southern Rockhopper Penguin. 2/22/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Solanum Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 9722–9733 conocarpum (marron bacora) as Endangered. but precluded. 2/23/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Thorne’s Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not war- 76 FR 991–10003 Hairstreak Butterfly as Endangered. ranted. 2/23/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Astragalus Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 10166– hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum but precluded and Not Warranted. 10203 soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and Trifolium friscanum as Endangered or Threatened. 2/24/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Wild Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substan- 76 FR 10299– Plains Bison or Each of Four Distinct Popu- tial. 10310 lation Segments as Threatened. 2/24/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substan- 76 FR 10310– Unsilvered Fritillary Butterfly as Threatened or tial. 10319 Endangered. 3/8/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Mt. Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 12667– Charleston Blue Butterfly as Endangered or but precluded. 12683 Threatened. 3/8/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Texas Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 12683– Kangaroo Rat as Endangered or Threatened. 12690 3/10/2011 ...... Initiation of Status Review for Longfin Smelt ...... Notice of Status Review ...... 76 FR 13121– 13122 3/15/2011 ...... Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to List the Flat- Proposed rule withdrawal ...... 76 FR 14210– tailed Horned Lizard as Threatened. 14268 3/22/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Berry Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 15919– Cave Salamander as Endangered. but precluded. 15932 4/1/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Spring Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 18138– Pygmy Sunfish as Endangered. 18143 4/5/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not War- 76 FR 18684– Bearmouth Mountainsnail, Byrne Resort ranted and Warranted but precluded. 18701 Mountainsnail, and Meltwater Lednian Stonefly as Endangered or Threatened. 4/5/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Peary Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 18701– Caribou and Dolphin and Union population of 18706 the Barren-ground Caribou as Endangered or Threatened. 4/12/2011 ...... Proposed Endangered Status for the Three Proposed Listing Endangered ...... 76 FR 20464– Forks Springsnail and San Bernardino 20488 Springsnail, and Proposed Designation of Crit- ical Habitat. 4/13/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Spring Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 20613– Mountains Acastus Checkerspot Butterfly as 20622 Endangered. 4/14/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Prairie Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 20911– Chub as Threatened or Endangered. 20918 4/14/2011 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Hermes Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted 76 FR 20918– Copper Butterfly as Endangered or Threat- but precluded. 20939 ened. 4/26/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial .... 76 FR 23256– Arapahoe Snowfly as Endangered or Threat- 23265 ened.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32927

FY 2011 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued

Publication date Title Actions FR pages

4/26/2011 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Smooth- Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substan- 76 FR 23265– Billed Ani as Threatened or Endangered. tial. 23271

Our expeditious progress also statutory timelines, that is, timelines a lower priority if they overlap includes work on listing actions that we required under the Act. Actions in the geographically or have the same threats funded in FY 2010 and FY 2011 but bottom section of the table are high- as the species with the high priority. have not yet been completed to date. priority listing actions. These actions Including these species together in the These actions are listed below. Actions include work primarily on species with same proposed rule results in in the top section of the table are being an LPN of 2, and, as discussed above, considerable savings in time and conducted under a deadline set by a selection of these species is partially funding, when compared to preparing court. Actions in the middle section of based on available staff resources, and separate proposed rules for each of them the table are being conducted to meet when appropriate, include species with in the future.

ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 AND FY 2011 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED

Species Action

Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement

4 parrot species (military macaw, yellow-billed parrot, red-crowned parrot, scarlet macaw) 5 ...... 12-month petition finding. 4 parrot species (blue-headed macaw, great green macaw, grey-cheeked parakeet, hyacinth 12-month petition finding. macaw) 5. 4 parrots species (crimson shining parrot, white cockatoo, Philippine cockatoo, yellow-crested 12-month petition finding. cockatoo) 5. Utah prairie dog (uplisting) ...... 90-day petition finding.

