Vol. 76 Tuesday, No. 177 September 13, 2011

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List 42 Great Basin and Mojave Desert Springsnails as Threatened or Endangered With Critical Habitat; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56608 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: You may submit (d) Historical and current population information by one of the following levels, and current and projected trends; Fish and Wildlife Service methods: and • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// (e) Past and ongoing conservation 50 CFR Part 17 www.regulations.gov. In the box that measures for the species, their habitat, reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the or both. [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0001; 92210–0–0008–B2] Docket number for this finding, which (2) The factors that are the basis for is FWS–R8–ES–2011–0001. You should making a listing determination for a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife then see an icon that reads ‘‘Submit a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Comment.’’ Please ensure that you have U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: Petition To List 42 Great Basin and found the correct rulemaking before (a) The present or threatened Mojave Desert Springsnails as submitting your comment. destruction, modification, or Threatened or Endangered With • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public curtailment of its habitat or range; Critical Habitat Comments Processing, Attn: [FWS–R8– (b) Overutilization for commercial, ES–2011–0001], Division of Policy and recreational, scientific, or educational AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Directives Management, U.S. Fish and purposes; Interior. Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, (c) Disease or predation; ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203. (d) The inadequacy of existing finding and initiation of status reviews. We will post all information we receive regulatory mechanisms; or on http://www.regulations.gov. This (e) Other natural or manmade factors SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and generally means that we will post any affecting its continued existence. Wildlife Service (Service), announce a personal information you provide us If, after the status review, we 90-day finding on a petition to list 42 (see the ‘‘Request for Information’’ determine that listing any of the 32 Great Basin and Mojave Desert section below for more details). springsnail species is warranted, we springsnails as threatened or After November 14, 2011, you must will propose critical habitat (see endangered under the Endangered submit information directly to the Field definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION under section 4 of the Act, to the We addressed 3 of the 42 petitioned CONTACT section below). Please note that maximum extent prudent and species in a 90-day finding dated we might not be able to address or determinable at the time we propose to August 18, 2009, in which we found incorporate information that we receive list the species. Therefore, within the that substantial scientific or commercial after the above requested date. geographical range currently occupied information was presented indicating by each of the 32 springsnail species, we FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill that listing may be warranted for those request data and information on: Ralston, Deputy State Supervisor, 3 species. In this finding, we find that (1) What may constitute ‘‘physical or Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. the petition does not present substantial biological features essential to the Fish and Wildlife Service, 1340 scientific or commercial information conservation of the species;’’ Financial Blvd, Suite 234, Reno, NV indicating that listing 7 of the remaining (2) Where these features are currently 89502, by telephone 775–861–6300, or 39 may be warranted. In addition, we found; and by facsimile 775–861–6301. If you use a find that the petition presents (3) Whether any of these features may telecommunications device for the deaf substantial scientific or commercial require special management (TDD), please call the Federal information indicating that listing may considerations or protection. be warranted for 32 of the remaining 39 Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. In addition, we request data and species. Therefore, with the publication information on ‘‘specific areas outside of this notice, we are initiating status SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the geographical area occupied by the reviews of these 32 species to determine Request for Information species’’ that are ‘‘essential to the if listing is warranted. To ensure that conservation of the species.’’ Please the status reviews are comprehensive, When we make a finding that a provide specific comments and we are requesting scientific and petition presents substantial information as to what, if any, critical commercial data and other information information indicating that listing a habitat you think we should propose for regarding these 32 species. Based on the species may be warranted, we are designation if the species is proposed status reviews, we will issue 12-month required to promptly review the status for listing, and why such habitat meets findings on these 32 species, which will of the species (status review). For the the requirements of section 4 of the Act. address whether the petitioned actions status review to be complete and based Please include sufficient information are warranted, as provided in the Act. on the best available scientific and with your submission (such as scientific If an emergency situation develops for commercial information, we request journal articles or other publications) to any of the 42 petitioned species that information on the 32 springsnail allow us to verify any scientific or warrants emergency listing, we will act species from governmental agencies, commercial information you include. immediately to provide necessary Native American Tribes, the scientific Submissions merely stating support protection. community, industry, and any other for or opposition to the action under DATES: To allow us adequate time to interested parties. We seek information consideration without providing conduct the status reviews, we request on: supporting information, although noted, that we receive information on or before (1) The species’ biology, range, and will not be considered in making a November 14, 2011. Please note that if population trends, including: determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the you are using the Federal eRulemaking (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, Act directs that determinations as to Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below), breeding, and sheltering; whether any species is an endangered or the deadline for submitting an (b) Genetics and taxonomy; threatened species must be made electronic comment is midnight Eastern (c) Historical and current range ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Daylight Saving Time on this date. including distribution patterns; and commercial data available.’’

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56609

You may submit your information (CBD), Tierra Curry, Noah Greenwald, findings on the 42 springsnail species concerning this status review by one of Dr. James Deacon, Don Duff, and the within the mandatory statutory the methods listed in the ADDRESSES Freshwater Mollusk Conservation timeframe. section. If you submit information via Society (hereinafter referred to as the Evaluation of Information for This http://www.regulations.gov, your entire petitioners), requesting that we, the Finding submission—including any personal Service, list 42 species of Great Basin identifying information—will be posted springsnails in Nevada, Utah, and Section 4 of the Act and its on the Web site. If you submit a California as threatened or endangered implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424 hardcopy that includes personal with critical habitat under the Act. The set forth the procedures for adding a identifying information, you may petition clearly identified itself as a species to, or removing a species from, request at the top of your document that petition and included the appropriate the Federal Lists of Endangered and we withhold this personal identifying identification information for the Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A information from public review. petitioners, as required in 50 CFR species may be determined to be an However, we cannot guarantee that we 424.14(a). endangered or threatened species due to will be able to do so. We will post all In an October 19, 2009, letter to the one or more of the five factors described hardcopy submissions on http:// petitioners, we acknowledged receipt of in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: www.regulations.gov. the petition, and responded that we (a) The present or threatened Information and supporting reviewed the information presented in destruction, modification, or documentation that we received and the petition and determined that issuing curtailment of its habitat or range; used in preparing this finding is an emergency regulation temporarily (b) Overutilization for commercial, available for you to review at http:// listing the species under section 4(b)(7) recreational, scientific, or educational www.regulations.gov, or you may make of the Act was not warranted. We also purposes; stated that compliance with various an appointment during normal business (c) Disease or predation; hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife court orders, settlement agreements and other statutory deadlines required us to (d) The inadequacy of existing Service, Nevada Fish and Wildlife regulatory mechanisms; or Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION expend all of our listing and critical (e) Other natural or manmade factors CONTACT). habitat funding for Fiscal Year 2009; thus, we anticipated making an initial affecting its continued existence. Background finding in Fiscal Year 2010. This finding In making this 90-day finding, we Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 addresses the petition. evaluated whether information U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires that we regarding threats to the 39 springsnail Previous Federal Actions make a finding on whether a petition to species as presented in the petition and list, delist, or reclassify a species Three of the 42 petitioned springsnail other information available in our files, presents substantial scientific or species were addressed in a separate 90- is substantial, thereby indicating that commercial information indicating that day finding on a petition to list 206 the petitioned action may be warranted. the petitioned action may be warranted. species in the midwest and western Our evaluation of this information is We are to base this finding on United States (August 18, 2009; 74 FR presented below. information provided in the petition, 41649); thus, these three species are not Summary of Common Species supporting information submitted with included in this finding. In the finding Information the petition, and information otherwise dated August 18, 2009, we found available in our files. To the maximum substantial scientific or commercial The 39 species of springsnails extent practicable, we are to make this information was presented indicating included in the petition and evaluated finding within 90 days of our receipt of that listing may be warranted for the in this finding are endemic, aquatic the petition and publish our notice of longitudinal gland pyrg (Pyrgulopsis macroinvertebrates of Great Basin and the finding promptly in the Federal anguina), Hamlin Valley pyrg Mojave Desert freshwater springs of Register. (Pyrgulopsis hamlinensis), and sub- Nevada, Utah, and California (Table 1). Our standard for substantial scientific globose snake pyrg (Pyrgulopsis All of the petitioned species are from or commercial information within the saxatilis). Therefore, this finding the phylum Mollusca, class Gastropoda, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with addresses the remaining 39 springsnail superorder Caenogastropoda (Bouchet regard to a 90-day petition finding is species from the petition dated February and Rocroi 2005, pp. 4–368). Thirty-four ‘‘that amount of information that would 17, 2009. of the species are in the genus lead a reasonable person to believe that On December 14, 2009, one of the Pyrgulopsis, family Hydrobiidae, and the measure proposed in the petition petitioners, CBD, filed a 60-day notice of five species are in the genus Tryonia, may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). intent to sue indicating that the Service family Cochliopidae (Table 1) (Wilke et If we find that substantial scientific or failed to comply with its mandatory al. 2001, pp. 1–21). Both in the petition commercial information was presented, duty to make a preliminary 90-day and in our files, little to no information we are required to promptly conduct a finding on the petition to list these 42 is available on population numbers or species status review, which we springsnail species, as well as findings population trends for the majority of subsequently summarize in our for numerous other species. On April these springsnail species. Life history 12-month finding. 26, 2010, CBD amended its complaint in information for the 39 species is Center for Biological Diversity v. available in the petition, and in Petition History Salazar, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, references cited in the petition and this On February 27, 2009, we received a Case No.: 1:10–cv–230–PLF (D.D.C.), finding. In this finding, we included a formal petition dated February 17, 2009, adding an allegation that the Service short summary of distribution from the Center for Biological Diversity failed to issue its 90-day petition information for each species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56610 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF 39 SPRINGSNAIL SPECIES INCLUDED IN THIS FINDING

Scientific name Common name Hydrographic area(s) County (Co.), state

Species for which substantial information indicating listing may be warranted was not presented or available:

Pyrgulopsis aloba ...... Duckwater pyrg ...... Railroad Valley North ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis anatine ...... Southern Duckwater pyrg ...... Railroad Valley North ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis gracilis ...... Emigrant pyrg ...... White River Valley ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis lockensis ...... Lockes pyrg ...... Railroad Valley North ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis montana ...... Camp Valley pyrg ...... Meadow Valley Wash (Camp Val- Lincoln Co., NV. ley). Pyrgulopsis papillata ...... Big Warm Spring pyrg ...... Railroad Valley North ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis villacampae ...... Duckwater Warm Spring pyrg ...... Railroad Valley North ...... Nye Co., NV.

Species for which substantial information indicating listing may be warranted was presented or available:

Pyrgulopsis avernalis ...... Moapa pebblesnail ...... Upper Muddy River Springs ...... Clark Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis breviloba ...... Flag pyrg ...... Dry Lake and White River ...... Lincoln and Nye Cos., NV. Pyrgulopsis carinifera ...... Moapa Valley pyrg ...... Upper Muddy River Springs ...... Clark Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis coloradensis ...... Blue Point pyrg...... Black Mountains Area (Lake Clark Co., NV. Mead). Pyrgulopsis crystalis ...... Crystal springsnail ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis deaconi ...... Spring Mountains pyrg ...... Las Vegas Valley and Pahrump Clark Co., NV. Valley. Pyrgulopsis erythropoma ...... Ash Meadows pebblesnail ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis fairbanksensis ...... Fairbanks springsnail ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis fausta ...... Corn Creek pyrg ...... Las Vegas Valley ...... Clark Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis hubbsi ...... Hubbs pyrg ...... Pahranagat Valley ...... Lincoln Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis isolatus ...... Elongate gland springsnail ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis landyei ...... Landyes pyrg ...... Steptoe Valley ...... White Pine Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis lata ...... Butterfield pyrg ...... White River Valley ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis marcida ...... Hardy pyrg ...... Cave Valley and White River Val- Lincoln, Nye, and White Pine ley. Cos., NV. Pyrgulopsis merriami ...... Pahranagat pebblesnail...... Pahranagat Valley and White Lincoln and Nye Cos., NV. River Valley. Pyrgulopsis nanus ...... Distal gland springsnail ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis neritella ...... Neritiform Steptoe Ranch pyrg ..... Steptoe Valley ...... White Pine Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis orbiculata ...... Sub-globose Steptoe Ranch pyrg Steptoe Valley ...... White Pine Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis peculiaris ...... Bifid duct pyrg ...... Snake Valley and Spring Valley ... White Pine Co., NV; Millard Co., UT. Pyrgulopsis pisteri ...... Median gland Nevada pyrg ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis planulata ...... Flat-topped Steptoe pyrg ...... Steptoe Valley ...... White Pine Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis sathos ...... White River Valley pyrg ...... White River Valley ...... Lincoln, Nye and White Pine Cos., NV. Pyrgulopsis serrata ...... Northern Steptoe pyrg ...... Steptoe Valley ...... Elko and White Pine Cos., NV. Pyrgulopsis sterilis ...... Sterile Basin pyrg ...... Ralston Valley and Stone Cabin Nye Co., NV. Flat. Pyrgulopsis sublata ...... Lake Valley pyrg ...... Lake Valley ...... Lincoln Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis sulcata ...... Southern Steptoe pyrg ...... Steptoe Valley ...... White Pine Co., NV. Pyrgulopsis turbatrix ...... Southeast Nevada pyrg ...... Las Vegas Valley, Indian Springs, Clark and Nye Cos., NV. Pahrump Valley, Amargosa Flat, and Frenchman Flat. Tryonia angulata ...... Sportinggoods tryonia ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Tryonia clathrata ...... Grated tryonia...... Upper Muddy River Springs, Clark, Lincoln, and Nye Cos., NV. White River Valley, and Pahranagat Valley. Tryonia elata ...... Point of Rocks tryonia ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Tryonia ericae ...... Minute tryonia ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Nye Co., NV. Tryonia variegata ...... Amargosa tryonia ...... Amargosa Desert ...... Inyo Co., CA; Nye Co., NV.

