Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 163 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 49881

Specles Vertebrate population where en- Histonc range Status When Usted Critical habi- Special Common name Scientific name dangered or threatened . - tat rules Do do do Snake R. (U.S.A.: ID, OR, WA) T 516 NA 227.21 (mainstem and the following subbasins: Tucannon R., Grande Ronde R., Imnaha R., Salmon R., and Clearwater R.) fall run, natural population(s), wherever found.

Dated: September 9, 1993. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATiON: species. A complete description and Richard N. Smith, Background illustration of these subspecies can be Acting Director. Fish and Wildlife Service. found in Cazier (1985). [FR Doc. 93—23162 Filed 9—22—93; 8:45 aml The Delhi Sands flower-loving The other subspecies of R. terrnincrtus, BILUNG CODE 4310-65-P (Pthaphiomidas terminatus abdoininalis) the El Segundo flower-loving fly, is a large in the Dipteran family historically occurred in coastal dunes of Apioceridae. It has an elongate body, southwestern Los Angeles County, 50 CFR Part 17 much like that of a robber fly (Asilidae), California (Cazier 1985). All known but unlike asilids, it has a long tubular localities for this were on coastal RIN 101&-AB83 proboscis, used, as in butterflies, for sand dunes. Surveys conducted during extracting nectar from flowers. The 1987, 1988, 1990, and 1991 at the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife flower-loving fly is approximately 2.5 Airport Dunes, the largest remaining and Plants; Determination of centimeters (1 inch) long, orange-brown coastal sand dune system south of Point Endangered Status for the Delhi Sands in color, and has dark brown oval spots Conception in California, did not locate Flower-loving Fly on the upper surface of the abdomen. any El Segundo flower-loving , and This species is a strong flier, and, like apparently other known sites for the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, a hummingbird, is capable of stationary, subspecies are no longer suitable habitat Interior. hovering flight. due to urbanization (G. Ballmer, in iitt., Rhophiomidas terminatus consists of 1989; R. Mattoni, private entomologist. ACTION: Final rule. two subspecies: the El Segundo flower- pers. comm. to Chris D. Nagano, Fish loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terrninatus and Wildlife Service, 1991). There are SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service terminatus) and the Delhi Sands flower- no extant sites known for this (Service) determines the Delhi Sands loving fly ( subspecies. flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas abdominalis). Specimens of R. The Delhi Sands flower-loving fly terminatus abdorninails) to be an terminatus were misidentified as currently occurs at five locations in endangered species throughout its range Rhaphiomidas episcopus by D.W. southern California~Four in in northwestern Riverside and Coquillett, based upon material he southwestern San Bernardino County southwestern San Bernardino Counties, collected in 1891 from Los Angeles, and one in Riverside County, just south California, pursuant to the Endangered California. Townsend (1895) referred to of the San Bernardino County line. All Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). these specimens as Pthaphiomidas known colonies occur on privately This species is in imminent danger of extinction due to extensive habitat loss mellifex. Cazier (1941) noted that both owned land within an 8-mile radius of these identifications were in error circle. and degradation that has reduced its and used the specimens collected by The most characteristic feature of all range by over 97 percent. Only five Coquillett to describe R. teiminatus as a collection sites for this animal is the populations of the Delhi Sands flower- new species. Later in the same presence of fine, sandy soils, often with loving fly exist; all are threatened by publication, the Delhi Sands flower- wholly or partly consolidated dunes. urban development activities. This rule loving fly was described as These soil types are generally classified implements Federal protection provided by the Act for the Delhi Sands flower- Rhaphioniidas abdoniinaiis, based upon as the “Delhi” series (primarily Delhi an adult male collected in August 1888, fine sand). Delhi series soils cover loving fly. in Colton, California. In 1941, when approximately 40 square milesin EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on both R. terminatus and R. abdorninaiis several irregular patches, extending September 22, 1993. were described, Cazier had only two from the cities of Colton to Ontario and ADDRESSES: The complete file for this specimens of each ta.xon available for Chino in northwestern Riverside and examination, and these individuals southwestern San Bernardino Counties rule is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business appeared to represent distinct species. (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1971, hours at the Carlsbad Field Office, U.S. However, when the genus was revised 1980). Much of the area of Delhi soils (Cazier 1985), it was determined that has been used for agriculture (chiefly Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California abdominalis is a subspecies of R. grapes and citrus) since the 1800’s. 92008. terminatus, based on abdominal More recently, this area has been used maculations and othermorphological for dairies, housing tracts, and FOR FURThER INFORMATION CONTACT: characters. Rhaphiomidas terminatus commerciallindustrial sites. The Peter Stine, ActingField Supervisor, at terminatus is presumed extinct; thus documented distribution of the Delhi the address