Actions With Statutory Deadlines

Casey’s june beetle ...... Final listing determination. 6 Birds from Eurasia ...... Final listing determination. 5 Bird species from Colombia and Ecuador ...... Final listing determination. Queen Charlotte goshawk ...... Final listing determination. 5 species southeast fish (Cumberland darter, rush darter, yellowcheek darter, chucky madtom, Final listing determination. and laurel dace) 4. Ozark hellbender 4 ...... Final listing determination. Altamaha spinymussel 3 ...... Final listing determination. 3 Colorado plants (Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa Skyrocket), Penstemon debilis (Parachute Final listing determination. Beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque Phacelia)) 4. Salmon crested cockatoo ...... Final listing determination. 6 Birds from Peru & Bolivia ...... Final listing determination. Loggerhead sea turtle (assist National Marine Fisheries Service) 5 ...... Final listing determination. 2 mussels (rayed bean (LPN = 2), snuffbox No LPN) 5 ...... Final listing determination. CA golden trout 4 ...... 12-month petition finding. Black-footed albatross ...... 12-month petition finding. Mojave fringe-toed lizard 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Kokanee—Lake Sammamish population 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Northern leopard frog ...... 12-month petition finding. Tehachapi slender salamander ...... 12-month petition finding. Coqui Llanero ...... 12-month petition finding/Proposed listing. Dusky tree vole ...... 12-month petition finding. 5 WY plants (Abronia ammophila, Agrostis rossiae, Astragalus proimanthus, Boechere (Arabis) 12-month petition finding. pusilla, Penstemon gibbensii) from 206 species petition. Leatherside chub (from 206 species petition) ...... 12-month petition finding. Frigid ambersnail (from 206 species petition) 3 ...... 12-month petition finding. Platte River caddisfly (from 206 species petition) 5 ...... 12-month petition finding. Gopher tortoise—eastern population ...... 12-month petition finding. Grand Canyon scorpion (from 475 species petition) ...... 12-month petition finding. Anacroneuria wipukupa (a stonefly from 475 species petition) 4 ...... 12-month petition finding. 3 Texas moths (Ursia furtiva, Sphingicampa blanchardi, Agapema galbina) (from 475 species peti- 12-month petition finding. tion). 2 Texas shiners (Cyprinella sp., Cyprinella lepida) (from 475 species petition) ...... 12-month petition finding. 3 South Arizona plants (Erigeron piscaticus, Astragalus hypoxylus, Amoreuxia gonzalezii) (from 12-month petition finding. 475 species petition). 5 Central Texas mussel species (3 from 475 species petition) ...... 12-month petition finding. 14 parrots (foreign species) ...... 12-month petition finding. Striped Newt 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Fisher—Northern Rocky Mountain Range 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Mohave Ground Squirrel 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Puerto Rico Harlequin Butterfly 3 ...... 12-month petition finding.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 32928 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules

ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 AND FY 2011 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED—Continued

Species Action

Western gull-billed tern ...... 12-month petition finding. Ozark chinquapin (Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis) 4 ...... 12-month petition finding. HI yellow-faced bees ...... 12-month petition finding. Giant Palouse earthworm ...... 12-month petition finding. Whitebark pine ...... 12-month petition finding. OK grass pink (Calopogon oklahomensis) 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Ashy storm-petrel 5 ...... 12-month petition finding. Honduran emerald ...... 12-month petition finding. Southeastern pop snowy plover & wintering pop. of piping plover 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. Eagle Lake trout 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. 32 Pacific Northwest mollusks species (snails and slugs) 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. 42 snail species (Nevada & Utah) ...... 90-day petition finding. Spring Mountains checkerspot butterfly ...... 90-day petition finding. Bay skipper ...... 90-day petition finding. Spot-tailed earless lizard ...... 90-day petition finding. Eastern small-footed bat ...... 90-day petition finding. Northern long-eared bat ...... 90-day petition finding. 10 species of Great Basin butterfly ...... 90-day petition finding. 6 sand dune (scarab) beetles ...... 90-day petition finding. Golden-winged warbler 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. 404 Southeast species ...... 90-day petition finding. Franklin’s bumble bee 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. 2 Idaho snowflies (straight snowfly & Idaho snowfly) 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. American eel 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. Gila monster (Utah population) 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. Leona’s little blue 4 ...... 90-day petition finding. Aztec gilia 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. White-tailed ptarmigan 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. San Bernardino flying squirrel 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. Bicknell’s thrush 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. Chimpanzee ...... 90-day petition finding. Sonoran talussnail 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. 2 AZ Sky Island plants (Graptopetalum bartrami & Pectis imberbis) 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. I’iwi 5 ...... 90-day petition finding. Carolina hemlock ...... 90-day petition finding. Western glacier stonefly (Zapada glacier) ...... 90-day petition finding. Thermophilic ostracod (Potamocypris hunteri) ...... 90-day petition finding.