Summary of Common Threats 60). These threats are generally indicating that listing any of the 39 described in the petition with little to petitioned species may be warranted. The petition identified several no information in the petition or Our conclusion for each species as it potential threats common to most, if not available in our files that correlates the relates to each of the five factors, as well all, of the petitioned springsnail species: threats to existing or probable impacts as specific threat information if groundwater development (withdrawal, on the individual springsnail species. In available, is then summarized later in extraction, pumping, etc.), spring this section, we summarize these the finding in species sections below. development, water pollution, common threats and provide the recreation, grazing, invasive species, rationale as to whether or not global climate change, isolated information in the petition and available populations, and inadequate regulatory mechanisms (CBD et al. 2009, pp. 21– in our files is substantial, thereby

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56611

Factor A. The Present or Threatened an indefinite period of time without springsnail species because the Destruction, Modification, or depleting the source.’’ The NSE proposed groundwater projects in these Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range considers system yield with perennial systems are not potential threats. This is yield estimates in basins with appropriately noted for each specific Groundwater Development ‘‘significant groundwater discharges to species it applies to in the species The petition identifies groundwater streams.’’ The NSE estimates perennial sections below. development (withdrawal, extraction, yield for 256 basins and sub-basins For other systems, significant pumping, etc.) as ‘‘an overarching and (areas) in Nevada, and may ‘‘designate’’ uncertainties still remain regarding imminent threat’’ (CBD et al. 2009, p. a groundwater basin, meaning the basin many of the groundwater development 23) to the persistence of the petitioned ‘‘is being depleted or is in need of projects and these uncertainties are springsnail species and their aquatic additional administration, and in the factored into our evaluation of the habitats as this may reduce or eliminate interest of public welfare, [the NSE may] information. These uncertainties spring discharge, thus altering the declare preferred uses (such as include, but are not limited to: (1) springhead environment and the municipal, domestic) in such basins.’’ Timing of pending applications for specific conditions (e.g., flow, substrate, Many of the hydrographic areas in water rights not yet permitted by the water temperature) required by which the petitioned springsnails occur NSE; (2) timing of authorization by the springsnails. As this threat relates to are ‘‘designated’’ by the NSE, and NSE to use those existing, permitted impacts to the petitioned species, it is permitted groundwater rights approach water rights that are required to perform primarily characterized in the petition or exceed the estimated average annual testing, monitoring, or other measures as ‘‘unsustainable groundwater recharge. Furthermore, the petition before they can be fully utilized; (3) withdrawal rates’’ from: (1) Existing provides evidence that such outcome of protests, lawsuits, and legal water rights and applications for water commitment of water resources beyond proceedings against water rights rights that exceed the amount of perennial yield may result in applications and groundwater perennial yield of a specific basin or detrimental impacts to spring and development projects; (4) progress of sub-basin where springsnails occur; and stream conditions, and thereby could project planning, timing of issuance of (2) existing and proposed groundwater impact habitats and microhabitat necessary permits (e.g., right-of-way development and pumping projects in conditions of many of the petitioned permits, National Environmental Policy groundwater basin(s) where springsnails species in the designated basins. When Act compliance), and project analyses occur or basin(s) hydrologically groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer that may correlate impacts to spring connected to other basins where recharge it may result in surface water systems; (5) varying results of different springsnails occur (CBD et al. 2009, pp. level decline, spring drying and models being used to determine project 23–32). degradation, or the loss of aquatic impacts and timing of projected impacts The petition presented significant (e.g., some project impacts are projected information regarding groundwater habitat (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396– 397). Based on this summary, to be 100–200 years in the future); (6) development as it relates to perennial availability of funding for construction yield versus committed water resources groundwater development resulting from permitted groundwater rights that and implementation of projects, within hydrographic basins where the including monitoring; and (7) locations petitioned springsnails may occur. The approach or exceed perennial yield may be a potential threat and is identified as of wells and other infrastructure in information they provide is referenced relation to the petitioned species. such for specific species in the species to the Nevada Division of Water Whether or not there is substantial sections below. Resources (NDWR) database (http:// information indicating that listing may water.nv.gov/). We accessed and As noted in the petition, several be warranted due to groundwater reviewed the NDWR database on groundwater development projects have development from existing and January 12, 2010, and saved hard copies been proposed by various entities and proposed projects is appropriately of pertinent information for each basin are at different stages of planning and identified for the specific species it where the petitioned springsnails may implementation. The petition asserts applies to in the species sections below. occur. Where we discuss perennial which springs and springsnails would In addition to habitat impacts from yield, committed water resources, and be affected by these groundwater groundwater development, inadequate effects of groundwater development development projects (CBD et al. 2009, regulation of groundwater development within this finding we are referring to pp. 23–32). However, based on the is cited as a threat in the petition (CBD information we have reviewed from the information in the petition and in our et al. 2009, pp. 28–29, 57); therefore, as NDWR database. The Nevada State files, we determined for certain springs the potential threat of groundwater Engineer (NSE) approves and permits and their associated petitioned development relates to regulatory groundwater rights in Nevada, and springsnails there is not substantial mechanisms, we analyzed this potential defines perennial yield as ‘‘the amount information indicating that they may be threat under Factor D below. of usable water from a ground-water threatened by the proposed groundwater aquifer that can be economically projects because the basins in which Spring Development, Grazing, and withdrawn and consumed each year for groundwater development is proposed Recreation an indefinite period of time. It cannot do not have a hydrologic connection to The petition identifies spring exceed the natural recharge to that the springs and flow systems where the development (e.g., capturing and piping aquifer and ultimately is limited to species occur (Welch et al. 2007, pp. spring flow), grazing, and recreation as maximum amount of discharge that can 71–79). These springs are upgradient threats to the persistence of the be utilized for beneficial use.’’ In some and outside of the zone of influence of petitioned springsnails (CBD et al. 2009, basins, system yield estimates may also the carbonate aquifer (e.g., in the pp. 33–39). In general, all of these be included with perennial yield alluvial aquifer or mountain block activities have been known to degrade estimates. System yield is defined as aquifer). Therefore based on this spring environments by decreasing or ‘‘the amount of usable groundwater and summary, there is not substantial eliminating flow and altering water surface water that can be economically information indicating that listing may quality, substrate condition, and withdrawn and consumed each year for be warranted for 9 of the 39 petitioned vegetative cover, composition, and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

structure. This, in turn, decreases Factor B. Overutilization for Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing available habitat for species that require Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Regulatory Mechanisms flowing, high-quality water, such as Educational Purposes The petitioned springsnails occur on springsnails. Sada and Vinyard (2002, private, Federal, and State lands, and as The petition identifies improper pp. 277 and 283) reviewed historical such are subject to a variety of land collection for scientific, educational and anthropogenic changes in the aquatic management strategies. The petition biota of the Great Basin and found that recreational purposes as a potential states that none of the 39 petitioned water flow diversions and livestock threat that could contribute to the springsnail species have legal protective grazing in riparian areas likely decline of the petitioned springsnails status and asserts that all are imperiled contributed to historical declines or (CBD et al. 2009, p. 42). The petition or critically imperiled (CBD et al. 2009, losses of several springsnail species. indicates that unauthorized collection of p. 47). The petition maintains that, Yet, overall site disturbance from spring invertebrates was observed at one although Federal and State land development and grazing did not always location where a petitioned springsnail management may incorporate equate to low numbers of springsnails, species occurs, but no information was conservation for fish, wildlife and plant as some sites classified as moderately to included on whether or not the resources, conservation for springsnails highly disturbed were also described as petitioned springsnail species was is often by default through other having springsnails that were common collected or if the invertebrate collection species’ conservation, is not generally or abundant (Sada 2006, p. 6). In many cases, these activities have activity affected the springsnail given high priority, or is limited by lack been occurring on the landscape for population. The petition also cites a of funding or staff (CBD et al. 2009, pp. some time, and for the majority of location in central Arizona where 47–56). In addition, the petition asserts species, the petition does not present population sampling without that an expired 1998 Memorandum of specific information that there may be replacement of aquatic organisms Understanding among the Forest an increase in the intensity of the resulted in a stark but temporary (1 Service, Bureau of Land Management, activity or that the activity may expand year) decline in the population size of National Park Service, Geological into additional occupied sites in the the springsnail species sampled at that Survey, Fish and Wildlife Service, future. The petition does not directly location (CBD et al. 2009, p. 42). Smithsonian Institution, and The Nature relate loss of springsnail populations or However, the petition provides no data Conservancy, as well as State wildlife reduction in numbers of individuals to or information that directly relates conservation strategies/plans, State these activities for 31 of the petitioned overutilization or collection to loss of Natural Heritage Programs, other conservation programs, habitat springsnail species. In addition, State springsnail populations or reduction in conservation plans, and groundwater and Federal agencies, conservation numbers of individuals for any of the organizations, and private landowners development stipulated agreements do petitioned springsnails. We have no not provide regulatory protection to any are conducting management actions, information in our files to indicate that restoration, and planning activities that of the petitioned springsnails (CBD et al. overutilization may be a threat to any of 2009, pp. 51–59). Furthermore, remove spring developments, restore the petitioned springsnail species. systems to a more natural state, and according to the petition, despite Therefore, we conclude there is not control or reduce the impacts of Federal or State conservation programs, substantial information indicating that livestock grazing and recreationists at springsnails are threatened on State and springs occupied by five of the listing may be warranted due to Federal lands by invasive species; petitioned springsnails. Specific overutilization for commercial, overgrazing by cattle, feral horses, and information pertaining to each of the recreational, scientific, or educational burros; spring development and petitioned species is included in the purposes for all of the 39 petitioned groundwater pumping; and climate species sections below. Based on this springsnail species because these change (CBD et al. 2009, pp. 48–52). summary, there is not substantial activities do not pose a potential threat. We do not consider land ownership and associated management activities, information to indicate that 26 of the Factor C. Disease or Predation petitioned springsnail species may memorandums of understanding, warrant listing due to spring The petition asserts the risk of conservation strategies, or other development, grazing, and recreation predation and disease is increased for conservation agreements, plans, or and this is noted in the individual springsnail populations with the programs to be regulatory mechanisms species sections below. However, for the invasion of exotic species, but provides since the conservation activities associated with these types of remaining 8 petitioned springsnail no supporting information. Natural documents are discretionary. Many of species specific information indicates predation of springsnails by various taxa these agreements, strategies, and plans that these activities may be potential is also noted but no information is were not intended to provide regulatory threats, and as appropriate, is noted provided as to the significance of this below in the species sections. protection, but rather to facilitate threat to springsnails or their The petition identifies invasive, voluntary cooperation or partnerships nonnative species as a threat to the populations. We have no information in between and among agencies and persistence of the petitioned our files to indicate that disease and entities to promote conservation. If springsnails through: habitat loss and predation may be threats to any of the specific laws, statutes, permits, or other degradation such as alteration of water petitioned springsnail species. mechanisms regulate specific activities quality, substrate condition, or Therefore, based on this summary, there and actions by landowners, entities, or vegetative cover, composition, and is not substantial information indicating agencies that relate to a potential threat structure; predation; and competition that listing may be warranted due to to the petitioned springsnails, we have (CBD et al. 2009, pp. 33–39). Since these disease and predation for all of the 39 determined whether there is substantial potential impacts of invasive species petitioned springsnails species. In information regarding the inadequacy of raised in the petition cross several of the regard to invasive (exotic) species, we those mechanisms in this finding. five factors, we analyzed this potential address this potential threat under Specifically, the inadequate threat under Factor E. Factor E. regulation of groundwater development

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56613

is considered a threat in the petition Muddy River) in southern Nevada, Sada Inherent Vulnerability of Isolated (CBD et al. 2009, p. 57). Through (2008, p. 69) observed that the niche Populations and Limited Distribution various permit and approval overlap between the nonnative red- The petition asserts that springsnails mechanisms, the NSE regulates rimmed melania (Melanoides are inherently vulnerable to extirpation groundwater rights in Nevada. In many tuberculata) and native springsnails due to their isolation and limited hydrologic basins in Nevada where the (Moapa pebblesnail, Moapa Valley pyrg, distribution (CBD et al. 2009, p. 47). petitioned springsnails occur, the and grated tryonia) was small and that Local endemism is common in permitted groundwater usage competitive interactions were minor. springsnails (Hershler and Sada 2002, p. approaches or exceeds the estimated The abundance of, or habitat use by, the 225), with many of the species in the perennial yield of the basin. This native springsnails was minimally western United States restricted to a commitment of water resources by the affected by the presence of the single spring, spring complex, or NSE beyond perennial yield may result nonnative red-rimmed melania. Sada drainage system (Hershler 1998, p. 1; in detrimental impacts to spring and (2008, p. 69) states that these Hershler et al. 1999, p. 377, Liu et al. stream condition in the designated 2003, p. 2775). Additionally, the spring basins, and thereby could impact observations provide insight into the potential impacts of nonnative red- systems in which these species are habitats and microhabitat conditions of located are typically isolated and many of the petitioned species. For the rimmed melania on native springsnails. The negative impacts or influences of separated from other surface waters by springsnail species where substantial large expanses of dry land. This information indicates that listing may be competition, or other life-history interactions, may be negligible at other isolation and limited distribution, warranted based on the inadequacy of coupled with low vagility, increases the this regulatory mechanism, it is noted in thermal springs as well, if nonnative and native snail species utilize different vulnerability of species or local the individual species sections below. populations of springsnails to temperatures, substrates, and water Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade extirpation from stochastic demographic velocities within the systems. Factors Affecting its Continued and natural events, and anthropogenic Existence In many cases, nonnative species have factors. been present on the landscape for some However, many springsnails have Nonnative and Invasive Species time, and for 36 of the 39 springsnail evolved and continue to persist in The petition identifies invasive, species, the petition does not present isolation with limited distribution nonnative species (fish, invertebrates, specific information that additional (Hershler and Sada 2002, p. 255). Thus, amphibians, and vegetation) as a threat occupied springsnail sites may be for all 39 of the petitioned springsnail to the persistence of the petitioned threatened by an increase or expansion species, we do not find substantial springsnails through: habitat loss and of nonnative species. The petition also information indicating that isolation degradation such as alteration of water does not correlate loss of springsnail with limited distribution, in and of quality, substrate condition, or populations or reduction in numbers of itself, is a potential threat. For some of vegetative cover, composition, and individuals directly to the introduction the petitioned springsnail species, structure; predation; and competition or presence of invasive, nonnative isolation and limited distribution are (CBD et al. 2009, pp. 43–45). Since the species for the majority of species. aspects we considered in determining potential impacts of invasive species Management actions and restoration whether there is substantial information raised in the petition cross several of the activities have been implemented by that indicates that a natural or five factors, we have determined anthropogenic threat, or a combination various agencies to avoid or reduce the whether there is substantial information of threats, may be affecting a specific potential impacts of nonnative species regarding this potential threat under springsnail species, and as appropriate, to fish and wildlife resources in certain Factor E. As summarized above for the this is discussed for those specific common threats under Factor A, Sada areas. Some of these actions have species in the species sections below. and Vinyard (2002, pp. 277 and 283) occurred at springs with petitioned found that nonnative species was one of springsnails; however, we are unaware Global Climate Change several prevalent threats to springsnail of information supporting the benefit or The petition identified global climate species of the Great Basin, and historical detriment of such actions to change (CBD et al. 2009, p. 46) as a declines or losses of several springsnail springsnails. If available, specific significant threat to the petitioned species, in some cases, have been nonnative species information springsnail species ‘‘due to potential attributed to the introduction of pertaining to the petitioned species or increased frequency and intensity of nonnative species. Thirty-four of the 42 the springs systems they occupy is drought, altered precipitation patterns, petitioned species were included in the included in the species section below. shifting ecological zones, decreased study, but Sada and Vinyard did not Therefore based on this summary, there groundwater levels and increasing conclude that a population decline in is not substantial information to demand for freshwater.’’ Climate, any of the 34 species occurred as a indicate that listing may be warranted particularly temperature and result of nonnative species for 36 of the 39 petitioned springsnail precipitation, is a primary factor introductions (Sada and Vinyard 2002, species, due to threats from nonnative affecting spring system structure, pp. 284–287). Sada and Vinyard (2002, and invasive species; this is reiterated function, and dynamics in the Great pp. 277 and 286–287) did have for specific species in the individual Basin and Mojave Desert. In general, sufficient information to confirm that species sections below. However, for spring ecosystems are adapted to short- major population declines occurred in three of the petitioned species, specific term climatic changes and the highly 1970 in 7 out of the 10 petitioned variable and unpredictable climatic information regarding effects from Amargosa Desert species due to regional patterns characteristic of the Basin and nonnative and invasive species is economic conditions and human Range Province. Because springsnails immigration (see species section for the available to indicate a potential threat, are aquatic obligates with limited Amargosa Desert for more information). and as appropriate, is noted for specific dispersal ability, their presence in a At one thermal spring system (Upper species in those species sections below. spring is indicative of perennial water