listed above (telephone 619/ Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdorninalis Sands flower-loving fly extends from 431—9440). is the only extant representative ofthis the eastern margin ofthe Delhi fine sand 49882 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations formation in Colton to near its western in the sand. The single annual flight Federal Register on Docember 24, 1990 limit in Mira Loma. This distribution suggests that development to (55 FR 52852). On November 21, 1991, strongly suggests that this species once metamorphosis takes a full year. Pupae the Delhi Sands f1ow~r-lovingfly was occurred throughout much or all of the worktheir way to the surface prior to included as a category I candidate 40 square milesof Delhi fine sand soil. emergence as adults. Hogue (1967) species in the Animal Notice of Review The validity of this assumption is describes the emergence of an El which was published in the Federal reinforced by the historic distribution of Segundo flower-loving fly from a pupal Register (56 FR 58804). Category 1 the closely related El Segundo flower- case in a remnant coastal dune in comprises those taxa for which the loving fly (now believed extinct), farther Manhattan Beach, California. Additional Service has on file sufficient west in the coastal dunes of Los Angeles observations on the natural history of information to support proposals for County. this and other species within the genus endangered or threatened status. On Ballmer (1989) reported the results of Rhaphiomidas are reported by Rogers March 25, 1992, Mr. Balimer petitioned searches for the Delhi Sands flower- and Mattoni (1993). the Service to list the Delhi Sands loving fly in potential habitat Circumstantial evidence suggests that flower-loving fly as an endangered (undeveloped or abandoned areas of sparse native vegetation is important in species on an emergency basis due to Delhi sand). No additional sites for the the biology of R. t. obdominolis ongoing and anticipated construction species were found; these absences were although specific plant associations that projects within its habitat. This petition variously attributed to a lack of native may be required by this species are not was regarded as a third request for the vegetation (possibly associated with known. Dominant native plant species same action and a separate finding was intensive off-road vehicle use), in its habitat include wild buckwheat not made. A proposed role to list the fly degradation by past agricultural use, (Eriogonurn fascicuiatum), croton as endangered was published in the solid waste disposal, freeway (Croton californicus), and telegraph Federal Register on November 19, 1992 construction, and conversion to weed (Heterotheca grandifiora) (Ballmer (57 FR 54547). housing. It may be possible to restore 1989). Additional native plants found the habitat in some of these areas for within habitat of R. t. abdominalis Summary of Comments and future reintroduction of the fly. The include Ambrosia acanthocarpa, Recommendations results of extensive searches by Ballmer Amsinckia intermedio, Eriastrurn In the November 19, 1992, proposed and others indicate that the Delhi Sands sapphirinurn, Eriogonum thurberi, and rule and associated notifications, all flower-loving fly now occupies less than Lessingia glanduiifera. Cazier (1985) interested parties were requested to 2.5 percent of the total area of Delhi fine reported that several specimens of submit factual reports or information sands. Thus, it appears that over 97 Rhaphiornidas terrninatus terminatus that might contribute to the percent of the habitat of the fly has been had been collected in association with development of a final rule for the Delhi eliminated. a member of the phlox family Sands flower-loving fly. The Governor The life history of the Delhi Sands (Eriastrum filifolium). of California, one State assemblyman, 2 flower-loving fly is not well known, but Federal agencies, 8 State agencies. 2 is probably similar to that ofother Previous Federal Action county and 3 city governments, 8 members of this genus (Cazier 1985). All On October 30, 1989, the Fish and county and 3 city agencies. 5 scientific members of the genus Rhaphiomidas Wildlife Service received a petition organizations, 4 conservation groups, inhabit arid or semi-arid regions, and (dated October 18, 1989) from Mr. Greg and 30 other interested parties were many occur in sparsely vegetated sand Balimer, an entomologist affiliated with contacted and requested to comment. A dune habitats. Adults of some species, the University of California at Riverside, legal notice announcing the proposal probably including R. t. abdominaiis, to list the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly and inviting general public comment take nectar from flowers by means of an as an endangered species. Mr. Ballmer was published in the San Bernardino elongate proboscis. The preference of had also submitted a similar petition County Sun on November 23, 1992, and Rhaphiomidas for sparsely vegetated (dated October 18, 1989) to the in the Riverside Press Enterprise on areas may be related to the insect’s California Fish and Game Commission November 30, 1992. A legal notice behavior of flying low, usually a meter (Commission). The State petition was announcing a public hearing and (3 feet) or less above the ground, and referred to the California Department of inviting general public comment on the frequently landing on the surface Fish and Game (CDFG), which found proposal was published in the same two (Balimer i~8c~j.Cazier (1985) suggested that the petitioned action may be newspapers on December 18, 1992. A that vegetanon may aid in the selection warranted. The State petition was later notice