High-Priority Listing Actions

19 Oahu candidate species 2 (16 plants, 3 damselflies) (15 with LPN = 2, 3 with LPN = 3, 1 with Proposed listing. LPN = 9). 19 Maui-Nui candidate species 2 (16 plants, 3 tree snails) (14 with LPN = 2, 2 with LPN = 3, 3 Proposed listing. with LPN = 8). Chupadera springsnail 2 (Pyrgulopsis chupaderae (LPN = 2)) ...... Proposed listing. 8 Gulf Coast mussels (southern kidneyshell (LPN = 2), round ebonyshell (LPN = 2), Alabama Proposed listing. pearlshell (LPN = 2), southern sandshell (LPN = 5), fuzzy pigtoe (LPN = 5), Choctaw bean (LPN = 5), narrow pigtoe (LPN = 5), and tapered pigtoe (LPN = 11)) 4. Umtanum buckwheat (LPN = 2) and white bluffs bladderpod (LPN = 9) 4 ...... Proposed listing. Grotto sculpin (LPN = 2) 4 ...... Proposed listing. 2 Arkansas mussels (Neosho mucket (LPN = 2) & Rabbitsfoot (LPN = 9)) 4 ...... Proposed listing. Diamond darter (LPN = 2) 4 ...... Proposed listing. Gunnison sage-grouse (LPN = 2) 4 ...... Proposed listing. Coral Pink Sand Dunes Tiger Beetle (LPN = 2) 5 ...... Proposed listing. Miami blue (LPN = 3) 3 ...... Proposed listing. Lesser prairie chicken (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. 4 Texas salamanders (Austin blind salamander (LPN = 2), Salado salamander (LPN = 2), Proposed listing. Georgetown salamander (LPN = 8), Jollyville Plateau (LPN = 8)) 3. 5 SW aquatics (Gonzales Spring Snail (LPN = 2), Diamond Y springsnail (LPN = 2), Phantom Proposed listing. springsnail (LPN = 2), Phantom Cave snail (LPN = 2), Diminutive amphipod (LPN = 2)) 3. 2 Texas plants (Texas golden gladecress (Leavenworthia texana) (LPN = 2), Neches River rose- Proposed listing. mallow (Hibiscus dasycalyx) (LPN = 2)) 3. 4 AZ plants (Acuna cactus (Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis) (LPN = 3), Fickeisen Proposed listing. plains cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus fickeiseniae) (LPN = 3), Lemmon fleabane (Erigeron lemmonii) (LPN = 8), Gierisch mallow (Sphaeralcea gierischii) (LPN = 2)) 5. FL bonneted bat (LPN = 2) 3 ...... Proposed listing. 3 Southern FL plants (Florida semaphore cactus (Consolea corallicola) (LPN = 2), shellmound Proposed listing. applecactus (Harrisia (=Cereus) aboriginum (=gracilis)) (LPN = 2), Cape Sable thoroughwort (Chromolaena frustrata) (LPN = 2)) 5. 21 Big Island (HI) species 5 (includes 8 candidate species—6 plants & 2 animals; 4 with LPN = 2, Proposed listing. 1 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN = 4, 2 with LPN = 8).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32929

ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 AND FY 2011 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED—Continued

Species Action

12 Puget Sound prairie species (9 subspecies of pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama ssp.) (LPN Proposed listing. = 3), streaked horned lark (LPN = 3), Taylor’s checkerspot (LPN = 3), Mardon skipper (LPN = 8)) 3. 2 TN River mussels (fluted kidneyshell (LPN = 2), slabside pearlymussel (LPN = 2)) 5 ...... Proposed listing. Jemez Mountain salamander (LPN = 2) 5 ...... Proposed listing. 1 Funds for listing actions for these species were provided in previous FYs. 2 Although funds for these high-priority listing actions were provided in FY 2008 or 2009, due to the complexity of these actions and competing priorities, these actions are still being developed. 3 Partially funded with FY 2010 funds and FY 2011 funds. 4 Funded with FY 2010 funds. 5 Funded with FY 2011 funds.