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56614 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

that has likely persisted for thousands of there is much uncertainty and the Northern hydrographic area (#173B) is years (Sada and Pohlmann 2006, p. 10), information is unreliable at a finer 75,000 acre-feet per year (afy) including through past climatic scales to predict what habitat attributes (92,510,000 cubic-meters per year (m3/ fluctuations. could be affected by climate change. year)), and there are 24,943 afy In the long term, major and relatively Given the current uncertainty and (30,770,000 m3/year) committed; thus, rapid shifts in climatic patterns that are unreliability of information as the permitted groundwater rights do not characteristic predictions of global summarized above, we determine that approach or exceed the estimated climate change have the potential to there is not substantial information average annual recharge in this cause large-scale changes to spring indicating that listing may be warranted hydrographic area. Based on the ecosystems. Climate change has for all of the 39 petitioned springsnail preceding discussion, the information occurred over the past century in high species due to global climate change; presented in the petition for these northern latitudes (increased this is identified as such for specific species is incorrect, and there is no precipitation) and areas below 10 species in the species sections below. information providing evidence that degrees south and 30 degrees north groundwater development may affect (decreased precipitation), with Species for Which Substantial habitat for the five petitioned Railroad associated changes in components of the Information was Not Presented Valley springsnails. Neither the petition, hydrologic cycle (e.g., precipitation In this summary section, the nor our files contain substantial patterns, snow melt, evaporation, soil springsnail species are grouped by information indicating that listing the moisture, and runoff) (Bates et al. 2008, hydrographic areas or basins in p. 3). alphabetical order for ease in discussing five petitioned Railroad Valley The petition did not provide climate common threats within those areas. springsnails may be warranted due to change information specific to Nevada, Within each hydrographic area, the threats from groundwater development. Utah, and California, or the basins and springsnails are listed in alphabetical The petition specifically cites a spring systems occupied by the 39 order by their scientific name. diversion (spring development) in Big petitioned springsnails species. Based Warm Spring as a threat to the five Railroad (Duckwater) Valley Northern on information in our files, the recent Railroad Valley springsnails. However, Hydrographic Area Species projections of climate change in the in 2006 and 2008, Big Warm Spring and Great Basin and Mojave Desert over the Pyrgulopsis aloba (Duckwater pyrg): Little Warm Spring underwent next century include: increased known from two unnamed springs extensive restoration efforts, including temperatures, with an increased northwest and southeast of Duckwater removal of the cited diversion, which frequency of extremely hot days in on tribal lands within the Duckwater have reduced or eliminated the threats summer; more variable weather patterns Reservation, Nye County, Nevada to the habitat for these species (Poore and more severe storms; more winter (Hershler 1998, p. 62). 2008b, pp. 1–10). Through a Safe Harbor precipitation in the form of rain, with Pyrgulopsis anatine (southern Agreement and several grants from the potentially little change or decreases in Duckwater pyrg): occurs at a single Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife summer precipitation; and earlier, more spring southeast of Old Collins Spring Program and through section 6 of the rapid snowmelt (United States on tribal lands within the Duckwater Act, conservation is being implemented Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Reservation, Nye County, Nevada to avoid threats such as spring EPA) 1998, pp. 1–4; Chambers and (Hershler 1998, p. 64). development, water pollution, Pyrgulopsis lockensis (Lockes pyrg): Pellant 2008, pp. 29–33). According to recreation, and grazing to Big Warm a report of the Intergovernmental Panel known from one spring on Lockes Spring and Little Warm Spring (Service on Climate Change (Bates et al. 2008, p. Ranch, State of Nevada lands, Nye 2007, pp. 1–25; Service 2009, pp. 1–36). 36), higher temperatures and earlier County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 58). In 2005, Lockes Ranch was purchased snow melt due to climate change could Pyrgulopsis papillata (Big Warm by the State of Nevada through a result in increased evapotranspiration Spring pyrg): occurs at Big Warm Spring and shifts in the timing or amount of and Little Warm Spring on tribal lands Recovery Lands Acquisition grant for groundwater recharge and runoff (EPA within the Duckwater Reservation, Nye protection of the federally threatened 1998, pp. 1–4), potentially resulting in County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 59). Railroad Valley springfish (Crenichthys decreased summer flows in springs and Pyrgulopsis villacampae (Duckwater nevadae). Although the State does not streams. Compounding these issues Warm Spring pyrg): known from Big regulate invertebrates, this purchase could be increased water demand and Warm Spring and Little Warm Spring on provides protection to riparian habitat, groundwater development for human tribal lands within the Duckwater spring systems, and associated wildlife. consumption. Reservation, Nye County, Nevada The State of Nevada actively manages In summary, it is difficult to predict (Hershler 1998, p. 63). grazing and recreation, or has local climate change impacts due to Factor A: The petition states that eliminated these activities from portions substantial uncertainty in trends of groundwater development, spring of Lockes Ranch such that these past hydrological variables (e.g., natural development, water pollution, threats to the species are reduced. In fall variability can mask long-term climate recreation, and grazing are threats that 2008, the four springs on Lockes Ranch trends); limitations in spatial and may affect the five petitioned Railroad underwent extensive restoration, which temporal coverage of monitoring Valley springsnails. The petition included creation of a new sinuous networks; and differences in the spatial mentions that groundwater resources in channel, improvement of existing scales of global climate models and the Railroad Valley Southern channels, dewatering of a man-made hydrological models (Bates et al. 2008, hydrographic area (#173A) are over irrigation ditch that was previously used p. 3). Thus, while the information in the committed; however, none of the five for stock watering, and removal of petition and our files indicates that petitioned species of Railroad Valley nonnative vegetation surrounding the climate change from a large-scale or springsnails occur in that area. Rather, four spring systems (Poore 2008a, pp. 1– regional level has the potential to affect these species occur in the Railroad 4). The petition does not provide spring ecosystems in the Great Basin Valley Northern hydrographic area. The evidence suggesting that these and Mojave Desert in the longterm, perennial yield of the Railroad Valley restoration efforts are beneficial or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56615

detrimental to the petitioned Railroad mechanisms designed to protect the Duckwater pyrg, Lockes pyrg, Big Warm Valley springsnail species. species that are inadequate. Therefore, Spring pyrg, or the Duckwater Warm In summary, these restoration we have determined that the Springs pyrg may be warranted due to activities and acquisition have information in the petition and in our threats associated with any of the five significantly reduced the threat of files does not present substantial factors. grazing and recreation, and eliminated information to indicate that listing the Spring Valley (Meadow Valley Wash/ the threats associated with spring Duckwater pyrg, southern Duckwater Camp Valley) Hydrographic Area diversions. Based on the preceding pyrg, Lockes pyrg, Big Warm Spring Species discussion we have determined that the pyrg, or the Duckwater Warm Spring information in the petition and in our pyrg may be warranted due to the The Pyrgulopsis montana (Camp files does not present substantial inadequacy of existing regulatory Valley pyrg) is known from a single information to indicate that listing the mechanisms. unnamed spring on private land in Railroad Valley springsnail species, may Factor E: The petition states that Camp Valley, Lincoln County, Nevada be warranted due to threats from spring inherent vulnerability of isolated (Hershler 1998, pp. 31–33; Garside and development, water pollution, springsnail populations, invasive Schilling 1979, p. 46). Data from the recreation, and grazing. species, and global climate change are 1992 survey indicates that the Camp Based on the above discussions, we threats that may affect the five Railroad Valley pyrg was abundant (abundant is have determined that the petition does Valley petitioned springsnails. the highest qualitative population not present substantial information to Specifically regarding invasive species description; e.g. abundant > common > indicate that listing the Duckwater pyrg, and the five Railroad Valley scarce > absent.) (Sada 2003, database southern Duckwater pyrg, Lockes pyrg, springsnails, the Service and NDOW are record 701). Big Warm Spring pyrg, or the Duckwater continuously working to eradicate Factor A: The petition identifies Warm Spring pyrg as threatened or nonnative species in Big Warm Spring groundwater development, spring endangered may be warranted due to (Goldstein and Hobbs 2009, pp. 1–14). development, water pollution, the present or threatened destruction, Little Warm Spring and the spring recreation, and grazing as threats. The modification, or curtailment of its system at Lockes Ranch currently do not petition incorrectly asserts that the habitat or range. contain nonnative species that could unnamed spring where the Camp Valley Factors B and C: The petition asserts threaten the petitioned Railroad Valley pyrg occurs is within the region of that the five Railroad Valley petitioned springsnails, and it is unknown if the influence to be affected by groundwater springsnails are threatened by collection two other unnamed springs where the development projects (CBD et al. 2009, for scientific or educational purposes petitioned Railroad Valley springsnails p. 89). The petition cites generalized and disease or predation. The petition are known to occur contain nonnative studies of that model future does not provide any information to species. The petition does not provide groundwater development (Schaefer and indicate that collection, disease or any information regarding the potential Harrill 1995; Harrill and Prudic 1998; predation is impacting the any of the threat from isolation and limited Deacon et al. 2007) to support its five Railroad Valley species or to distribution. We do not consider assertion that it will affect the Camp indicate these activities are occurring in, isolation and limited distribution, in Valley pyrg and its habitat. Schaefer and or are likely to occur in their habitats. and of itself, to be a threat to the five Harrill (1995, p. 7) indicated that, for The petitioners offer no evidence of Railroad Valley species. The petitioners their analysis, the data that were used population decline for any of the five offer no evidence of population decline in their model were highly generalized Railroad Valley springsnail species as a for any of the five Railroad Valley and that their assumptions were result of Factors B or C, and these springsnail species as a result of isolated simplifications of the actual system. In species continue to persist in their populations, invasive species, and addition, the locations of proposed habitats. Therefore based on the global climate change under Factor E. wells and the pumping schedule were preceding discussion and the discussion The petitioned Railroad Valley likely to be revised. Thus, their results in the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ springsnails continue to persist in their were only indications of potential for Factors B and C, we have determined habitats. Therefore, based on the generalized results and are not specific that the information in the petition and preceding discussion and discussion of to the Camp Valley pyrg. Harrill and in our files does not present substantial isolated springsnail populations, Prudic (1998) and Deacon et al. (2007) information to indicate that listing the invasive species, and global climate present overviews of the groundwater Duckwater pyrg, southern Duckwater change in the ‘‘Summary of Common system in southern Nevada, western pyrg, Lockes pyrg, Big Warm Spring Threats,’’ we have determined that the Utah, and southeastern California; pyrg, or the Duckwater Warm Spring information in the petition and in our however, neither study presents specific pyrg may be warranted due to the files does not present substantial information regarding potential impacts overutilization for commercial, information to indicate that listing the to the Camp Valley pyrg. recreational, scientific or educational Duckwater pyrg, southern Duckwater References cited in the petition purposes and disease or predation. pyrg, Lockes pyrg, Big Warm Spring regarding groundwater development Factor D: We have determined that pyrg, or the Duckwater Warm Spring projects that petitioners use to assert the information in the petition and in pyrg may be warranted due to other that this activity is a potential threat to our files does not present substantial natural or manmade factors such as the species (cited below) do not support information to indicate that listing the threats from isolation,, invasive species, the claims in the petition that the Camp five Railroad Valley springsnails may be and global climate change. Valley pyrg or its habitat will be affected warranted due to threats associated with Railroad Valley Summary: Based on by proposed groundwater development Factors A, B, C, and E. It follows that the our evaluation of the information projects. The Camp Valley pyrg occurs adequacy or inadequacy of mechanisms provided in the petition and available in in an unnamed spring within the Spring to regulate any of these threats is not at our files, we have determined that the Valley hydrographic area (#201), This issue. Further, the petition does not petition does not present substantial hydrographic area was not identified as present any additional information that information to indicate that listing of being within the Region of Influence for there are existing regulatory the Duckwater pyrg, southern two groundwater development projects

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56616 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

in Lincoln County (Lincoln County pyrg may be warranted due to threats information in the petition and in our Land Act Groundwater Development from spring development, water files does not present substantial and Utility Right-of-Way Project (BLM pollution, or recreation. information to indicate that listing the 2008, pp. 3–12) and Kane Springs We have determined that the petition Camp Valley pyrg may be warranted Valley Groundwater Development does not present substantial information due to the inadequacy of existing Project (BLM 2008, pp. 3–10)). After to indicate that listing the Camp Valley regulatory mechanisms. evaluating the hydrologic evidence pyrg as threatened or endangered may Spring Valley Summary: Based on our presented, the NSE did not identify the be warranted due to the present or evaluation of the information provided unnamed spring where the Camp Valley threatened destruction, modification, or in the petition and available in our files, pyrg occurs as a location where impacts curtailment of its habitat or range we have determined that the petition will occur as a result of the groundwater Factors B, C, and E: The petition does not present substantial information development (NDWR 2007, pp. 1–23; proposes that collection for scientific or to indicate that listing of the Camp NDWR 2008, pp. 1–40). The Spring educational purposes, disease or Valley pyrg may be warranted due to Valley hydrographic area has not been predation, invasive species, inherent threats associated with any of the five classified as a ‘‘Designated Groundwater vulnerability of isolated springsnail factors. Basin’’ by the NSE. The perennial yield populations, and global climate change are threats. As discussed in the White River Valley Hydrographic Area of the Spring Valley hydrographic area Species is 25,000 afy (30,840,000 m3/year), and ‘‘Summary of Common Threats Section’’ there are 1,112 afy (1,372,000 m3/year) above, the petition does not provide any Pyrgulopsis gracilis (Emigrant pyrg): committed; thus, permitted groundwater specific information relative to the found on private land in Emigrant rights do not exceed the estimated Camp Valley pyrg to indicate that Springs, Nye County, Nevada (Hershler average annual recharge. Based upon collection for scientific or education 1998, pp. 45 and 47). Emigrant Springs the preceding discussion we have purposes, disease or predation, invasive is located in White River Valley (HB determined that the information in the species, and global climate change are #207). Sada (2003, database record 734) petition and in our files does not threats to the species. The Camp Valley identified that the Emigrant pyrg was present substantial information to pyrg is currently known from one common at Emigrant Springs during a indicate that listing the Camp Valley spring, and the extent of springsnail survey in 1992. pyrg may be warranted due to threats surveys in the area is unknown. The Factor A: The petition identifies from groundwater development. petition (CBD et al. 2009, p. 89) does not groundwater development, spring The unnamed spring where the Camp provide any specific information development, water pollution, Valley pyrg occurs was assessed as regarding the potential threat from recreation, and grazing as threats to the being heavily disturbed by cattle isolation and limited distribution. We Emigrant pyrg. The petition provided (ranking ranged from 1 if undisturbed to do not consider isolation and limited information (Schaefer and Harrill 1995; 4 if heavily disturbed) during a 1992 distribution, in and of itself, to be a Harrill and Prudic 1998; Deacon et al. survey (Hershler 1998, p. 33; Sada 2003, threat to the Camp Valley pyrg. 2007) that broadly describes predicted database record 701), however Sada Therefore based on the preceding impacts of groundwater development to showed that the Camp Valley pyrg was discussion and the discussion of general areas, but did not provide any abundant (Sada 2003, database record potential threats of overutilization, information to indicate that 701). Based on this information, the disease or predation, invasive species, groundwater development is a potential species was abundant despite livestock inherent vulnerability of isolated threat to Emigrant Springs or the activity in its habitat. There is no springsnail populations, and global Emigrant pyrg. The Southern Nevada indication that livestock activity has or climate change in the ‘‘Summary of Water Authority (SNWA) is proposing may increase in intensity or extent, or Common Threats’’ section above, we to withdraw groundwater from the Cave that the activity ceased. Therefore, we have determined that the information in Valley hydrographic area (#180) (SNWA have determined that the information in the petition and in our files does not 2008, p. 1–1). There is evidence for a the petition and in our files does not present substantial information to hydrologic connection suggesting that present substantial information that indicate that listing the Camp Valley groundwater may flow between Cave listing may be warranted because pyrg may be warranted due to Valley and White River Valley based on grazing does not seem to be affecting the overutilization for commercial, isotopic similarities of groundwater in species. recreational, scientific, or educational Cave Valley that emerge at Butterfield The petition does not present specific purposes, disease or predation, or other Springs and Flag Springs, but not at information with regard to the potential natural or manmade factors such as Emigrant Springs where this springsnail threats of spring development, and threats from invasive species, isolation, species occurs (NDWR 2008, pp. 16–17). groundwater water development. and global climate change. After evaluating all hydrological Although the petition mentions water Factor D: We have determined that evidence presented, the NSE did not pollution, and recreation it does not the information in the petition and in identify Emigrant Springs as a location present any supporting information to our files does not present substantial where impacts will occur as a result of its assertions that these activities are information to indicate that listing the the groundwater development in Cave impacting or are likely to impact the Camp Valley pyrg under Factors A, B, Valley (NDWR 2008, pp. 16–17). The Camp Valley pyrg or its habitat. C, and E may be warranted as detailed White River hydrographic area (#207) Therefore, based on the preceding above.It follows that the adequacy or has not been classified as a ‘‘Designated discussion and the discussion of spring inadequacy of mechanisms to regulate Groundwater Basin’’ by the NSE. The development, water pollution, and these threats is not at issue. Further, the perennial yield of the White River recreation in the ‘‘Summary of Common petition does not present any additional hydrographic area is 37,000 afy Threats’’ section above, for, we have information that there are existing (45,640,000 m3/year), and there are determined that the information in the regulatory mechanisms designed to 31,699 afy (39,100,000 m3/year) petition and in our files does not protect the species that are inadequate. committed; thus, permitted groundwater present substantial information to Therefore, based on the preceding rights do not exceed the estimated indicate that listing the Camp Valley discussion we have determined that the average annual recharge. Therefore, the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56617

information in the petition does not any specific information to indicate the springsnails are listed in alphabetical provide reliable information that activities are occurring in or are likely order by their scientific name. groundwater providing habitat for the to occur in its habitat at Emigrant Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Area Emigrant pyrg will be affected from Spring, where the Emigrant pyrg occurs. Species current or by proposed groundwater The petition does not provide any development.. Based on the above specific information regarding the Ten species from the Amargosa Desert discussion we have determined that the potential threat from isolation and hydrographic area were included in the information in the petition and in our limited distribution, and we do not petition. All but one of these species files does not present substantial consider isolation and limited occur only in Nye County, Nevada, and information to indicate that listing the distribution, in and of itself, to be a most are present on Service-managed Emigrant pyrg may be warranted due to threat to the Emigrant pyrg. Therefore, lands at Ash Meadows National Wildlife groundwater development. based on the preceding discussion and Refuge (NWR). A survey of Emigrant Springs the discussion of the potential threats of Pyrgulopsis crystalis (Crystal (southernmost of the complex) in 1992 overcollection, disease or predation, springsnail) is limited to Crystal Pool (Hershler (1998, p. 12; Sada 2003, invasive species, inherent vulnerability (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. 801; database record X) described it as highly of isolated springsnail populations, and Hershler 1994, p. 32) located in Ash impacted by cattle, but effects on the global climate change in the ‘‘Summary Meadows NWR. springsnail population were not of Common Threats’’ section above, we Pyrgulopsis erythropoma (Ash described. Springsnails were described have determined that the information in Meadows pebblesnail) is distributed as common during the survey though it the petition and in our files does not primarily within Ash Meadows NWR is unknown whether there were present substantial information to among 6 springs and 5 spring brooks, all differences in abundance of the indicate that listing the Emigrant pyrg of which are located within 0.5 sympatric Emigrant pyrg and Hardy may be warranted due to overutilization kilometer (km) (0.3 mile (mi)) of one pyrg. Sada (2005; as cited in Golden et for commercial, recreational, scientific, another, at the Point of Rocks Spring al. 2007, p. 162) indicated that the or educational purposes, disease or complex (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. Emigrant pyrg was common. We have predation, or other natural or manmade 795). no additional information, nor was any factors such as threats from invasive Pyrgulopsis fairbanksensis (Fairbanks information presented in the petition, species, isolation, and global climate springsnail) is restricted to its type on whether livestock activity has or may change. locality at Fairbanks Spring, within Ash increase in intensity or extent, or if it Meadows NWR, where it is common on Factor D: Since we have determined has ceased. The species remains the travertine at the spring orifice that the information in the petition and common in abundance despite this (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. 796). in our files does not present substantial potential activity in its habitat, which Pyrgulopsis isolatus (elongate-gland information to indicate that listing the may suggest that grazing under past springsnail) is restricted to its type Emigrant pyrg may be warranted due to conditions and use levels has not acted locality at an unnamed spring west of threats associated with Factors A, B, C, as a threat to the Emigrant pyrg. Carson Slough and south of the claypits and E as detailed above, the adequacy Therefore, we have determined that the on private land (Hershler and Sada or inadequacy of mechanisms to information in the petition and in our 1987, pp. 807 and 810). regulate these threats is not at issue. files does not present substantial Pyrgulopsis nanus (distal-gland information to indicate that listing the Further, the petition does not present springsnail) is known from four small Emigrant pyrg may be warranted any additional information that there springbrooks within 10 km (6.2 mi) of because grazing does not seem to be are existing regulatory mechanisms one another (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. affecting the species. designed to protect the species that are 804) and is found primarily on public Although the petition mentions spring inadequate. Therefore, based on the land. These springs and their associated development, water pollution, and preceding discussion we have springbrooks include: Collins Ranch on recreation it does not present any determined that the information in the Ash Meadows NWR, Five Springs on supporting information to its assertions petition and in our files does not private land and Ash Meadows NWR, that these activities are impacting or are present substantial information to North Collins Ranch on Ash Meadows likely to impact the Emigrant pyrg, or its indicate that listing the Emigrant pyrg NWR, and Mary Scott Spring on BLM- habitat. Therefore, based on this may be warranted due to the inadequacy managed land (Service 1990, p. 10). preceding discussion we have of regulatory mechanisms. Pyrgulopsis pisteri (median-gland determined that the information in the White River Valley Summary: Based springsnail or Median-gland Nevada petition and in our files does not on our evaluation of the information pyrg) is located at Marsh Spring on present substantial information to provided in the petition and available in BLM-managed land, North Scruggs indicate that that listing the Emigrant our files, we have determined that the Springs on Ash Meadows NWR, and pyrg may be warranted due to spring petition does not present substantial below School Springs in an observation development, water pollution, or information to indicate that listing of pond on Ash Meadows NWR, all within recreation. the Emigrant pyrg may be warranted 2 km (1.2 mi) of each other (Hershler Factors B, C, and E: The petition due to threats associated with any of the and Sada 1987, p. 807). proposes that collection for scientific or five factors. Tryonia angulata (Sportinggoods educational purposes, disease or Species for Which Substantial tryonia) is common in three springs, predation, invasive species, inherent Information was Presented which include Fairbanks Spring on Ash vulnerability of isolated springsnail Meadows NWR, Crystal Pool on Ash populations, and global climate change In this summary section, the Meadows NWR, and Big Spring on BLM are threats to the Emigrant pyrg. The springsnail species are grouped by land (Hershler and Sada 1987, pp. 811 petition does not cite any specific hydrographic areas or basins in and 817). information (CBD et al. 2009, p. 114) alphabetical order for ease in discussing Tryonia elata (Point of Rocks tryonia) correlating these potential threats with common threats within those areas. is found on travertine mound in two impacts to the Emigrant pyrg or provide Within each hydrographic area, the small springs at Point of Rocks where it

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56618 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

is common in stream outflows in silted springs and seeps at Ash Meadows that the information in the petition and areas (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. 831) (Mayer 2000, pp. 2–3), and offers some our files does not indicate that spring on BLM land and Ash Meadows NWR. protection for the springsnails and other development, water pollution, Tryonia ericae (minute tryonia) aquatic species; however, as previously recreation, and grazing may be threats to occurs in North Scruggs Spring and a noted, permitted groundwater rights any of the 10 Amargosa Desert spring north of Collins Ranch Spring, exceed the estimated average annual springsnails. However, we will further which are located within 4 km (2.5 mi) recharge in the hydrographic area where consider this and any additional of each other on Ash Meadows NWR the 10 Amargosa Desert springsnails and information on these activities received (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. 830). their spring habitats occur. Based upon during our status review for these Tryonia variegata (Amargosa tryonia) the preceding discussion and additional species. occurs on private and public land in at rationale discussing groundwater Factors B, C, and E: The petition least 21 small springs in Nye County, development in the ‘‘Summary of proposes that collection for scientific or Nevada, and 2 springs in Inyo County, Common Threats,’’ we have determined educational purposes, disease or California (Hershler and Sada 1987, p. there is substantial information in the predation, inherent vulnerability of 826). petition and our files to indicate that isolated springsnail populations, and Factor A: The petition proposes listing the 10 Amargosa Desert global climate change are threats to all groundwater development, spring springsnails may be warranted due to 10 Amargosa Desert springsnails. The development, water pollution, threats from groundwater development. petition does not provide specific recreation, and grazing are threats to all information regarding the potential The petition does not provide specific 10 species of springsnails occurring in threat from isolation and limited information regarding spring the Amargosa Desert hydrographic area. distribution, and we do not consider development, recreation, and grazing as The Amargosa Desert hydrographic area inherent vulnerability due to isolation potential threats to the 10 Amargosa (#230) has been classified as a and limited distribution, in and of itself, Desert springsnails. Based on ‘‘Designated Groundwater Basin’’ by the as a threat to the 10 Amargosa Desert information in our files, the Service and NSE in which permitted groundwater springsnails. As discussed in the other partnering agencies have rights exceed the estimated average ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section completed and continue to implement annual recharge. The perennial yield of above, the petition does not provide extensive efforts to restore wetland, Amargosa Desert is 24,000 afy specific information, nor does the (29,600,000 m3/year), and riparian, and spring systems and other Service have any information in its files approximately 25,282 afy (31,180,000 protective measures (e.g., installation of regarding collection for scientific or m3/year) are committed for use. When boardwalks and fencing in sensitive educational purposes, disease or groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer areas to manage use) at Ash Meadows predation for any of the petitioned recharge, it may result in surface water NWR and on BLM land within the Ash springsnails, including the 10 Amargosa level decline, spring drying and Meadows NWR boundary that benefit Desert species. Additionally, the degradation, or loss of aquatic habitat aquatic and riparian species, including petition does not contain specific (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). On 9 of the Amargosa Desert species that information, nor does the Service have July 16, 2007, the Nevada State Engineer occur on the Ash Meadows NWR and on specific information about the potential issued Ruling 5750 denying numerous BLM land. These actions have reduced effects of global climate change as water rights applications in the or eliminated the potential threats from potential threats to the 10 Amargosa Amargosa Valley, and finding that the spring diversion, grazing, and recreation Desert springsnails due to the current groundwater basin is over-appropriated for the springsnail populations on Ash uncertainty in model predictions. (NDWR 2007, p. 22). On November 4, Meadows NWR and on BLM land Therefore, based on this and the 2008, the Nevada State Engineer issued within the Ash Meadows NWR preceding discussion in the ‘‘Summary Order 1197 further stipulating that any boundary. In 1995, the Service excluded of Common Threats,’’ we have new applications for water rights in the grazing from springsnail habitats by determined that there is not substantial Amargosa Valley will be denied (NDWR constructing roughly 16 mi (25.7 km) of information in the petition and our files 2008, p. 1). Most groundwater perimeter fencing around Ash Meadows indicating that collection for scientific monitoring wells in the Amargosa NWR (including BLM land within Ash or educational purposes, disease or Valley have shown a significant decline Meadows NWR) and any trespass predation, inherent vulnerability of in water levels since 1992, especially in animals, such as burros, cattle, or isolated springsnail populations, and the Amargosa Farms area (northwest of horses, are removed. It is unknown if global climate change may be threats to Ash Meadows). In some areas of the two springs in California occupied any of the 10 Amargosa Desert Amargosa Valley, groundwater pumping by the Amargosa tryonia springsnail are springsnails. However, we will further is currently occurring at about twice the grazed or if fencing excludes grazing. consider this and any additional rate predicted to be sustainable. Water The petition does not provide specific information on these activities and other levels for some wells in the Ash information regarding water pollution as potential threats received during our Meadows area were relatively stable a potential threat to the 10 Amargosa status review for these species. 1992–2002 (USGS 2002, pp. 1, 53 and Desert springsnails, nor is there any The petition further asserts that 66). Mayer (2006, pp. 19 and 28) information in our files regarding water invasive species are a threat to the 10 indicates groundwater monitoring wells pollution in the springs where the 10 Amargosa Desert springsnails. Hershler and spring discharges on the Refuge are Amargosa Desert springsnails occur. and Sada (1987, pp. 778–779 and 839– currently stable to slightly declining. Therefore, based on the preceding 843) indicate that invasive species are The Service has permitted water rights discussion and additional rationale in present in the springs. The nonnative for 16,376 afy (20,200,000 m3/year) of the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ in red-rimmed melania is present in annual spring discharge on Ash which we conclude the petition does thermal springs on Ash Meadows NWR Meadows NWR (Mayer 2005, pp. 2–3). not directly relate loss of springsnail and on BLM land within the Ash This constitutes approximately 96 populations or reduction in numbers of Meadows NWR boundary. A study in percent of the 17,025 afy (21,000,000 individuals to these activities for the the thermal, Upper Muddy River spring m3/year) annual discharge by the majority of species, we have determined system of competition from red-rimmed

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56619

melania suggest that this competition tryonia may be warranted due to the Therefore, we have determined that may not be a threat because there are present or threatened destruction, there is not substantial information in only minor niche overlap and modification, or curtailment of its the petition and in our files indicating interactions between native and habitat or range (Factor A) resulting that spring development, water nonnative snails (Sada 2008, p. 69). from groundwater development and the pollution, recreation, and grazing may Other nonnatives species (fish, inadequacy of existing regulatory be threats to the Blue Point pyrg. amphibians, crustaceans, and mechanisms (Factor D) related to the However, we will further consider this vegetation) have been present in the permitting of groundwater rights and and any additional information on these past or currently exist in the springs on use. activities received during our status Ash Meadows NWR and on BLM land Black Mountains (Lake Mead) review for this species. within the Ash Meadows NWR Hydrographic Area Species Factors B and C: The petition boundary; however, the Service and its proposes that collection for scientific or partners have implemented and Pyrgulopsis coloradensis (Blue Point educational purposes and disease or continue to implement ongoing pyrg) is found in Blue Point Spring in predation are threats to the Blue Point management actions and restoration Lake Mead National Recreation Area pyrg. As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of activities to eradicate, manage, or (National Park Service managed lands), Common Threats’’ section, the petition reduce the impacts of nonnative species Clark County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. does not present any specific at springs with springsnails on Ash 29). Hershler (1998, p. 29) described the information, nor is there any Meadows NWR and on BLM land population as occurring in limited information in our files regarding within the Ash Meadows NWR abundance and becoming increasingly collection for scientific or educational boundary. Information is not available scarce in the past decade. The Blue purposes and disease or predation as in the petition or our files about the Point pyrg was not located during potential threats to the Blue Point pyrg. intensive surveys between 1999 and status of any threat from nonnative Therefore, we have determined that 2001, and was believed to be extinct species on private land. Based on the there is not substantial information in (Sada field notes 2001 as cited in Sada preceding discussion and additional the petition and in our files indicating 2002, pp. 2–3). The petition indicates rationale regarding invasive species in that collection for scientific or that the Blue Point pyrg was found the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ we educational purposes and disease or during a survey in 2008 (CBD et al. have determined that there is not predation may be threats to the Blue substantial information in the petition 2009, p. 82). Factor A: The petition proposes that Point pyrg. However, we will further and our files indicating that invasive consider this and any additional species may be a threat to any of the 10 groundwater development, spring development, water pollution, information on these activities received Amargosa Desert springsnails. However, during our status review for this species. we will further consider this and any recreation, and grazing are threats to Factor D: The petition states that additional information on these this species. The Black Mountains inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a potential threats received during our hydrographic area (#215) has been threat to the Blue Point pyrg due to the status review for these species. classified as a ‘‘Designated Groundwater Factor D: The petition states that Basin’’ by the NSE in which permitted permitting of groundwater rights by the inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a groundwater rights approach or exceed NSE that exceed perennial yield. threat to the 10 Amargosa Desert the estimated average annual recharge. Permitted groundwater rights in the springsnails due to the permitting of The perennial yield of the Black hydrographic area currently approach groundwater rights by the NSE that Mountains hydrographic area is 1,300 the average annual recharge (see details exceed perennial yield. Permitted afy (1,604,000 m3/year) and system under Factor A). Therefore, based on groundwater rights in the Amargosa yield is 7,000 afy (8,634,000 m3/year), this and the preceding discussion of Desert hydrographic area currently while 6,882 afy (8,489,000 m3/year) are regulatory mechanisms pertaining to exceed the average annual recharge (see committed for use—which is permitting of groundwater rights and details under Factor A above). Based on approaching the estimated average use in the ‘‘Summary of Common the preceding discussion and additional annual recharge. When groundwater Threats,’’ we have determined that there rationale discussing regulatory extraction exceeds aquifer recharge, it is substantial information in the petition mechanisms in the ‘‘Summary of may result in surface water level and our files indicating that listing the Common Threats,’’ we have determined decline, spring drying, and degradation Blue Point pyrg may be warranted due that there is substantial information in or loss of aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. to the inadequacy of existing regulatory the petition and in our files to indicate 2005, pp. 396–397). Therefore, based on mechanisms related to the permitting of that listing the 10 Amargosa Desert the preceding discussion and additional groundwater rights and use.. springsnails may be warranted due to rationale discussing groundwater Factor E: The petition proposes that the inadequacy of existing regulatory development in the ‘‘Summary of invasive species, inherent vulnerability mechanisms related to the permitting of Common Threats,’’ we have determined of isolated springsnail populations, and groundwater rights and use. that there is substantial information in global climate change are threats to the Amargosa Desert Summary: Based on the petition and in our files to indicate Blue Point pyrg. The petition does not our evaluation of the information that listing the Blue Point pyrg may be provide and specific information, nor is provided in the petition and available in warranted due to threats from there any information in our files, our files, we have determined that the groundwater development. regarding global climate change as a petition presents substantial As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of potential threat to the Blue Point pyrg. information to indicate that listing of Common Threats’’ section above, the The petition does not provide any Crystal springsnail, Ash Meadows petition does not present any specific specific information regarding the pebblesnail, Fairbanks springsnail, information, nor is there any potential threat from isolation and elongate-gland springsnail, distal gland information in our files regarding spring limited distribution, and we do not springsnail, median-gland springsnail, development, water pollution, consider isolation and limited sportinggoods tryonia, Point of Rocks recreation, and grazing as potential distribution, in and of itself, to be a tryonia, minute tryonia, and Amargosa threats to the Blue Point pyrg. threat to the Blue Point pyrg.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56620 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Specifically regarding invasive complexes in Nye, Lincoln, and White Hardy pyrg, and White River Valley species, Sada (2002, p. 4) indicates that Pine Counties, Nevada (Hershler 1998, pyrg. However, we will further consider nonnative convict cichlids (Amatitlania pp. 48–50; Golden et al. 2007, p. 162). this and any additional information on nigrofacsciata) are present and may feed Sada (2003, database records 723, 726, these activities received during our on members of the macroinvertebrate 734, 735 and 737) reported that the status review for this species. community. The nonnative red-rimmed Hardy pyrg was common at Emigrant Factors B, C, and E: The petition melania is present in Blue Point Spring, Springs, Arnoldson Spring, Hardy proposes that collection for scientific or and its appearance coincided with Spring, and Silver Spring. The species educational purposes, disease or declines of the Blue Point pyrg (Sada is also present at Butterfield Springs. predation, invasive species, inherent 2002, p. 2). A study in the thermal, Pyrgulopsis sathos (White River vulnerability of isolated springsnail Upper Muddy River spring system of Valley pyrg) occurs in Flag Springs population, and global climate change competition from red-rimmed melania (north and middle), Nye County, are threats to the Butterfield pyrg, Hardy suggests that this competition may not Nevada; Camp Spring, Lincoln County, pyrg, and White River Valley pyrg. The be a threat because there are only minor Nevada; and Lund Spring, Arnoldson petition does not provide any specific niche overlaps and interactions between Spring, Preston Big Spring, and information regarding the potential native and nonnative snails (Sada 2008, Nicholas Spring, White Pine County, threat from isolation and limited p. 69). This information suggests that Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 39; Golden et distribution, and we do not consider the Blue Point pyrg’s limited al. 2007, p. 160). isolation and limited distribution, in distribution and isolation appear to Factor A: The petition proposes that and of itself, to be a threat to the make it more susceptible to other groundwater development, spring Butterfield pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White potential natural or anthropogenic development, water pollution, River Valley pyrg. As discussed in the threats, including potential predation by recreation, and grazing are threats. The ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section or other effects of nonnative species perennial yield of the White River above, the petition does not provide any such as convict cichlids. Therefore, hydrographic area is 37,000 (afy) specific information, nor is there any based on the preceding discussion and (45,640,000 m3/year), and there are information in our files regarding the discussion in the ‘‘Summary of 31,699 afy (39,100,000 m3/year) collection for scientific or educational Common Threats,’’ we have determined committed; thus, permitted groundwater purposes, disease or predation, invasive that there is not substantial information rights do not exceed the estimated species, and global climate change as in the petition and our files indicating average annual recharge. However, potential threats to any of the petitioned that inherent vulnerability of isolated SNWA is proposing to develop 134,000 springsnail species, which includes the springsnail populations and global afy (165,288,100 m3/year) of Butterfield pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White climate change may be threats to the groundwater from the Cave Valley River Valley pyrg. Therefore, we have Blue Point pyrg. However, we have hydrographic area (#180) (SNWA 2008, determined that there is not substantial determined that there is substantial p. 1–1). There is evidence for a information in the petition and our files information in the petition and our files hydrologic connection suggesting that indicating that collection for scientific to indicate that listing the Blue Point groundwater may flow between Cave or educational purposes, disease or pyrg may be warranted due to threats Valley and White River Valley based on predation, invasive species, inherent from invasive species. Nevertheless, we isotopic similarities of groundwater in vulnerability of isolated springsnail will further consider this and any Cave Valley that emerge at Butterfield populations, and global climate change additional information received on Springs and Flag Springs, where these may be threats to the Butterfield pyrg, these potential threats during our status three springsnail species occur (NDWR Hardy pyrg, and White River Valley review for this species. 2008, pp. 16–17). The NSE expressed pyrg. However, we will further consider Black Mountains Summary: Based on concern for potential impacts to these this and any additional information on our evaluation of the information springs from groundwater development these activities and other potential provided in the petition and available in in Cave Valley (NDWR 2008, p. 17). threats received during our status our files, we have determined that the Based on the preceding discussion, we review for this species. petition presents substantial have determined that there is Factor D: The petition states that information to indicate that listing of substantial information in the petition inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a the Blue Point pyrg may be warranted and our files to indicate that listing the threat to the Butterfield pyrg, Hardy due to the present or threatened Butterfield pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White pyrg, and White River Valley pyrg due destruction, modification, or River Valley pyrg may be warranted due to the permitting of groundwater rights curtailment of its habitat or range to threats from groundwater by the NSE. The NSE expressed concern (Factor A) resulting from groundwater development. for potential impacts to Butterfield development, the inadequacy of existing As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Springs and Flag Springs, where the regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) Common Threats’’ section above, the three springsnail species occur, from the related to the permitting of groundwater petition does not present specific proposed groundwater development by rights and use, and other natural or information, nor is there any SNWA in the Cave Valley hydrographic manmade factors affecting its survival information in our files regarding spring area (see details under Factor A). Based (Factor E) from the introduction or development, water pollution, on the preceding discussion, we have presence of invasive species. recreation, and grazing as potential determined there is substantial threats to the any of the petitioned information in the petition and in our Cave Valley and White River Valley springsnail species, which includes the files to indicate that listing the Hydrographic Area Species Butterfield pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White Butterfield pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White Pyrgulopsis lata (Butterfield pyrg) is River Valley pyrg. Therefore, we have River Valley pyrg due to the inadequacy found in Butterfield Springs on private determined there is not substantial of existing regulatory mechanisms land in Nye County, Nevada (Hershler information in the petition and our files related to permitting of groundwater 1998, p. 43). indicating that spring development, rights and use . Pyrgulopsis marcida (Hardy pyrg) is water pollution, recreation, and grazing Cave Valley Summary: Based on our located in several springs or spring may be threats to the Butterfield pyrg, evaluation of the information provided

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56621

in the petition and available in our files, development, water pollution, grazing, our files, we have determined that the we have determined that the petition and recreation as potential threats to the petition presents substantial presents substantial information to Flag pyrg. Therefore, we have information to indicate that listing of indicate that listing of the Butterfield determined that there is not substantial the Flag pyrg may be warranted due to pyrg, Hardy pyrg, and White River information in the petition and our files the present or threatened destruction, Valley pyrg may be warranted due to the indicating that spring development, modification, or curtailment of its present or threatened destruction, water pollution, grazing, and recreation habitat or range (Factor A) resulting modification, or curtailment of its may be threats to the Flag pyrg. from groundwater development and the habitat or range (Factor A) resulting However, we will further consider this inadequacy of existing regulatory from groundwater development and the and any additional information on these mechanisms (Factor D) related to the inadequacy of existing regulatory activities received during our status permitting of groundwater rights and mechanisms (Factor D) related to the review for this species. use. permitting of groundwater rights and Factors B, C, and E: The petition use. proposes that collection for scientific or Lake Valley Hydrographic Area Species educational purposes, disease or Pyrgulopsis sublata (Lake Valley pyrg) Dry Lake Valley and White River Valley predation, invasive species, inherent Hydrographic Area Species is found in Wambolt Springs, Lincoln vulnerability of isolated springsnail County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 57). Pyrgulopsis breviloba (Flag pyrg) is populations, and global climate change Golden et al. (2007, p. 133) indicate that found at the Flag Springs complex are threats to the Flag pyrg. The petition there are at least six spring sources, of (North, Middle, and South springs), Nye does not provide specific information which they focused their attention at County, Nevada; and Meloy Spring, regarding the potential threat from two. During surveys in 1992, Sada Lincoln County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, isolation and limited distribution, and (2003, database record 717) described p. 39; Golden et al. 2007, pp. 161–162). we do not consider isolation and limited Lake Valley pyrg as common. During Factor A: The petition proposes that distribution, in and of itself, to be a surveys in 2004, Golden et al. (2007, p. groundwater development, spring threat to the Flag pyrg. As discussed in 136) observed that Lake Valley pyrg was development, water pollution, grazing, the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ common at one spring head and scarce and recreation are threats to the Flag section above, the petition does not pyrg. The perennial yield of the White 5–15 meter (m) (16 feet (ft)–49 ft) provide specific information, nor is downstream. Brief surveys of the River hydrographic area is 37,000 (afy) there any information in our files, (45,640,000 m3/year), and there are remaining springs by Golden et al. 2007, regarding collection for scientific or p. 136) showed that springsnails were 31,699 afy (39,100,000 m3/year) educational purposes, disease or committed; thus, permitted groundwater scarce at one and absent from the predation, invasive species, and global remaining four. Golden et al. (2007, p. rights do not exceed the estimated climate change as potential threats to average annual recharge. The perennial 137) found that Lake Valley pyrg was any of the petitioned springsnail the fourth most dominant taxa in the yield of the Dry Lake Valley species, which includes the Flag pyrg. macroinvertebrate samples collected at hydrographic area is 12,700 afy Therefore, we have determined that springs they surveyed. (15,670,000 m3/year), and there are there is not substantial information in 1,066 afy (1,315,000 m3/year) the petition and our files indicating that Factor A: The petition proposes that committed; thus, permitted groundwater collection for scientific or educational groundwater development, spring rights do not exceed the estimated purposes, disease or predation, invasive development, water pollution, average annual recharge. However, species, inherent vulnerability of recreation, and grazing are threats to the SNWA is proposing to develop 134,000 isolated springsnail populations, and Lake Valley pyrg. The Lake Valley afy (165,288,100 m3/year) of global climate change may be threats to hydrographic area (#183) has been groundwater from the Cave Valley the Flag pyrg. However, we will further classified as a ‘‘Designated Groundwater hydrographic area (#180) (SNWA 2008, consider this and any additional Basin’’ by the NSE in which permitted p. 1–1). There is evidence for a information on these activities and other groundwater rights exceed the estimated hydrologic connection suggesting that potential threats received during our average annual recharge. The perennial groundwater may flow between Cave status review for this species. yield of Lake Valley is 12,000 afy Valley and White River Valley based on Factor D: The petition states that (14,800,000 m3/year), while 21,868 afy isotopic similarities of groundwater in inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a (26,970,000 m3/year) are committed for Cave Valley that emerge at Butterfield threat to the Flag pyrg due to the use. When groundwater extraction Springs and Flag Springs (NDWR 2008, permitting of groundwater rights by the exceeds aquifer recharge it may result in pp. 16–17). The NSE expressed concern NSE. The NSE expressed concern for surface water level decline, spring for potential impacts to these springs potential impacts to Flag Springs, where drying and degradation or loss of from groundwater development in Cave the species occurs, from the proposed aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. Valley (NDWR 2008, p. 17), and a large groundwater development by SNWA in 396–397). A berm (spring development) proportion of habitat of Flag pyrg occurs the Cave Valley hydrographic area (see is present at the complex and was at Flag Springs. Therefore, based on the details under Factor A). Based on the potentially created to pool water preceding discussion, we have preceding discussion, we have (Golden et al. 2007, p. 137). Pooling of determined there is substantial determined there is substantial water can alter springsnail habitat information in the petition and in our information in the petition and in our conditions from flowing to standing files to indicate that listing the Flag pyrg files to indicate that listing the Flag pyrg water. Therefore, based on the may be warranted due to threats from may be warranted due to the inadequacy preceding discussion and the discussion groundwater development . of existing regulatory mechanisms of groundwater and spring development As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of related to the permitting of groundwater in the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ Common Threats’’ section, the petition rights and use. we have determined there is substantial does not present any specific Dry Lake Valley Summary: Based on information in the petition and our files information, nor is there any our evaluation of the information to indicate that listing the Lake Valley information in our files regarding spring provided in the petition and available in pyrg may be warranted due to threats

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56622 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

from groundwater development and permitting of groundwater rights by the development, water pollution, spring development. NSE that exceed perennial yield. recreation, and grazing are threats to the As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Permitted groundwater rights in the Spring Mountains pyrg. The Pahrump Common Threats’’ section above, the hydrographic area currently exceed the Valley (#162) and Las Vegas Valley petition does not present any specific average annual recharge (see details (#212) hydrographic areas have each information, nor is there any under Factor A). Based on this and the been classified as a ‘‘Designated information in our files regarding water discussion of regulatory mechanisms Groundwater Basin’’ by the NSE in pollution and recreation as potential related to the permitting of groundwater which permitted groundwater rights threats to any of the petitioned rights and use in the ‘‘Summary of exceed the estimated average annual springsnail species, which includes the Common Threats,’’ we have determined recharge. The perennial yield of Lake Valley pyrg. Specifically regarding there is substantial information in the Pahrump Valley hydrographic area is grazing, Golden et al. (2007, p. 137) petition and our files to indicate that 12,000 afy (14,800,000 m3/year), while described the two springs surveyed as listing the Lake Valley pyrg may be 62,740 afy (77,390,000 m3/year) are slightly disturbed indicating that warranted due to the inadequacy of committed for use. The perennial yield livestock were prevalent, but damage to existing regulatory mechanisms related of Las Vegas Valley hydrographic area is habitat was minimal. Therefore, based to the permitting of groundwater rights 25,000 afy (30,840,000 m3/year), while on the preceding discussion and the and use. 92,406 afy (114,000,000 m3/year) are discussion of water pollution, Lake Valley Summary: Based on our committed for use. When groundwater recreation, and grazing in the evaluation of the information provided extraction exceeds aquifer recharge it ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ we in the petition and available in our files, may result in surface water level have determined that there is not we have determined that the petition decline, spring drying and degradation substantial information in the petition presents substantial information to or loss of aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. and our files indicating that water indicate that listing of Lake Valley pyrg 2005, pp. 396–397). Sada (2002, p. 4) pollution, recreation, and grazing may may be warranted due to the present or reported that the extirpation of the be threats to the Lake Valley pyrg. threatened destruction, modification, or Spring Mountains pyrg from Manse However, we will further consider this curtailment of its habitat or range Spring is believed to coincide with its and any additional information on these (Factor A) resulting from groundwater drying in 1975, which occurred as a activities received during our status development and spring development, result of localized groundwater review for this species. and due to the inadequacy of existing development (Soltz and Naiman 1978, Factors B, C, and E: The petition regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) p. 24). Therefore, based on this and the proposes that collection for scientific or related to the permitting of groundwater discussion of groundwater development educational purposes, disease or rights and use. in the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ predation, invasive species, inherent section, above, we have determined vulnerability of isolated springsnail Las Vegas Valley, Indian Springs, there is substantial information in the populations, and global climate change Pahrump Valley, Amargosa Flat, and petition and our files to indicate that are threats to the Lake Valley pyrg. The Frenchman Flat Hydrographic Areas listing the Spring Mountains pyrg may petition does not provide any Species be warranted due to threats from information regarding the potential Pyrgulopsis deaconi (Spring groundwater development. threat from isolation and limited Mountains pyrg) is found on Federal distribution, and we do not consider land at Kiup Spring, Red Spring, and The springsnail population at Willow isolation and limited distribution, in Willow Spring, Clark County, Nevada Spring (on Bureau of Land Management and of itself, to be a threat to the Lake (Hershler 1998, p. 25; Sada and (BLM) lands, not Willow Creek on Valley pyrg. As discussed in the Nachlinger 1998, p. 15). A population Forest Service lands) was extirpated ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section described as scarce is also present at between 1992 and 1995 as a result of above, the petition does not provide any Rainbow Spring (Sada and Nachlinger spring diversion and channel information, nor is there any 1998, p. 28 as confirmed by Sada (2002, modification for recreation (Sada and information in our files regarding p. 2)). Previously unknown populations Nachlinger 1996, pp. 17 and 29; Sada collection for scientific or educational were documented at Horse Spring 1 and 2002, p. 4). In 2001, Willow Spring was purposes, disease or predation, invasive 2 in the late 1990s and early 2000s restored, including a boardwalk to species, and global climate change as (Sada 2002, p. 2). A population at protect the spring, and the Spring potential threats to any of the petitioned Manse Spring in Nye County, Nevada, Mountains pyrg was repatriated using springsnail species, which includes the has been extirpated (Sada 2002, p. 4). individuals from Lost Canyon Creek. Lake Valley pyrg. Therefore, we have Sada (2002, p. 3) surveyed areas in Red Spring had a high level of use by determined that there is not substantial Clark County for the Spring Mountains the public in the past (Sada and information in the petition and our files pyrg between 1999 and 2001, and Nachlinger 1996, p. 29). Recreationists indicating that collection for scientific described their estimated abundance in may have dammed and diverted stream or educational purposes, disease or occupied habitat. The Spring Mountains flow from the spring (Putnam and predation, invasive species, inherent pyrg was described as abundant at Botsford 2002, as cited in CBD et al. vulnerability of isolated springsnail Horse Spring 1 and 2; common at Red 2009, p. 87). Areas around Red Spring populations, and global climate change Spring; and scarce at Kiup Spring and have been restored, including the may be threats to the Lake Valley pyrg. Rainbow Spring. In 2001, the Spring installation of a boardwalk to limit However, we will further consider this Mountains pyrg was repatriated to further disturbance. Based on the and any additional information on these Willow Spring from Lost Canyon Creek. preceding discussion, we have activities and other potential threats Springsnails were found during surveys determined there is substantial received during our status review for in 2002 at Willow Spring, but no information in the petition and our files this species. collections were made to identify to indicate recreation may be a threat to Factor D: The petition states that species (Sada 2002, p. 6). the Spring Mountains pyrg, but there is inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a Factor A: The petition proposes that not substantial information in the threat to the Lake Valley pyrg due to the groundwater development, spring petition and our files indicating spring

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56623

development may be a threat to the information in the petition and our files scarce at both springs and that the Spring Mountains pyrg. As discussed in to indicate that listing the Spring species was restricted to estimated 5-m the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats Mountains pyrg may be warranted due and 1-m (16.4-ft and 3.3-ft) lengths of Section’’ above, the petition does not to the inadequacy of existing regulatory habitat in each spring, respectively present any specific information, nor is mechanisms related to the permitting of (Sada 2002, p. 3). However, in 2002, the there any information in our files groundwater rights and use. Service removed the channel regarding water pollution and grazing as Spring Mountains Pyrg Summary: modifications and restored the springs. potential threats to the Spring Based on our evaluation of the Sada (2002, p. 4) projected the Mountains pyrg. Therefore, we have information provided in the petition abundance of the Corn Creek pyrg determined that there is not substantial and available in our files, we have would increase as habitat stabilized, information in the petition and our files determined that the petition presents thereby removing the past impacts of indicating water pollution, grazing, and substantial information to indicate that spring development, and anecdotal spring development may be threats to listing of the Spring Mountains pyrg observations support this, although the Spring Mountains pyrg. However, may be warranted due to the present or formal surveys for the Corn Creek pyrg we will further consider this and any threatened destruction, modification, or have not been conducted since the additional information on these curtailment of its habitat or range restoration. Based on the preceding activities received during our status (Factor A) resulting from groundwater discussion regarding the current habitat review for this species. development and recreation, and due to conditions and conservation Factors B, C, and E: The petition the inadequacy of existing regulatory management, which have alleviated the proposes that collection for scientific or mechanisms (Factor D) related to the threat of spring development, we have educational purposes, disease or permitting of groundwater rights and determined that there is not substantial predation, invasive species, inherent use. information in the petition and our files vulnerability of isolated springsnail Pyrgulopsis fausta (Corn Creek pyrg) indicating that spring development may populations, and global climate change is found at Corn Creek Springs on the be a threat to the Corn Creek pyrg. are threats to the Spring Mountains Desert NWR, Clark County, Nevada However, we will further consider this pyrg. The petition does not provide any (Hershler 1998, p. 23). and any additional information on this specific information regarding the Factor A: The petition proposes that activity received during our status potential threat from isolation and groundwater development, spring review for this species. limited distribution, and we do not development, water pollution, As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of consider isolation and limited recreation, and grazing are threats to the Common Threats’’ section above, the distribution, in and of itself, to be a Corn Creek pyrg. The Las Vegas Valley petition does not present any specific threat to the Spring Mountains pyrg. As hydrographic area (#212) has been information, nor is there any discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common classified as a ‘‘Designated Groundwater information in our files regarding water Threats’’ section above, the petition Basin’’ by the NSE in which permitted pollution, recreation, and grazing as does not provide any specific groundwater rights exceed the estimated potential threats to any of the petitioned information, nor is there any average annual recharge. The perennial springsnail species, which includes the information in our files regarding yield of Las Vegas Valley hydrographic Corn Creek pyrg. Therefore, we have collection for scientific or educational area is 25,000 afy (30,840,000 m3/year), determined that there is not substantial purposes, disease or predation, invasive while 92,406 afy (114,000,000 m3/year) information in the petition and our files species, and global climate change as are committed for use. When indicating that water pollution, potential threats to the Spring groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer recreation, and grazing may be threats to Mountains pyrg. Therefore, we have recharge it may result in surface water the Corn Creek pyrg. However, we will determined that there is not substantial level decline, spring drying and further consider this and any additional information in the petition and our files degradation, or loss of aquatic habitat information on these activities received indicating that collection for scientific (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). Based during our status review for this species. or educational purposes, disease or on this and the preceding discussion of Factors B, C, and E: The petition predation, invasive species, inherent groundwater development in the proposes that collection for scientific or vulnerability of isolated springsnail ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ we educational purposes, disease or populations, and global climate change have determined there is substantial predation, invasive species, inherent may be threats to the Spring Mountains information in the petition and our files vulnerability of isolated springsnail pyrg. However, we will further consider to indicate that listing the Corn Creek populations, and global climate change this and any additional information on pyrg may be warranted due to threats are threats. The petition does not these activities and other potential from groundwater development. provide any specific information threats received during our status Development of the springs at and regarding the potential threat from review for this species. near Corn Creek Springs dates back to isolation and limited distribution, and Factor D: The petition states that the early 1900s. Reduction in we do not consider isolation and limited inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a abundance of the Corn Creek pyrg from distribution, in and of itself, to be a threat to the Spring Mountains pyrg due when it was first collected (Hershler threat to the Corn Creek pyrg. As to the permitting of groundwater rights 1998, p. 23) was attributed to the discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common by the NSE that exceed perennial yield. historical lining of the main outflow of Threats’’ section above,the petition does Permitted groundwater rights in the Corn Creek Springs with cement, which not provide any specific information, hydrographic areas currently exceed the eliminated all but 5 m (16.4 ft) of Corn nor is there any information in our files average annual recharge (see details Creek pyrg habitat (Sada 2002, p. 4). regarding collection for scientific or under Factor A). Based on this and the This past spring development action educational purposes, disease or discussion of regulatory mechanisms impacted the abundance of the Corn predation, invasive species, and global related to the permitting of groundwater Creek pyrg. Estimates of abundance climate change as potential threats to rights and use in the ‘‘Summary of from surveys conducted at two springs any of the petitioned springsnails, Common Threats above,’’ we have at Corn Creek between 1999 and 2001 which includes the Corn Creek pyrg. determined there is substantial indicated that the Corn Creek pyrg was Therefore, we have determined that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56624 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

there is not substantial information in Springs Valley (#161), Pahrump Valley species (Sada 2002, p. 6). Based on the the petition and our files does (#162), and Las Vegas Valley (#212) preceding discussion, we have indicating that collection for scientific hydrographic areas each have been determined there is substantial or educational purposes, disease or classified as ‘‘Designated Groundwater information in the petition and our files predation, invasive species, inherent Basin’’ by the NSE in which permitted to indicate that listing the Southeast vulnerability of isolated springsnail groundwater rights exceed the estimated Nevada pyrg may be warranted due to populations, and global climate change average annual recharge. The perennial threats from spring development and may be threats to the Corn Creek pyrg. yield of Indian Springs Valley recreation. However, we will further consider this hydrographic area is 500 afy (616,700 The petition does not present any and any additional information on these m3/year), while 1,380 afy (1,702,000 m3/ specific information, nor is there any activities and other potential threats year) are committed for use. The information in our files regarding water received during our status review for perennial yield of Pahrump Valley pollution as a potential threat to the this species. hydrographic area is 12,000 afy Southeast Nevada pyrg. Therefore, we Factor D: The petition states that (14,800,000 m3/year), while 62,740 afy have determined that there is not inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a (77,390,000 m3/year) are committed for substantial information in the petition threat to the Corn Creek pyrg due to the use. The perennial yield of Las Vegas and our files indicating that water permitting of groundwater rights by the Valley hydrographic area is 25,000 afy pollution may be a threat to the NSE that exceed perennial yield. (30,840,000 m3/year), while 92,406 afy Southeast Nevada pyrg. However, we Permitted groundwater rights in the (114,000,000 m3/year) are committed for will further consider this and any hydrographic area currently exceed the use. When groundwater extraction additional information on this activity average annual recharge (see details exceeds aquifer recharge it may result in received during our status review for under Factor A). Therefore, based on surface water level decline, spring this species. this and the discussion of regulatory drying, and degradation or loss of Factors B, C, and E: The petition mechanisms related to the permitting of aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. proposes that collection for scientific or groundwater rights and use in the 396–397). Based on this and the educational purposes, disease or ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section discussion of groundwater development predation, invasive species, inherent above, we have determined there is in the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ vulnerability of isolated springsnail substantial information in the petition we have determined there is substantial populations, and global climate change and our files to indicate that listing the information in the petition and our files are threats to the Southeast Nevada Corn Creek pyrg may be warranted due to indicate that listing the Southeast pyrg. The petition does not provide any to the inadequacy of existing regulatory Nevada pyrg may be warranted due to specific information regarding the mechanisms related to the permitting of threats from groundwater development. potential threat from isolation and groundwater rights and use. Horseshutem Springs has been highly limited distribution, and we do not Corn Creek Pyrg Summary: Based on impacted by ungulate grazing and water consider isolation and limited our evaluation of the information diversion (Sada and Nachlinger 1996, p. distribution, in and of itself, to be a provided in the petition and available in 22; Hershler 1998, p. 53), but the threat to the Southeast Nevada pyrg. As our files, we have determined that the Southeast Nevada pyrg remains discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common petition presents substantial common (Sada 2002, p. 3). Sada (2002, Threats’’ section above, the petition information to indicate that listing the p. 4) observed levels of ungulate grazing does not provide any specific Corn Creek pyrg may be warranted due disturbance at Horseshutem Springs and information, nor is there any to the present or threatened destruction, Grapevine Springs that may have information in our files regarding modification, or curtailment of its reduced the levels of springsnail collection for scientific or educational habitat or range (Factor A) resulting abundance but appeared insufficient to purposes, disease or predation, invasive from groundwater development, and extirpate populations. Based on the species, and global climate change as due to the inadequacy of existing preceding discussion, we have potential threats to any of the petitioned regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) determined there is substantial springsnails, which includes the related to the permitting of groundwater information in the petition and our files Southeast Nevada pyrg. Therefore, we rights and use. to indicate that listing the Southeast have determined that there is not Pyrgulopsis turbatrix (Southeast Nevada pyrg may be warranted due to substantial information in the petition Nevada pyrg) is found in approximately threats from grazing. and our files indicating that collection 10 spring or creek areas around the At Grapevine Springs one of four for scientific or educational purposes, Spring Mountains of southern Nevada populations was extirpated when one of disease or predation, invasive species, in Clark and Nye Counties, Nevada; the springs dried as a result of a inherent vulnerability of isolated Grapevine Springs in Amargosa Flat of diversion (spring development) between springsnail populations, and global Nye County, Nevada; and Cane Spring 1992 and 1995 (Sada and Nachlinger climate change may be threats to the in Frenchman Flat, Nye County, 1996, p. 17). The population at Willow Southeast Nevada pyrg. However, we Nevada. The Southeast Nevada pyrg is Spring (on BLM lands) was extirpated will further consider this and any one of the most widely distributed between 1992 and 1995 as a result of additional information on these springsnail species in southern Nevada spring development (diversion and activities and other potential threats (Sada 2002, p. 4). This species has channel modification) for recreation received during our status review for previously been misidentified as or (Sada and Nachlinger 1996, p. 17; Sada this species. confused with Pyrgulopsis micrococcus 2002, p. 4). In 2001, Willow Spring was Factor D: The petition states that (Oasis Valley springsnail (Hershler restored, including a boardwalk to inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a 1998, p. 53)). protect the spring, and the Southeast threat to the Southeast Nevada pyrg due Factor A: The petition proposes that Nevada pyrg was repatriated using to the permitting of groundwater rights groundwater development, spring individuals from Lost Canyon Creek. by the NSE that exceed perennial yield. development, water pollution, Springsnails were found during surveys Permitted groundwater rights in the recreation, and grazing are threats to the in late 2002 at Willow Spring, but no hydrographic areas currently exceed the Southeast Nevada pyrg. The Indian collections were made to identify average annual recharge (see details

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56625

under Factor A). Therefore, based on areas of Hot Creek Spring during 2006 additional information on these this and the discussion of regulatory surveys (Golden et al. 2007, p. 162). activities received during our status mechanisms related to the permitting of Factor A: The petition asserts that review for this species. groundwater rights and use in the groundwater development, spring Factors B, C, and D: The petition ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section development, water pollution, proposes that collection for scientific or above, we have determined there is recreation, and grazing are threats to the educational purposes, disease or substantial information in the petition Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. predation, and inadequate regulatory and our files to indicate that listing the The SNWA is proposing to develop mechanisms are threats to the Hubbs Southeast Nevada pyrg may be groundwater from the Cave Valley pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. The warranted due to the inadequacy of (#180), Dry Lake Valley (#181), and petition does not provide specific existing regulatory mechanisms related Delamar Valley (#182) hydrographic information, nor is there any to the permitting of groundwater rights areas, (SNWA 2008, p. 1–1). There is information in our files regarding and use. evidence suggesting a hydrologic collection for scientific or educational Southeast Nevada Pyrg Summary: connection between these basins and purposes, disease or predation, and Based on our evaluation of the the Pahranagat Valley as discussed in inadequate regulatory mechanisms as information provided in the petition NSE ruling #5875 (NSE 2008, p. 18). potential threats to the Hubbs pyrg and and available in our files, we have However, groundwater development Pahranagat pebblesnail. Therefore, determined that the petition presents model scenarios indicate that potential based on this and the discussion in the substantial information to indicate that effects may not express themselves at ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ we listing of the Southeast Nevada pyrg down-gradient springs in Pahranagat have determined that there is not may be warranted due to the present or Valley for centuries (NSE 2008, pp. 22– substantial information in the petition threatened destruction, modification, or 23). In addition, a monitoring and and our files indicating that collection curtailment of its habitat or range mitigation plan is required as a for scientific or educational purposes, (Factor A) resulting from groundwater condition of approval (NSE 2008, p. 23). disease or predation, and inadequate development, spring development, Based on the preceding discussion, we regulatory mechanisms may be threats recreation, and grazing, and due to the have determined that there is not to the Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat inadequacy of existing regulatory substantial information in the petition pebblesnail. However, we will further mechanisms (Factor D) related to the and our files indicating that consider this and any additional groundwater development may be a permitting of groundwater rights and information on these activities and other threat to the Hubbs pyrg or the use. potential threats received during our Pahranagat pebblesnail. However, we status review for this species. Pahranagat Valley Hydrographic Area will further consider this and any Species additional information on this activity Factor E: The petition proposes that received during our status review for invasive species, inherent vulnerability Pyrgulopsis hubbsi (Hubbs pyrg) is this species. of isolated springsnail populations, and found on private land at Hiko Spring Golden et al. (2007, p. 200) observed global climate change are threats to the and Crystal Springs in Lincoln County, that Hiko Spring, Crystal Springs, and Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 35; Golden et Ash Springs were highly disturbed by Nonnative, invasive species (fish, al. 2007, p. 197). Springsnails were not water diversions (spring development) invertebrates, amphibians and observed at Hiko Spring during surveys and recreation. Sada and Vinyard (2002, vegetation) are present—and in some in 2000 (Sada 2003, database records) or p. 286) identified water diversion at locations are the dominant species—in 2006 and may be extirpated there Crystal Springs as a threat to the Hubbs Ash Springs, Hiko Spring, and Crystal (Golden et al. 2007, pp. 197–198). At pyrg. Based on this information, Springs, which may be affecting the Crystal Springs, Hubbs pyrg was coupled with the available population Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail abundant during 1992 surveys (Sada abundance information for Hubbs pyrg (Golden et al. 2007, pp. 184–199). 2003, database record 804 and 805), but and Pahranagat pebblesnail as cited Presence of nonnative species in these scarce during surveys in 2006 (Golden above, we have determined that there is three springs, particularly nonnative et al. 2007, pp. 197–198). substantial information in the petition fishes, has resulted in extirpations and Pyrgulopsis merriami (Pahranagat and in our files indicating that listing negative interactions with native fish pebblesnail) is found in four springs in the Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat species, although the information in the Nevada including: Ash Springs in pebblesnail may be warranted due to petition and in our files does not Pahranagat Valley, Lincoln County threats from spring development and directly correlate presence of nonnative (Hershler 1994, p. 41); and Hot Creek recreation. species with impacts to the Hubbs pyrg Spring, Moon River Spring, and As discussed in the ‘‘Summary of and Pahranagat pebblesnail (Golden et Moorman Spring of White River Valley, Common Threats’’ section above, the al. 2007, p. 194). Based on the Nye County (Hershler 1998, p. 31). Of petition does not present any specific information in the petition and in our the public lands surveyed, Golden et al. information, nor is there any files, we are unable to identify any (2007, p. 198) described Pahranagat information in our files, regarding water single potential threat that is affecting pebblesnail as common to scarce at two pollution and grazing as potential the abundance of the Hubbs pyrg and spring heads in Ash Springs, absent in threats to any of the petitioned Pahranagat pebblesnail, and it is likely much of the pool area, and common in springsnails, which includes the Hubbs that their abundance is being affected by a stretch 60 m (197 ft) downstream to an pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. a combination of threats, including area discharging to private property. Therefore, we have determined that nonnative species. Therefore, we have Pahranagat pebblesnail was common in there is not substantial information in determined there is substantial Hot Creek Spring, Moon River Spring, the petition and our files indicating that information in the petition and our files and Moorman Spring during 1992 water pollution and grazing may be to indicate that listing the Hubbs pyrg surveys (Sada 2003, database record threats to the Hubbs pyrg and and Pahranagat pebblesnail may be 806). Springsnails were scarce Pahranagat pebblesnail. However, we warranted due to potential threats from throughout most, but common in a few, will further consider this and any invasive species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56626 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

The petition asserts that inherent afy (14,220,000 m3/year) are committed. predation, invasive species, and global vulnerability of isolated springsnail The permitted groundwater rights in the climate change may be threats to the populations and global climate change Ralston Valley hydrographic area do not Sterile Basin pyrg. However, we will are threats to the Hubbs pyrg and exceed, but are approaching the further consider this and any additional Pahranagat pebblesnail. The petition estimated average annual recharge with information on these activities and other does not provide any specific the perennial yield at 6,000 afy potential threats received during our information regarding the potential (7,401,000 m3/year), and 4,415 afy status review for this species. threat from isolation and limited (5,446,000 m3/year) are committed. Factor D: The petition states that distribution, and we do not consider When groundwater extraction exceeds inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a isolation and limited distribution, in aquifer recharge it may result in surface threat to the Sterile Basin pyrg due to and of itself, to be a threat to the Hubbs water level decline, spring drying, and the permitting of groundwater rights by pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. The degradation or loss of aquatic habitat the NSE that exceed perennial yield. petition does not provide any specific (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). Based Permitted groundwater rights in the information, nor is there any upon this and the discussion of hydrographic areas currently approach information in our files regarding global groundwater development in the or exceed the average annual recharge climate change as a potential threat to ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section (see details under Factor A). Based on the Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat above, we have determined there is this and the discussion of regulatory pebblesnail. Based on this and the substantial information in the petition mechanisms related to the permitting of discussion in the ‘‘Summary of and our files to indicate that listing the groundwater rights and use in the Common Threats,’’ we have determined Sterile Basin pyrg may be warranted due ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section that there is not substantial information to threats from groundwater above, we have determined there is in the petition and our files indicating development. substantial information in the petition that inherent vulnerability of isolated The petition asserts spring and our files to indicate that listing the springsnail populations and global development, water pollution, Sterile Basin pyrg may be warranted due climate change may be threats to the recreation, and grazing are threats to the to the inadequacy of existing regulatory Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat pebblesnail. Sterile Basin pyrg. As discussed in the mechanisms related to the permitting of However, we will further consider this ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section groundwater rights and use. and any additional information on this above, the petition does not present any Ralston Valley Summary: Based on and other potential threats received specific information, nor is there any our evaluation of the information during our status review for this species. information in our files regarding spring provided in the petition and available in Pahranagat Valley Summary: Based development, water pollution, our files, we have determined that the on our evaluation of the information recreation, and grazing as potential petition presents substantial provided in the petition and available in threats to the Sterile Basin pyrg. information to indicate that listing of our files, we have determined that the Therefore, we have determined that the Sterile Basin pyrg may be warranted petition presents substantial there is not substantial information in due to the present or threatened information to indicate that listing of the petition and our files indicating that destruction, modification, or the Hubbs pyrg and Pahranagat spring development, water pollution, curtailment of its habitat or range pebblesnail may be warranted due to the recreation, and grazing may be threats to (Factor A) resulting from groundwater present or threatened destruction, the Sterile Basin pyrg. However, we will development, and due to the modification, or curtailment of its further consider this and any additional inadequacy of existing regulatory habitat or range (Factor A) resulting information on these activities received mechanisms (Factor D) related to the from spring development and during our status review for this species. permitting of groundwater rights and recreation, and due to other natural or Factors B, C, and E: The petition use. manmade factors affecting its continued states that collection for scientific or Snake Valley and Spring Valley existence (Factor E) resulting from educational purposes, disease or Hydrographic Area Species invasive species. predation, invasive species, inherent vulnerability of isolated springsnail Pyrgulopsis peculiaris (bifid duct Ralston Valley and Stone Cabin Flat populations, and global climate change pyrg) occurs at 6 sites in Millard Hydrographic Areas Species are threats that may affect the Sterile County, Utah, and two sites in White Pyrgulopsis sterilis (Sterile Basin Basin pyrg. The petition provides little Pine County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. pyrg) is known from two springs on information regarding the potential 110). private lands, Hunts Canyon Ranch and threat from isolation and limited Factor A: The petition states that Sidehill Spring, Nye County, Nevada distribution, and we do not consider groundwater development, spring (Hershler 1998, p. 54). isolation and limited distribution, in development, agricultural development, Factor A: The petition states that and of itself, to be a threat to the Sterile water pollution, recreation, and grazing groundwater development, spring Basin pyrg. As discussed in the are threats to the bifid duct pyrg. The development, water pollution, ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section Snake Valley (#195) and Spring Valley recreation, and grazing are threats that above, the petition does not provide any (#184) hydrographic areas are not may affect the Sterile Basin pyrg. The specific information, nor is there any classified as ‘‘Designated Groundwater Stone Cabin Flat (#149) and Ralston information in our files regarding Basins’’ by the NSE. The permitted Valley (#141) hydrographic areas each collection for scientific or educational groundwater rights in the Snake Valley have been classified as ‘‘Designated purposes, disease or predation, invasive hydrographic area do not exceed the Groundwater Basins’’ by the NSE. The species, and global climate change as estimated average annual recharge. The permitted groundwater rights in the potential threats to the Sterile Basin perennial yield of Snake Valley Stone Cabin Flat hydrographic area pyrg. Therefore, we have determined hydrographic area is 25,000 afy exceed the estimated average annual that here is not substantial information (30,840,000 m3/year), and there are recharge. The perennial yield of Stone in the petition and our files indicating 10,720 afy (13,220,000 m3/year) Cabin Flat hydrographic area is 2,000 that collection for scientific or committed. However, the permitted afy (2,467,000 m3/year), while 11,532 educational purposes, disease or groundwater rights in the Spring Valley

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56627

hydrographic area exceed the estimated predation, invasive species, inherent Valley, Elko County, Nevada, and at average annual recharge. The perennial vulnerability of isolated springsnail Indian Ranch Spring and Indian Creek yield of the Spring Valley hydrographic populations, and global climate change in Steptoe Valley, White Pine County area is 80,000 afy (98,680,000 m3/year), may be threats to the bifid duct pyrg. (Hershler 1998, p. 71). The species also and there are 86,085 afy (106,200,000 However, we will further consider this occurs at 10 springs in northern Steptoe m3/year) committed. When groundwater and any additional information on these Valley (Sada 2006, p. i). extraction exceeds aquifer recharge it activities and other potential threats Pyrgulopsis sulcata (southern Steptoe may result in surface water level received during our status review for pyrg) occurs at two spring complexes in decline, spring drying, and degradation this species. White Pine County, Nevada (Hershler or loss of aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. Factor D: The petition states that 1998, p. 67). 2005, pp. 396–397). Based upon this inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a Factor A: The petition asserts that and the discussion of groundwater threat to the bifid duct pyrg due to the these six Steptoe Valley springsnail development in the ‘‘Summary of permitting of groundwater rights by the species are threatened by groundwater Common Threats’’ section above, we NSE that exceed perennial yield. development, spring development, have determined there is substantial Permitted groundwater rights in the water pollution, recreation, and grazing information in the petition and our files Spring Valley hydrographic area (Hershler 1998, p. 70; Sada and Vinyard to indicate that listing the bifid duct currently exceed the average annual 2002, p. 277). The Steptoe Valley pyrg may be warranted due to threats recharge (see details under Factor A). hydrographic area (#179) has been from groundwater development. Based on this and the discussion of classified as a ‘‘Designated Groundwater The petition states that spring regulatory mechanisms relating to the Basin’’ by the NSE in which permitted development, agricultural development, permitting of groundwater rights and groundwater rights approach or exceed water pollution, recreation, and grazing use in the ‘‘Summary of Common the estimated average annual recharge. are threats to the bifid duct pyrg. As Threats,’’ we have determined there is The perennial yield of Steptoe Valley is discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common substantial information in the petition 70,000 afy (86,340,000 m3/year), and Threats’’ section above, the petition and our files to indicate that listing the approximately 97,000 afy (119,600,000 does not present any specific bifid duct pyrg may be warranted due to m3/year) are committed for use. When information, nor is there any the inadequacy of existing regulatory groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer information in our files regarding spring mechanisms relating to the permitting of recharge, it may result in surface water development, agricultural development, groundwater rights and use. level decline, spring drying, and water pollution, recreation, and grazing Snake Valley Summary: Based on our degradation or loss of aquatic habitat as potential threats to the bifid duct evaluation of the information provided (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). pyrg. Therefore, we have determined in the petition and available in our files, Therefore, based on this and the that there is not substantial information we have determined that the petition discussion of discussing groundwater in the petition and our files indicating presents substantial information to development in the ‘‘Summary of that spring development, agricultural indicate that listing of bifid duct pyrg Common Threats,’’ we have determined development, water pollution, may be warranted due to the present or there is substantial information in the recreation, and grazing may be threats to threatened destruction, modification, or petition and our files to indicate that the bifid duct pyrg. However, we will curtailment of its habitat or range listing the six petitioned springsnail further consider this and any additional (Factor A) resulting from groundwater species of the Steptoe Valley may be information on these activities received development, and due to inadequacy of warranted due to threats from during our status review for this species. existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor groundwater development. Factors B, C, and E: The petition D) relating to the permitting of Within Steptoe Valley, surveys for states that collection for scientific or groundwater rights and use. springsnails were conducted in the early educational purposes, disease or 1990s in springs near Bassett Lake (Sada predation, invasive species, inherent Steptoe Valley Hydrographic Area 2006, p. i). These surveys found all six vulnerability of isolated springsnail Species petitioned Steptoe Valley springsnail populations, and global climate change Pyrgulopsis landyei (Landyes pyrg) species. Due to potential groundwater are threats to the bifid duct pyrg. The occurs at one rheocrene spring (flowing pumping by the previously proposed petition does not provide any specific directly out of the ground, typically White Pine Energy Project (application information regarding the potential under pressure) north-northwest of is no longer active), Sada (2006, p. i) threat from isolation and limited Steptoe Ranch, White Pine County, surveyed 44 springs in Steptoe Valley in distribution, and we do not consider Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 70). 2005 that were located within the zone isolation and limited distribution, in Pyrgulopsis neritella (neritiform of potential impact by the energy and of itself, to be a threat to the bifid Steptoe Ranch pyrg) occurs at two project. It was noted that all of the duct pyrg. As discussed in the rheocrene springs located on private springs surveyed were moderately to ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section land north of Steptoe Ranch, White Pine highly disturbed due to spring diversion above, the petition does not present any County, Nevada (Hershler 1998, p. 70). and livestock trampling (2006, p. 4). Ten specific information, nor is there any Pyrgulopsis orbiculata (sub-globose of the 44 springs were occupied by information in our files regarding Steptoe Ranch pyrg) is restricted to two northern Steptoe pyrgs, which were collection for scientific or educational springs in White Pine County, Nevada scarce at 3 sites, common at 6 sites, and purposes, disease or predation, invasive (Hershler 1998, p. 68). abundant at 1 site (Sada 2006, p. 5 and species, and global climate change as Pyrgulopsis planulata (flat-topped Table 6). The surveys conducted in the potential threats to any of the petitioned Steptoe pyrg) occurs on private land at 1990s did not include any of the 44 springsnail species, which includes the one spring northwest of Clark Spring, springs surveyed by Sada in 2005, bifid duct pyrg. Therefore, we have White Pine County, Nevada (Hershler where 10 previously unrecorded determined that there is not substantial 1998, p. 66). populations of the northern Steptoe information in the petition and our files Pyrgulopsis serrata (northern Steptoe pyrg were found. Although Sada (2006, indicating that collection for scientific pyrg) occurs at Twin Springs and pp. i-27) states that the springs surveyed or educational purposes, disease or springs south of Currie in Steptoe in 2005 were degraded and had variable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56628 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

levels of occupation by the northern substantial information in the petition locations in Moapa Valley, Clark Steptoe pyrg, it is not clear whether and our files indicating that collection County, Nevada (Hershler 1994, pp. 26– these activities have resulted in the loss for scientific or educational purposes, 27; Hershler 1998, p. 31; Sada 2008, p. of or decline in springsnail populations disease or predation, invasive species, 60). The documented spring locations in the Steptoe Valley. Based on the inherent vulnerability of isolated are found in an approximately 1.5-km preceding discussion, we have springsnail populations, and global (0.9-mi) radius. determined that there is not substantial climate change may be threats to the six Factor A: Potential threats to the information in the petition and our files Steptoe Valley springsnail species. Moapa pebblesnail and Moapa Valley indicating that spring development and However, we will further consider this pyrg identified in the petition are grazing may be threats to the six and any additional information on these groundwater development, spring petitioned springsnail species of the activities and other potential threats development, water pollution, Steptoe Valley. However, we will received during our status review for recreation, and grazing. The Upper further consider this and any additional this species. Muddy River Springs hydrographic area information on these activities received Factor D: The petition states that (#219) has been classified as a during our status review for this species. inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a ‘‘Designated Groundwater Basin’’ by the The petition also claims that the threat to the six Steptoe Valley NSE in which permitted ground water springsnails of Steptoe Valley are springsnails due to the permitting of rights exceed the estimated average threatened by the proposed White Pine groundwater rights by the NSE that annual recharge. The perennial yield of Energy Station (BLM 2008, Volumes 1 exceed perennial yield. Permitted the Upper Muddy River Springs is 100– through 4); however, the White Pine groundwater rights in the hydrographic 36,000 afy (123,300–44,410,000 m3/ Energy project application is currently area currently exceed the average year), while approximately 14,558 afy withdrawn, and the future of the project annual recharge (see details under (17,960,000 m3/year) are committed for is uncertain; therefore, there is not Factor A). Therefore, based on this and use. Since 1998, there has been a small substantial information indicating that discussion of regulatory mechanisms and widespread decline in carbonate this project may threaten these six related to the permitting of groundwater aquifer water levels in the Upper Steptoe Valley springsnail species. rights and use in the ‘‘Summary of Muddy River Springs area because of The petition does not present any Common Threats’’ section above, we groundwater pumping (Mayer and specific information, nor is there any have determined there is substantial Congdon 2007, p. 13). When information in our files regarding water information in the petition and our files groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer pollution and recreation as potential to indicate that listing the six Steptoe recharge, it may result in surface water threats to the six Steptoe Valley Valley springsnail species may be level decline, spring drying, and springsnail species. Therefore, based on warranted due to the inadequacy of degradation or loss of aquatic habitat this and the discussion in the existing regulatory mechanisms related (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). ‘‘Summary of Common Threats’’ section to the permitting of groundwater rights Regarding spring development, Sada above, we have determined that there is and use. (2008, p. 69) reported that reduced not substantial information in the Steptoe Valley Summary: Based on habitat quality and heterogeneity caused petition and our files indicating that our evaluation of the information by diversions, channelization, and water pollution, and recreation may be provided in the petition and available in siltation resulted in reductions of threats to the six Steptoe Valley our files, we have determined that the springsnails (including the Moapa springsnail species. However, we will petition presents substantial pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg) further consider this and any additional information to indicate that listing of such that they were scarce or absent at information on these activities received the Landyes pyrg, neritiform Steptoe 85 percent of the springbrooks where during our status review for this species. Ranch pyrg, sub-globose Steptoe Ranch they historically occurred at Warm Factors B, C, and E: The petition pyrg, flat-topped Steptoe pyrg, northern Springs. states that collection for scientific or Steptoe pyrg, and southern Steptoe pyrg The Service and other partnering educational purposes, disease or may be warranted due to the present or agencies have completed, and continue predation, invasive species, inherent threatened destruction, modification, or to implement extensive efforts to restore vulnerability of isolated springsnail curtailment of their habitat or range the spring systems in the Upper Muddy populations, and global climate change (Factor A) resulting from groundwater River Springs area and to reduce or are threats that may impact the six development, and due to the eliminate past spring diversion impacts Steptoe Valley springsnail species. The inadequacy of existing regulatory to aquatic species including petition does not provide any specific mechanisms (Factor D) related to the springsnails; however, not all of the information regarding the potential permitting of groundwater rights and impacts of spring diversion have been threat from isolation and limited use. removed or reduced. Therefore, based distribution, and we do not consider on the preceding discussion, we have isolation and limited distribution, in Upper Muddy River Springs determined there is substantial and of itself, to be a threat to the six Hydrographic Area Species information in the petition and our files Steptoe Valley springsnail species. As Pyrgulopsis avernalis (Moapa to indicate that listing the Moapa discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common pebblesnail) is documented at more pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg may Threats’’ section above, the petition than five spring locations in Moapa be warranted due to threats from does not present any specific Valley, Clark County, Nevada (Hershler groundwater development and spring information, nor is there any 1994, pp. 19–21; Service 1995, pp. 15– development. information in our files regarding 16; Hershler 1998, pp. 29–30; Sada The petition states that water collection for scientific or educational 2008, p. 60). The documented spring pollution, recreation, and grazing are purposes, disease or predation, invasive locations in the Moapa Valley are found potential threats to the Moapa species, and global climate change as within an approximately 1.5-km (0.9- pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg. As potential threats to the six Steptoe mi) radius (Hershler 1994, p. 19). discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common Valley springsnail species. Therefore, Pyrgulopsis carinifera (Moapa Valley Threats’’ section, above the petition we have determined that there is not pyrg) occurs at more than five spring does not present any specific

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56629

information, nor is there any and Moapa Valley pyrg (Sada 2008, p. 100–36,000 afy (123,300–44,410,000 information in our files regarding water 69). The petition does not provide any m3/year), while approximately 14,558 pollution, recreation, and grazing as specific information regarding other afy (17,960,000 m3/year) are committed potential threats to the Moapa invasive species in the springs occupied for use. Since 1998, there has been a pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg. by the Moapa pebblesnail and Moapa small and widespread decline in Therefore, we have determined there is Valley pyrg. The petition does not carbonate aquifer water levels in the not substantial information in the provide any specific information Upper Muddy River Springs area petition and our files indicating that regarding the potential threat from because of groundwater pumping water pollution, recreation, and grazing isolation and limited distribution, and (Mayer and Congdon 2007, p. 13). When may be threats to the Moapa pebblesnail we do not consider isolation and limited groundwater extraction exceeds aquifer and Moapa Valley pyrg. distribution, in and of itself, to be a recharge, it may result in surface water Factors B and C: The petition asserts threat to the Moapa pebblesnail and level decline, spring drying, and collection for scientific or educational Moapa Valley pyrg. The petition does degradation or loss of aquatic habitat purposes and disease or predation as not provide any specific information, (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 396–397). Based potential threats to the Moapa nor is there any information in our files on the preceding discussion, we have pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg. The regarding global climate change as a determined there is substantial petition did not present any specific potential threat to the Moapa information in the petition and our files information, nor is there any pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg. to indicate that listing the grated tryonia information in our files regarding Therefore, based on the preceding may be warranted due to threats from collection for scientific or educational discussion, we have determined that groundwater development. purposes, and disease or predation as there is not substantial information in Regarding spring development, Sada potential threats to the Moapa the petition and our files indicating that (2008, p. 69) reported that reduced pebblesnail and Moapa Valley pyrg. invasive species, inherent vulnerability habitat quality and habitat heterogeneity Therefore, we have determined that of isolated springsnail populations, and caused by diversions, channelization, there is not substantial information in global climate change may be threats to and siltation resulted in reductions of the petition and our files indicating that the Moapa pebblesnail and Moapa springsnails (including the grated collection for scientific or educational Valley pyrg. However, we will further tryonia) such that they were scarce or purposes and disease or predation may consider this and any additional absent at 85 percent of the springbrooks be threats to the Moapa pebblesnail and information on these activities and other where they historically occurred at Moapa Valley pyrg. However, we will potential threats received during our Warm Springs. The Service and other further consider this and any additional status review for this species. partnering agencies have completed and information on these activities and other Upper Muddy River Springs continue to implement extensive efforts potential threats received during our Summary: Based on our evaluation of to restore the spring systems in the status review for this species. the information provided in the petition Upper Muddy River Springs Area and Factor D: The petition states that and available in our files, we have reduce or eliminate past spring inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a determined that the petition presents diversion impacts to aquatic species threat to the Moapa pebblesnail and substantial information to indicate that including springsnails; however, not all Moapa Valley pyrg due to the permitting listing of the Moapa pebblesnail and of the impacts of spring diversion have of groundwater rights by the NSE that Moapa Valley pyrg may be warranted exceed perennial yield. Permitted due to the present or threatened been removed or reduced. Golden et al. groundwater rights in the hydrographic destruction, modification, or (2007, p. 200) observed that Crystal area currently approach the average curtailment of its habitat or range Springs, where grated tryonia are also annual recharge (see details under (Factor A) resulting from groundwater found, was highly disturbed by Factor A). Based on this and the development and spring development, diversion. Golden et al. (2007, p. 197) discussion of regulatory mechanisms and due to the inadequacy of existing did not document grated tryonia at related to the permitting of groundwater regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) Crystal Springs during their surveys. rights and use in the ‘‘Summary of permitting groundwater rights and use. Therefore, based on the preceding Common Threats,’’ we have determined discussion, we have determined there is there is substantial information in the Upper Muddy River Springs, White substantial information in the petition petition and our files to indicate that River Valley, and Pahranagat Valley and our files to indicate that listing the listing the Moapa pebblesnail and Hydrographic Areas Species grated tryonia may be warranted due to Moapa Valley pyrg may be warranted Tryonia clathrata (grated tryonia) is threats from spring development. due to the inadequacy of existing found in approximately 12 spring The petition asserts that water regulatory mechanisms related to the systems in Clark, Lincoln, and Nye pollution, recreation, and grazing are permitting of groundwater rights and Counties, Nevada (Hershler, 1999, pp. threats to the grated tryonia. As use. 331–332). discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common Factor E: The petition asserts that Factor A: The petition proposes that Threats’’ section above, the petition invasive species, inherent vulnerability groundwater development, spring does not present any specific of isolated populations, and global development, water pollution, information, nor is there any climate change are potential threats to recreation, and grazing are threats to the information in our files regarding water the Moapa pebblesnail and Moapa grated tryonia. The grated tryonia occurs pollution, recreation, and grazing as Valley pyrg. Specifically regarding in springs in the Upper Muddy River potential threats to the grated tryonia. invasive species, a study in the thermal, Springs hydrographic area (#219), Therefore, we have determined there is Upper Muddy River spring system of which has been classified as a not substantial information in the competition from the invasive red- ‘‘Designated Groundwater Basin’’ by the petition and our files indicating that rimmed melania suggests that this may NSE where permitted groundwater water pollution, recreation, and grazing not be a threat because there is only a rights exceed the estimated average may be threats to the grated tryonia. minor niche overlap between nonnative annual recharge. The perennial yield of However, we will further consider this snails and the native Moapa pebblesnail the Upper Muddy River Springs area is and any additional information on these

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56630 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules

activities received during our status have determined there is substantial any of these 32 species under the Act is review for this species. information in the petition and our files warranted. Factors B, C, and E: The petition to indicate that listing the grated tryonia We previously determined that proposes that collection for scientific or may be warranted due to the inadequacy emergency listing of any of the 39 educational purposes, disease or of existing regulatory mechanisms species is not warranted. However, if at predation, invasive species, inherent related to the permitting of groundwater any time we determine that emergency vulnerability of isolated springsnail rights and use. listing of any of the 39 petitioned populations, and global climate change Grated Tryonia Summary: Based on species is warranted, we will initiate an are threats to the grated tryonia. our evaluation of the information emergency listing. Specifically regarding invasives, a study provided in the petition and available in The petition also requests that critical in the thermal, Upper Muddy River our files, we have determined that the habitat be designated for the species spring system of competition from the petition presents substantial concurrent with final listing under the invasive red-rimmed melania suggests information to indicate that listing of Act. If we determine in our 12-month that this may not be a threat because the grated tryonia may be warranted due finding, following the status review of there is only a minor niche overlap to the present or threatened destruction, the species, that listing is warranted, we between nonnative snails and the native modification, or curtailment of its will address the designation of critical grated tryonia (Sada 2008, p. 69). The habitat or range (Factor A) resulting habitat in the subsequent proposed rule. petition does not provide any specific from groundwater development and The ‘‘substantial information’’ information regarding other invasive spring development, and due to the standard for a 90-day finding differs species in the springs occupied by the inadequacy of existing regulatory from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and grated tryonia. The petition does not mechanisms (Factor D) related to the commercial data’’ standard that applies provide any specific information permitting of groundwater rights and to a status review to determine whether regarding the potential threat from use. a petitioned action is warranted. A 90- isolation and limited distribution, and day finding does not constitute a status we do not consider isolation and limited Finding review under the Act. In 12-month distribution, in and of itself, to be a We reviewed and evaluated 39 of the findings, we will determine whether a threat to the grated tryonia. As 42 petitioned springsnail species, based petitioned action is warranted after we discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Common on the information in the petition and have completed thorough status reviews Threats’’ section above, the petition the literature cited in the petition. We of the species, which is conducted does not provide any specific have evaluated the information to following a substantial 90-day finding. information, nor is there any determine whether the sources cited Because the Act’s standards for 90-day information in our files regarding support the claims made in the petition and 12-month findings are different, as collection for scientific or educational relating to the five listing factors. We described above, a substantial 90-day purposes, disease or predation, and also reviewed reliable information finding does not mean that the 12- global climate change as potential readily available in our files. month findings will result in a threats to any of the petitioned warranted finding. springsnails, which includes the grated On the basis of our evaluation of the tryonia. Therefore, we have determined petition under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the References Cited that there is not substantial information Act, we find that the petition does not A complete list of references cited is in the petition and our files indicating present substantial scientific or available on the Internet at Docket No. collection for scientific or educational commercial information that listing may FWS–R8–ES–2011–0001 at http:// purposes, disease or predation, invasive be warranted for 7 species: Pyrgulopsis www.regulations.gov and upon request species, inherent vulnerability of gracilis (Emigrant pyrg), Pyrgulopsis from the Nevada Fish and Wildlife isolated springsnail populations, and montana (Camp Valley pyrg), Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Pyrgulopsis aloba (Duckwater pyrg), global climate change may be threats to CONTACT). the grated tryonia. However, we will Pyrgulopsis anatine (southern further consider this and any additional Duckwater pyrg), Pyrgulopsis lockensis Author information on these activities and other (Lockes pyrg), Pyrgulopsis papillata (Big The primary authors of this document potential threats received during our Warm Spring pyrg), Pyrgulopsis are the staff members of the Nevada Fish status review for this species. villacampae (Duckwater Warm Spring and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER Factor D: The petition states that pyrg). INFORMATION CONTACT). inadequate regulatory mechanisms are a We find that the petition presents Authority threat due to the permitting of substantial scientific or commercial The authority for this action is the groundwater rights by the NSE that information that listing the remaining Endangered Species Act of 1973, as exceed perennial yield. Permitted 32 of the 39 species that we evaluated amended (U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). groundwater rights in the Upper Muddy as threatened or endangered under the River Springs hydrographic area Act may be warranted. Because we have Dated: August 22, 2011. currently approach the average annual found that the petition presents Gregory E. Siekaniec, recharge (see details under Factor A). substantial information that listing these Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Based on this and additional rationale 32 species may be warranted, we are Service. discussing regulatory mechanisms in initiating status reviews (12-month [FR Doc. 2011–23272 Filed 9–12–11; 8:45 am] the ‘‘Summary of Common Threats,’’ we findings) to determine whether listing BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2