announcing the date of the public of oviposition (egg-laying) sites as in voluntarily withdrawn when the hearing was published in the Federal Apiocerci, another apiocerid fly genus. petitioner learned that it could be Register on December 18, 1992 (57 FR Collection records for the Delhi Sands rejected by the Commission, because 60159). The public hearing was held on flower-loving fly indicate a single CDFG had not yet determined whether January 5, 1993, at the San Bernardino annual flight period during August and it had authority under the California County Government Center. September. A skewed ratio of males to Endangered Species Act to list . A total of 57 comments was received females (about 2:1) suggests that, as with On July 19, 1990, the Service received on the proposed rule. (Multiple many other insect species, males are a letter (dated July 16, 1990) from Mr. comments from the same party on the more active, spending much of their Balimer requesting again that the Delhi same date are’ regarded as one time flying and investigating vegetation Sands flower-loving fly be listed as comment.) Of these, 9 (16 percent) or the sand surface for resting females. endangered. In accordance with section supported the listing, 46 (81 percent) Mating behavior of the Delhi Sands 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species opposed the listing, and 2 (3 percent) flower-loving fly has not been observed, Act of 1973 as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 neither supported nor opposed listing. but it is known that eggs are deposited et seq.), the Service found that In addition, a petition containing 48 in sand. In captivity, one female substantial information had been - signatures opposed the listing. survived for 10 days and produced over presented to indicate that the petitioned Four elected officials, the City of 50 eggs (Bailmer 1989). Larval action may be warranted on October 30, Rialto, the Board of Supervisors for the development apparently also takes place 1990. This finding was published in the County of San Bernardino, the Riverside Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 49383

County Farm Bureau, the Riverside as habitat set-asides and habitat 40 square miles (Ballmer 1989). The County Habitat Conservation Agency, restoration programs) for the fly. Service calculated historical habitat loss and the Agua Mansa Industrial Growth However, no definitive habitat based on the correlation between soil Association opposed listing. One conservation plan has been prepared, type and presence ofthe fly, and the conservation organization and eight approved, funded, and implemented at historic and current distribution of the individuals supported listing. this time, and no protection is currently Delhi sands soil series. The Service has reviewed all of the afforded to the fly or its habitat. Since issue 5: The status surveys conducted written and oral comments referenced the proposed rule was published, about for this species are inadequate. above. Based on this review, nine 45 acres of occupied habitat have been Service Response: All known surveys relevant issues have been identified and destroyed (G. Ballmer, pers. comm., from 1941 to the present were are discussed below. These issues are 1993). That represents a loss of 6 to 13 conducted during the months of August representative of the comments percent of the Delhi Sands flower-loving and September when FL t. abdominalis questioning or opposing the proposed fly habitat that existed at the time the is most active, Potential habitat areas listing action. proposed rule was published. In were initially identified by examining Issue 1: The Service should consider addition, the county of San Bernardino soil, topographic, and street maps. Sites economic effects in determining has informed the Service of its intention with potentially suitable habitat (based whether to list the Delhi Sands flower- to destroy about 7 acres of occupied, on location, soil type, vegetation, arid loving fly under the Endangered Species high quality habitat and 69 acres of degree of disturbance) were then Act. degraded, unoccupied habitat (Linda R. surveyed by ground reconnaissance. Service Response: In accordance with Dawes, Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. Marginal habitat areas were also 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(1)(A) and 50 CF’R comm., 1993). The destruction of this examined, The presence of sand- 424.11(b), listing decisions are made site would sever an important link dwelling insects (e.g., certain species of solely on the basis of the best scientific between adjacent patches of occupied native bees, wasps, beetles, and flies) and commercial data available. habitat. The fly is in imminent danger and native vegetation were used as a In adding the word “solely” to the of extinction and warrants immediate general indicator of habitat quality. The statutory criteria for listing a species. protection under the Act. Listing the fly Service finds that the survey Congress specifically addressed this as endangered will not hamper the methodology described above is issue in 1982 amendments to the Act. ability of local entities to continue adequate to determine the status of this The legislative history of the 1982 working on an HCP for this species. If species. amendments states: “The addition of the voluntary conservation planning efforts Issue 6: The Service has word “solely” is intended to remove referenced above are completed in a underestimated the amount of available from the process of the listing or timely manner, that should diminish and potential habitat for the fly. The delisting of species any factor not adverse effects of a listing action on ability of the Delhi Sands flower-loving related to the biological status of the affected parties and promote the fly to recolonize previou~)voccupied species. The Committee strongly recovery of the fly. areas is unknown. Certain land uses believes that economic considerations Issue 3: The Service should designate may actually be compatible with the have no relevance to determinations critical habitat for the fly because it is conservation of this species. For regarding the status of species and readily definable and would be example, agriculture does not alter the intends that the economic analysis beneficial to the species. soil type of Delhi sand, so once requirements of Executive Order 12291, Service Response: For the reasons agricultural activity ceases, the fly may and such statutes as the Regulatory discussed in the “Critical Habitat” be able to recolonize the area. Flexibility Act and the Paperwork section of this rule, the Service Service Response: Based on the best ReductionAct,notapply* * concludes that designation of critical available scientific information, there is Applying economic criteria to the habitat is not prudent for the Delhi no reason for concluding that the Delhi analysis of these alternatives and to any Sands flower-lovin~fly at this time. Sands flower-loving fly will use phase of the species listing process is Issue 4: The Service should explain previously farmed areas. Agricultural applying economics to the the basis for its conclusions that: (1) fields may return or be restored to determinations made under section 4 of Only a fraction of the historical habitat suitable habitat over time; however, the the Act and is specifically rejected by for the fly remains; and (2) it is endemic potential of this species to recolonize the inclusion of the word “solely” in to Delhi sand soils. degraded sites is unknown although this this legislation.” HR. Rep. No. 567, Part Service Response: Historical and behavior may be pivotal to its recovery. I, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 20 (1982). current distribution limits of the fly are The use of pesticides in agricultural Issue 2: Listing the Delhi Sands based on field collections, surveys, land areas and their persistence in the soil flower-loving fly as endangered should use patterns, and analysis of soil types may have deleterious effects on this be postponed until local efforts to (Ballmer 1989). There is no scientific species. Furthermore. the level of conserve this species (e.g., the Agua evidence to indicate that the Delhi disturbance at a given site may favor Mansa Industrial Growth Association Sands flower-loving fly occurs on any exotic over native vegetation, which (AMIGA) Habitat Conservation Plan substrate other than Delhi sands may preclude the use of that area by the (HCP)) are completed and can be (Bailmer 1989, Rogers and Mattoni fly. evaluated by the Service. These actions 1993). Although other flower-loving For these reasons, the Service will eliminate the need for listing by flies occur within its range, B. t. concludes that the amount of available adequately providing for conservation of abdominalis has never been collected or habitat for the Delhi Sands flower- the fly while also permitting beneficial observed on other soil types (Ballmer loving fly is limited. Thus, it is essential economic growth in the region. 1989, Rogers and Mattoni 1993). Based to avoid or minimize the effects of Serv~ceResponse: The Service on the best available scientific and human activities on remaining suitable acknowledges the efforts by several commercial information, the Service habitat areas, and to provide a means to landowners associated with AMIGA to concludes that this species is endemic restore degraded habitat to the greatest cooperate with the Service in to Delhi sands which historically extent possible so that it may be utiui:ed developing conservation measures (such occupied an area encompassing about by this species in the future. These and 49884 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations other appropriate conservation economic costs of designating critical construction of a shopping center. measures will be addressed during the habitat would be appreciably higher Another area north of l~10that once recovery process. than the costs associated with listing. ‘supported the largest population of the Issue 7: Because there is a general lack Also refer to the Service’s response to Delhi Sands flower-loving fly was of knowledge on the ecology of this Issue 1 regarding the consideration of bisected and reduced in size by a county taxon, the Service used data on related economic effects in determining park in 1988. The resultant two sites species in its description of the life whether or not to list this subspecies. and a third small site north of I—~0are history and behavior of the Delhi Sands In summary, no information was threatened by adjacent urban flower-loving fly. The Delhi Sands received indicating that the species is development, invasion of exotic flower-loving fly should not be more widespread or under lesser threat vegetation, removal of native vegetation considered for listing until more than previously thought. for fire prevention, dumping. and off- specific scientific information is Summary of Factors Affecting the road vehicle use. All three remaining available. Species habitat parcels north of 1—10 are offered Service Response: The Service is for sale, and one already has roads and required to make listing decisions solely After a thorough review and streetlights installed (Ballmer 1992). on the basis of the best available consideration of all available A significant amount of habitat for the sdentific and commercial information information, the Service has determined Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is located regarding the and status of a that the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly south of 1—10 in the city of Colton. The ç:articular species. In the case of the should be classified as an endangered owner of this site has sold some Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, the species. Procedures found at section 4 of adjacent property and has plans to Service finds that substantial the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. develop the area containing habitat for information exists with respect to these 1531 et seq.) and regulations (50 CFR the flower-loving fly (G. Bailmer, pers. Lactors to indicate that listing is part 424) promulgated to implement the comm., 1992). This habitat is warranted. The Service acknowledges listing provisions of the Act were surrounded by petroleum facilities, that more precise scientific information followed. A species may be determined railroad storage yards, a landfill, a will benefit the fly’s recovery, but is not to be endangered or threatened due to cement quarry, and a sewage treatment a legitimate basis for postponing a one or more of the five factors described plant. An adjoining parcel, which listing decision. in section 4(a)(1). These factors and contained the greatest concentration of Issue 8: The Service made their application to the Delhi Sands the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly unsubstantiated conclusions in the flower-loving fly (Rhaphiontidas observed in 1991, was sand-mined some proposed rule regarding the threat of terminatus abdominalis) are as follows: time between September 1991 and stochastic extinction. One coinmenter A. The Present or Threatened March 1992. The only other San ako suggested that, although most of the Bernardino County site south of I—ID kx~ownhabitat of this species is Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range known to support this species occurs currently for sale, that has no bearing on within a powerline right-of-way and the intended land use and therefore The major threats to the Delhi Sands adjacent to a major road. Portions of this does not constitute a threat to the flower-loving fly are habitat loss and area are also bein~advertised for sale. species. degradation. Historic and recent All of the sites in San Bernardino Sex-vice Response: Stochastic events agricultural, residential, and County south of I—la containing suitable car. threaten the continued existence of commercial development have habitat for the Delhi Sands flower- species with small, fragmented significantly reduced suitable habitat for loving fly are within the Agua Manse populations (Soulé 1986, 1987). For this species. Enterprise Zone (County of San example, the dusky seaside sparrow Most of the former habitat for the Bernardino 1986). This is a joint project (Amrnodramus rnaritimus nigrescens) Delhi Sands flower-loving fly was of the cities of Colton, Rialto, and became extinct as a result of wildfires destroyed by agricultural conversion in Riverside, and the counties of Riverside that destroyed its habitat and eliminated the 1800’s. The remaining fragments of and San Bernardino. Its purpose is to females from a small remnant suitable habitat continue to be destroyed encourage industrial development of the population. The Service considers the by the construction of homes, area through various tax and other unprotected status of private lands businesses, and associated roads and economic incentives. The few remaining zoned for development (irrespective of infrastructure. Based on the distribution colonies of the Delhi Sands flower- their ownership status) to be a of the Delhi Sands soil type, the present loving fly would quickly be eliminated si~ciificantthreat to the continued distribution of the Delhi Sands flower- from increased development in this existence of the fly. loving fly most likely represents 2 to 3 region. Issue 9: Because there are only five. percent of its former range; the amount In 1990, a small site in Riverside sites remaining that provide habitat for of habitat existing today is County, just south of the San this subspecies, listing ofthe flower- approximately one-half of what existed Bernardino County line, was found to he loving fly and designating critical in 1975 (Ballmer 1989). occupied by the Delhi Sands flower- habitat are equivalent. Therefore, the The five remaining sites occupied by loving fly. However, this site max’ now Service should prepare an economic the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly occur be too small to persist; residential units analysis of the impacts of listing the within an 8-mile radius circleon private were recently constructed on land subspecies. land, totalling between 350 and 700 adjacent to this location. As with most Service Response: As discussed in the acres. These sites are divided of the other sites occupied by this “Critical Habitat” section of this rule, approximately equally by Interstate 10 species, this area too is being degraded, the Service has concluded that (I—lU) and adjacent Southern Pacific as described below. designation of critical habitat would not Railroad tracks. The portion north of All of the sites known to be occupied benefit the Delhi Sands flower-loving 1—10 is undergoing rapid and intensive by the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly are fly. Given the restricted distribution and urbanization. The largest site in this presently being degraded by ongoing small population sizes ofthis area, encompassing 70 acres, was soil disturbances, caused by grading, subspecies, it is unlikely that the destroyed sometime after 1990 by the plowing, discing to remove vegetation Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 49885 for fire control, and off-road vehicle use. dispersing from a colony could also stresses. In the remaining vestiges of its The Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is rare reduce the probability that new colonies former habitat and.with its reduced to absent in areas where these activities will be established. genetic variability, the Delhi Sands occur, Service biologists noted, during a flower-loving fly is vulnerable to 1991 survey, that this species tended to C. Disease or Predation random fluctuations or variation of occupy portions ofhabitat least Not known to be applicable. annuaFweather patterns, availability of disturbed by these activities, The use of D. The Inadequacy of Existing food, and other environmental stresses. off-road vehicles in the areas containing RegulatoiyMechanisms The absence of these insects from the fly’s remaining habitat may disturbed habitat may be due to the contribute to the loss of native The Delhi Sands flower-loving fly and direct effects of the disturbance or to the vegetation and subsequent invasion of its habitat are not currently protected growth of tumbleweeds (Salsola kali) weedy, non-native species. Illegal under any Federal, State or local laws. and other non-native vegetation such as dumping ofabandoned automobiles and CDFG has determined that it is unable European grasses (chiefly Aveno Spp. other trash has also contributed to to protect insects under current State and Bromus spp.) that increase in habitat degradation. regulations (Bontadelli 1990). abundance following soil disturbance. In summary, one colony of the Delhi In December 1992, a coalition of Tumbleweeds often form dense thickets Sands flower-loving fly has been lost agencies and landowners (including the covering extensive areas of previously due to urban development since 1990, counties of Riverside and San open sand and grow to more than I one was partially destroyed by sand- Bernardino; the cities of Colton, meter (3 feet) high. Tumbleweeds occur mining some time between late 1991 Fontana, Rialto, and Riverside; the to some extent at every extant fly and early 1992, and four colony sites are Riverside County Habitat Conservation location. Introduced grasses may also currently offered for sale. Given the rate Agency; and the University of California eliminate open areas of sand by forming and interest in residential and at Riverside) initiated a process to dense patches. commercial development in this area prepare a habitat conservation plan for The Service has carefully assessed the and the added incentive of the Agua the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly and best scientific and commercial Mansa Enterprise Zone plan, these sites other species that is intended to satisfy information available regarding the past, are likely to be purchased and the standards established under section present, and future threats faced by the developed in the immediate future. 10(a) of the Act for the incidental take Delhi Sands flower-loving fly in Finally, virtually all of the sites of listed species. The Service is determining to make this rule final, As presently occupied by this fly are being providing technical assistance to this described under the “Summary of degraded by soil-disturbing activities planning effort. The agencies listed Factors Affecting the Species” section that reduce native vegetation and above are currently working to develop above, the available information promote the invasion of non-native, procedures to prevent destruction of the indicates that one subspecies of weedy species. Delhi Sands habitat during the planning Rhaphiomidas terminatus is already Since the proposed rule was period. However, as noted under Factor extinct. Over 97 percent of the historic published, about 45 acres of occupied A above, habitat loss and fragmentation habitat of the Delhi Sands flower-loving habitat have been destroyed (G. Ballmer, have continued to occur since the fly has been eliminated. The five pers. comm., 1993). This represents a proposed rule was published and fragments of its remaining habitat are loss of 6 to 13 percent ofthe Delhi further losses are imminent. imminently threatened by urban Sands flower-loving fly habitat that Although the Service encourages and development, unauthorized trash existed at the time the proposed rule supports these kinds of planning efforts, dumping, off-road vehicle use, and was published. In addition, the county it is unable to conclude at this time that stochastic events. This species and its of San Bernardino has informed the the plarming process described above is habitat currently receive no protection Service of its intention to destroy about adequately providing for the at any location. Based on this 7 acres of occupied, high quality habitat conservation ofthe Delhi Sands flower- information, the Service concludes that and 69 acres of degraded, unoccupied loving fly. Considering the precarious the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is in habitat (L.R. Dawea, pers. comm., 1993). status of this species and the ecosystem imminent danger of extinction The destruction of this site will sever an in which it occurs, and the imminent throughout the remainder of its range important link between adjacent patches threat of habitat loss, the Service and warrants immediate protection of occupied habitat. concludes that existing regulatory under the Act. As provided by 5 U.S.C. B. Overutilization for Commercial, mechanisms aie inadequate to protect 5 53(d), the Service has determined that this species and its habitat. good cause exists to make the effective Recreational, Scientific or Educational Purposes E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors date ofthis rule immediate. Delay in implementation of the effective date Affecting Its Continued Existence Although flies in general are not would place the habitat of the species at especially popular with collectors (Pyle The small colony sizes of the Delhi risk. et al. 1981), Rhaphiomidas flies are Sands flower-loving fly and the high prized because of their unusual size, degree of fragmentation of its habitat Critical Habitat coloration, and rarity (C.D. Nagano, make this taxon especially vulnerable to Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as pers. comm., 1992). A dedicated stochastic events and to loss of genetic amended, requires critical habitat to be collector or collectors could readily variability. Small population size designated to the maximum extent eliminate the Delhi Sands flower-loving increases rates of inbreeding and may prudent and determinable at the time a fly, given its small, isolated populations. allow the expression ofany deleterious species is listed as endangered or Even scientific collecting, or repeated recessive genes occurring in the threatened. The Service finds that the handling and marking (particularly of population (known as “inbreeding designation of critical habitat is not females and/or in years of low depression”). Loss of genetic variability, prudent for the Delhi Sands flower- abundance) could eliminate or seriously through random genetic drift, reduces loving fly at this time. The Service’s damage the populations through loss of the ability of small populations to regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state genetic variability. Collection of females respond successfully to environmental that designation of critical habitat is not 49886 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, prudent when one or both of the that is proposed or listed as endangered following situations exist: (1) The orthreatened and with respect to its Virginia 22203 (70313.58—2104). species is imperiled by taking or other critical habitat, if any is being human activity, and identification of designated. Regulations implementing National Environmental Policy Act critical habitat can be expected to this interagency cooperation provision The Fish and Wildlife Service has increase the degree of such threat to the of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part determined that an Environmental species; or (2) such designation of 402. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires critical habitat would not be beneficial Federal agencies to insure that activities Assessment, as defined under the authority of the National Environmental to the species. they authorize, fund, or carry out, are Policy Act of 1969, need not be In the case of the Delhi Sands flower- not likely to jeopardize the continued loving fly, both criteria are met. As existence of listed species or result in prepared in connection with regulations discussed under the “Summary of destruction or adverse modification of adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Factors Affecting the Species” section of critical habitat. If a proposed Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as this rule, the fly is especially vulnerable agency action may affect a listed species amended. A notice outlining the to the removal of specimens for or its critical habitat, the responsible Service’s reasons for this determination scientific or personal collections, an Federal agency must enter into formal was published in the Federal Register activity that could be carried out by a consultation with the Service. No on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). few people, and would be very difficult Federal involvement is expected for References Cited to regulate or control. The precise activities occurring within habitats pinpointing of localities that would currently occupied by the Delhi Sands Balimer, G. 1989. Petition to the U.S. Fish result from publication of critical flower-loving fly. and Wildlife Service to list habitat descriptions and maps in the The Act and implementing Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis Federal Register would render the regulations found at 50 CFR 17.21 set as endangered. llpp. species more vulnerable to collecting. Ballmer, G. 1992. Petition for emergency forth a series of general prohibitions and listing of Pihaphiomidas tenninatus Furthermore, such maps and associated exceptions that apply to all endangered information would increase the threat of abdominahs as an endangered species. wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, 2pp. vandalism to these sites. For these make it illegal for any person subject to reasons, the Service finds that Bontadelli, P. 1990 (former Director of the the jurisdiction of the United States to California Department of Fish and publication of critical habitat take (including harass, harm, pursue, Game). Letter to State Assemblyman Jim descriptions and maps would likely hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, Costa, February 20, 1990. make the fly more vulnerable to collect, or attempt any such conduct), Cazier, M.A. 1941. A generic review of the activities prohibited under section 9 of importor export, transport in interstate family Apioceratidae with a revision of the Act. the North American species (Diptera- All populations of the Delhi Sands orforeign commerce in the course of commercial activity, or sell oroffer for Brachycera). Am. MidI, Nat. 25:589—631. flower-loving fly are found on private Cazier, M.A. 1985. A revision of the North lands where Federal involvement in sale in interstate or foreign commerce American flies belonging to the genus land-use activities does not generally any listed species. It is also illegal to Rhaphiomidas (Diptera, Apioceridae). occur. Additional protection resulting possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or Bulletin of the American Museum of from critical habitat designation is ship any such wildlife that has been Natural History 182:181—263. achieved through the section 7 taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply County of San Bernardino. 1986. Agua Mansa consultation process. Since section 7 is to agents of the Service and State Industrial Corridor Specific Plan. not expected to apply to land-use conservation agencies. Environmental Impact Report No. 397. activities occurring within any areas Permits may be issued to carry out San Bernardino, California. that might be designated as critical otherwise prohibited activities Hogue, C.L. 1967. The pupa ofPthaphiomidas involving endangered wildlife species terminatus Cazier (Diptera: Apioceridae). habitat, its designation would not Bull. So. Calif. Acad. Sci. 66:49—53. appreciably benefit the species. under certain circumstances. Regulations governing permits are Pyle, R.M., M. Bentzien, and P. Opler. 1981. Available Conservation Measures Insect Conservation. Ann. Rev. Ent. codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. 26:233—258. Conservation measures provided to Such permIts are available for scientific Rogers, R., and R. Mattoni. 1993. species listed as endangered or purposes, to enhance thepropagation or Observations on the Natural Historyand threatened under the Act include survival of the species, for incidental Conservation Biology of the Giant Flower recognition, recovery actions, take in connection with otherwise Loving Flies, Rhaphiomidas (Diptera- requirements for Federal protection, and lawful activities, and economic Apioceridae). Unpubl. mson file at U.S. prohibitions against certain activities. hardship in certain circumstances. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad, Recognition through listing encourages Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis California. and results in conservation actions by spends all buta short flight period Soulé, ME., ed. 1986. Conservation Biology: The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Federal, State, and private agencies, between August and Septemberin close Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, groups and individuals. The Act association with sandy soil, and under Massachusetts. provides for possible land acquisition such circumstancesdestruction of the Soulé, ME., ed. 1987. Viable Populations tor and cooperation with the States and species habitat could be interpreted to Conservation. Cambridge University requires that recovery actions be carried constitute take. Applicants may apply Press, Cambridge, Great Britain. out for all listed species. Such activities for incidental take permits under such Townsend, C.H.T. 1895. On the Diptera of may be initiated following listing. The circumstances where grading or other Baja California, including some species protection required ofFederal agencies activities may result in take. from adjacent regions. Proc. Calif. Acad. and the prohibitions against taking and Requests for copies ofthe regulations Sd., Ser. 2. 4:601—607. harm are discussed, in part, below. on listed wildlife and inquiries Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, regarding them may be addressed to the requires Federal agencies to evaluate Office of Management Authority, U.S. their actions with respect to any species Fish and Wildlife Service, room 432, Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 49887 Regulations, is amended as set forth U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil 1825 Virginia Street, Annapolis, Conservation Service. 1971. Soil Survey: Maryland 21401), Lynn Wilson Oldt, below:. Western Riverside County. U.S. (Ventura Field Office, 2140 Eastman Government Printing Office, PART 17—(AMENDED] Washington, D.C. 188 pp+214 maps. Avenue, Suite 100, Ventura, California U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil 93003, 805/644—1766), and Chris 1. The authority citation for part 17 Nagano (Sacramento Field Office, 2800 Conservation ServIce. 1980. SoIl Survey continues to read as follows: of San Bernardino County Southwestern Cottage Way, Room E—1823, Part, California. U.S. Government Sacramento, California 95825, 916/978— AuthorIty: 16 U.S.C. 1361—1407; 16 U.S.C. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 65 4866). 1531—1543; 16 U.S.C. 4201—4245; Pub. L. 99— 100 3500, pp+12 maps. 625, Stat. unless otherwise noted. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Authors 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding the Endangered and threatened species, following in alphabetical order under This rule was prepared by Ecological Exports, Imports, Reporting and Insects to the List of Endangered and Services stafffrom the Carlsbad Field recordkeeping requirements, Threatened Wildlife to read as follows: Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Transportation. ServIce, 2730 Loker Avenue West, ~17.11 Endangered and threatened Carlsbad, California 92008. It is based Regulation Promulgation wildlife. largely on the proposed rule prepared Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of * a a * * by Judy Jacobs (Annapolis Field Office, chapter I, title 50 of the Code ofFederal

Species Vertebrate popu- I I.. HIStOdC range latlon where endan- Status When lI~ - pec a Common name ScieniffIc name gered or threatened t ru es

Insects

Fly, Delhi Sands Rhaphiom~das U.S.A. (CA) NA E 517 NA NA flower-loving. terminatus ab~nails

* . a a a a *

Dated: September 14, 1993. Richard N. Smith, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 93—23163 Filed 9—22—93; 8:45 ami ULL1~Ococa 4310-15-P