We have endeavored to make our Dated: May 3, 2011. • Electronic Submission: Submit all listing actions as efficient and timely as Rowan W. Gould, electronic public comments via the possible, given the requirements of the Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal e-Rulemaking Portal http:// relevant law and regulations, and [FR Doc. 2011–13911 Filed 6–6–11; 8:45 am] www.regulations.gov; or • Mail: Michael D. Tosatto, Regional constraints relating to workload and BILLING CODE 4310–55–P personnel. We are continually Administrator, NMFS, Pacific Islands considering ways to streamline Region (PIR), 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., processes or achieve economies of scale, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814–4700. such as by batching related actions Instructions: Comments must be together. Given our limited budget for National Oceanic and Atmospheric submitted to one of the above two implementing section 4 of the Act, these Administration addresses to ensure that the comments actions described above collectively are received, documented, and constitute expeditious progress. 50 CFR Part 665 considered by NMFS. Comments sent to any other address or individual, or The striped newt will be added to the [Docket No. 100218104–1291–01] received after the end of the comment list of candidate species upon period, may not be considered. All publication of this 12-month finding. RIN 0648–AY27 comments received are a part of the We will continue to monitor the status public record and will generally be of this species as new information Western Pacific Pelagic Fisheries; posted to http://www.regulations.gov becomes available. This review will American Samoa Longline Gear without change. All personal identifying determine if a change in status is Modifications To Reduce Turtle information (e.g., name, address, etc.) warranted, including the need to make Interactions submitted voluntarily by the commenter prompt use of emergency listing may be publicly accessible. Do not AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries procedures. submit confidential business Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and information, or otherwise sensitive or We intend that any proposed Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), protected information. NMFS will classification of the striped newt will be Commerce. as accurate as possible. Therefore, we accept anonymous comments (enter ACTION: will continue to accept additional Proposed rule; request for ‘‘N/A’’ in the required name and information and comments from all comments. organization fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic concerned governmental agencies, the SUMMARY: This proposed rule would comments will be accepted in Microsoft scientific community, industry, or any require specific gear configuration for Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe other interested party concerning this pelagic longline fishing for vessels finding. PDF file formats only. based in American Samoa, as well as The Western Pacific Fishery References Cited other U.S. longline vessels longer than Management Council (Council) 40 ft (12.2 m), while fishing south of the prepared Amendment 5 to the Fishery A complete list of references cited is Equator in the Pacific Ocean. The Ecosystem Plan for Pelagic Fisheries of available on the Internet at http:// requirements include minimum float the Western Pacific Region (Pelagics www.regulations.gov and upon request line and branch line lengths, number of FEP), including an environmental from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, hooks between floats, and distances assessment, that presents background North Florida Field Office (see between floats and adjacent hooks. The information on this proposed rule. The ADDRESSES section). rule would also limit the number of Pelagics FEP and Amendment 5 are swordfish taken. The proposed action is Authors available from the Council, 1164 Bishop intended to ensure that longline hooks St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, tel The primary authors of this notice are are set at depths of 100 meters (m) or 808–522–8220, fax 808–522–8226, the staff members of the North Florida deeper to reduce interactions between http://www.wpcouncil.org. longline fishing and Pacific green sea Field Office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: turtles. Authority Adam Bailey, Sustainable Fisheries DATES: Comments on the proposed rule Division, NMFS PIR, 808–944–2248. The authority for this section is must be received by July 22, 2011. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Longline section 4 of the Endangered Species Act ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed fishing employs a mainline that is of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et rule, identified by 0648–AY27, may be suspended below the surface by floats seq.). sent to either of the following addresses: and float lines that are attached along

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Jun 06, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS