53756 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Review of Native Species 

That Are Candidates or Proposed for 

Listing as Endangered or Threatened; 

Annual Notice of Findings on 

Resubmitted Petitions; Annual 

Description of Progress on Listing 

Actions 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of review. 

SUMMARY: In this Candidate Notice of 

Review (CNOR), we, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), present an 

updated list of plant and animal species 

native to the United States that we 

regard as candidates or have proposed 

for addition to the Lists of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended. Identification of 

candidate species can assist 

environmental planning efforts by 

providing advance notice of potential 

listings, allowing landowners and 

resource managers to alleviate threats 

and thereby possibly remove the need to 

list species as endangered or threatened. 

Even if we subsequently list a candidate 

species, the early notice provided here 

could result in more options for species 

management and recovery by prompting 

candidate conservation measures to 

alleviate threats to the species. 

The CNOR summarizes the status and 

threats that we evaluated in order to 

determine that species qualify as 

candidates and to assign a listing 

priority number to each species, or to 

remove species from candidate status. 

Additional material that we relied on is 

available in the Species Assessment and 

Listing Priority Assignment Forms 

(species assessment forms, previously 

called candidate forms) for each 

candidate species. 

Overall, this CNOR recognizes 7 new 

candidates, changes the listing priority 

number for 24 candidates, and removes 

10 species from candidate status. 

Combined with other decisions for 

individual species that were published 

separately from this CNOR, the new 

number of species that are candidates 

for listing is 279. 

We request additional status 

information that may be available for 

the 279 candidate species identified in 

this CNOR. We will consider this 

information in preparing listing 

documents and future revisions to the 

notice of review, as it will help us in 

monitoring changes in the status of 

candidate species and in management 

for conserving them. We also request 

information on additional species that 

we should consider including as 

candidates as we prepare future updates 

of this notice. 

This document also includes our 

findings on resubmitted petitions and 

describes our progress in revising the 

Lists of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants during the period 

May 2, 2005, through August 23, 2006. 

DATES: We will accept comments on the 

Candidate Notice of Review at any time. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

regarding a particular species to the 

Regional Director of the Region 

identified in SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION as having the lead 

responsibility for that species. You may 

submit comments of a more general 

nature to the Chief, Division of 

Conservation and Classification, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. 

Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 

22203 (703/358–2171). Written 

comments and materials received in 

response to this notice will be available 

for public inspection by appointment at 

the Division of Conservation and 

Classification (for comments of a general 

nature only) or at the appropriate 

Regional Office listed in SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

Species assessment forms with 

information and references on a 

particular candidate species’ range, 

status, habitat needs, and listing priority 

assignment are available for review at 

the appropriate Regional Office listed 

below in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION or 

at the Division of Conservation and 

Classification, Arlington, Virginia (see 

address above), or on our Internet Web 

site (http://endangered.fws.gov/ 

candidates/index.html). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Endangered Species Coordinator(s) in 

the appropriate Regional Office(s) or 

Chris Nolin, Chief, Division of 

Conservation and Classification (703– 

358–2171). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Candidate Notice of Review 

Background 

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, 

as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) 

(Act), requires that we identify species 

of wildlife and plants that are 

endangered or threatened, based on the 

best available scientific and commercial 

information. As defined in section 3 of 

the Act, an endangered species is any 

species which is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range, and a threatened species is 

any species which is likely to become 

an endangered species within the 

foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range. Through 

the Federal rulemaking process, we add 

species that meet these definitions to 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 

CFR 17.12. As part of this program, we 

maintain a list of species that we regard 

as candidates for listing. A candidate 

species is one for which we have on file 

sufficient information on biological 

vulnerability and threats to support a 

proposal to list as endangered or 

threatened, but for which preparation 

and publication of a proposal is 

precluded by higher-priority listing 

actions. 

We maintain this list of candidates for 

a variety of reasons: To notify the public 

that these species are facing threats to 

their survival; to provide advance 

knowledge of potential listings that 

could affect decisions of environmental 

planners and developers; to provide 

information that may stimulate and 

guide conservation efforts that will 

remove or reduce threats to these 

species and possibly make listing 

unnecessary; to solicit input from 

interested parties to help us identify 

those candidate species that may not 

require protection under the Act or 

additional species that may require the 

Act’s protections; and to solicit 

necessary information for setting 

priorities for preparing listing proposals. 

We strongly encourage collaborative 

conservation efforts for candidate 

species and offer technical and financial 

assistance to facilitate such efforts. For 

additional information regarding such 

assistance, please contact the 

appropriate Regional Office listed in 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION or visit our 

Internet Web site, http:// 

endangered.fws.gov/candidates/ 

index.html. 

Previous Notices of Review 

The Act directed the Secretary of the 

Smithsonian Institution to prepare a 

report on endangered and threatened 

plant species, which was published as 

House Document No. 94–51. We 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register on July 1, 1975 (40 FR 27823), 

in which we announced we would 

review more than 3,000 native plant 

species named in the Smithsonian’s 

report and other species added by the 

1975 notice for possible addition to the 

List of Endangered and Threatened 

Plants, referring to them as species 

considered to be candidate endangered 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53757 

or threatened species. We published a 

new comprehensive notice of review for 

native plants on December 15, 1980 (45 

FR 82479), which took into account the 

earlier Smithsonian report and other 

accumulated information. On November 

28, 1983 (48 FR 53640), our 

supplemental plant notice of review 

announced changes in the status of 

various species. We published complete 

updates of the plant notice on 

September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526); 

February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184); 

September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144); and, 

as part of combined animal and plant 

notices, on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 

7596); September 19, 1997 (62 FR 

49398); October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534); 

October 30, 2001 (66 FR 54808); June 

13, 2002 (67 FR 40657); May 4, 2004 (69 

FR 24876); and May 11, 2005 (70 FR 

24870). Additionally, on January 8, 2001 

(66 FR 1295), we published our 

resubmitted petition finding for one 

plant species having an outstanding 

‘‘warranted-but-precluded finding’’ on a 

petition to list. 

We published earlier comprehensive 

reviews for vertebrate animals in the 

Federal Register on December 30, 1982 

(47 FR 58454), and on September 18, 

1985 (50 FR 37958). We published an 

initial comprehensive review for 

invertebrate animals on May 22, 1984 

(49 FR 21664). We published a 

combined (i.e. vertebrate and 

invertebrate) animal notice of review on 

January 6, 1989 (54 FR 554), with minor 

corrections on August 10, 1989 (54 FR 

32833). We again published 

comprehensive animal notices on 

November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58804) and 

November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982). 

Beginning in 1996 we published 

combined animal and plant notices, 

including those published on February 

28, 1996 (61 FR 7596); September 19, 

1997 (62 FR 49398); October 25, 1999 

(64 FR 57534); October 30, 2001 (66 FR 

54808); June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40657); 

May 4, 2004 (69 FR 24876); and May 11, 

2005 (70 FR 24870). Additionally, on 

January 8, 2001 (66 FR 1295), we 

published our resubmitted petition 

findings for 25 animal species having 

outstanding ‘‘warranted-but-precluded’’

petition findings as well as notice of one 

candidate removal. 

On September 21, 1983, we published 

guidance for assigning a listing priority 

number (LPN) for each candidate 

species (48 FR 43098). We continue to 

use this guidance to assign each 

candidate a LPN of 1 to 12, depending 

on the magnitude of threats, imminence 

of threats, and taxonomic status. Such a 

priority ranking guidance system is 

required under section 4(h)(3) of the Act 

(15 U.S.C. 1533(h)(3)). 

This revised notice supersedes all 

previous animal, plant, and combined 

notices of review. 

Summary of This CNOR 

Since publication of the 2004 CNOR 

on May 11, 2005 (70 FR 24870), we 

reviewed the available information on 

candidate species to ensure that a 

proposed listing is justified for each 

species and reevaluated the relative 

listing priority number assigned to each 

species. We also evaluated the need to 

emergency-list any of these species, 

particularly species with high priorities 

(i.e. species with listing priority 

numbers of 1, 2, or 3). This review and 

reevaluation ensures that we focus 

conservation efforts on those species at 

greatest risk. In addition to reviewing 

candidate species, the Service has 

worked on numerous findings in 

response to petitions to list species and 

has prepared proposed and final 

determinations for rules to list species 

under the Act; some of these findings 

and determinations have been 

completed and published in the Federal 

Register while work on others is still 

underway (see Preclusion and 

Expeditious Progress, below, for 

details). Since publication of the CNOR 

last year the Service has completed and 

published final rules listing 2 species as 

endangered and 17 species as 

threatened; reviewed the status of and 

published findings that listing proposals 

are not warranted for 4 species; and 

published proposed rules for listing for 

3 species for which final determinations 

are pending. 

Based on our review of the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information, this CNOR identifies 7 new 

candidate species (see New Candidates, 

below), changes the listing priority 

number for 24 candidates (see Listing 

Priority Changes in Candidates, below) 

and determined that listing proposals 

are not warranted for an additional 10 

species and thus have removed them 

from candidate status (see Candidate 

Removals, below). Combined with the 

other decisions published separately 

from this CNOR for individual species 

that previously were candidates, a total 

of 279 species, including 140 plant and 

139 animal species, are now candidates 

awaiting preparation of rules proposing 

their listing. These 279 species, along 

with the 3 species currently proposed 

for listing, are included in Table 1. 

Table 2 includes 33 species identified 

in the previous CNOR as either 

proposed for listing or classified as 

candidates that are no longer in those 

categories. This includes the 19 species 

we listed as threatened or endangered 

since the previous CNOR and the 4 

species for which we published separate 

findings that listing is not warranted, 

plus the 10 species that we have 

determined do not warrant preparation 

of a rule to propose listing and therefore 

have removed from candidate status in 

this CNOR. 

New Candidates 

Below we present brief summaries of 

seven new candidates that we are 

recognizing in this CNOR, including one 

species of mammal, one bird, two snails, 

two insects, and one plant. Complete 

information, including references, can 

be found in the species assessment 

forms. You may obtain a copy of these 

forms from the Regional Office having 

the lead for the species, or from our 

Internet Web site (http:// 

endangered.fws.gov/candidates/ 

index.html). For each of these seven 

species, we find that we have on file 

sufficient information on biological 

vulnerability and threats to support a 

proposal to list as endangered or 

threatened, but that preparation and 

publication of a proposal is precluded 

by higher-priority listing actions (i.e. 

these meet our definition of a candidate 

species). Two of these seven species 

were petitioned for listing, and for those 

two species this constitutes our finding, 

as required pursuant to section 

4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act, that the 

immediate issuance of a proposed rule 

and timely promulgation of a final rule 

for each of these species has been, for 

the preceding months, and continues to 

be, precluded by higher priority listing 

actions, and that expeditious progress is 

being made to add qualified species to 

the lists of threatened and endangered 

species and to remove from such lists 

species for which the protections of the 

Act are no longer necessary. (Additional 

information is provided in the sections 

entitled Petition Findings and 

Preclusion and Expeditious Progress, 

below). We also note below that one 

other species, a fish, was identified as 

a candidate earlier this year in a 

separate finding published in the 

Federal Register. 

Mammals 

New England cottontail (Sylvilagus 

transitionalis)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files 

and information collected during the 

public comment period on our 90-day 

petition finding. On August 30, 2000, 

we received a petition to list this 

species. We published our 90-day 

finding on June 30, 2004 (69 FR 39395). 

The New England cottontail (NEC) is 

a medium- to large-sized cottontail 

rabbit that may reach 1,000 grams in 

weight, and is one of two species within 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53758 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

the genus Sylvilagus occurring in New 

England. New England cottontails are 

considered habitat specialists, in so far 

as they are dependent upon earlysuccessional habitats typically 

described as thickets. The species is the 

only endemic cottontail in New 

England. 

Historically, the NEC ranged from 

southeastern New York (east of the 

Hudson River) north through the 

Champlain Valley, southern Vermont, 

the southern half of New Hampshire, 

southern Maine, and south throughout 

Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode 

Island. The species is now considered to 

be extirpated from Vermont, the current 

range elsewhere has declined 

substantially, and occurrences have 

become increasingly separated. The 

species’ current distribution is 

fragmented into five apparently isolated 

metapopulations in about 14 percent of 

the species’ historical range. The range 

has contracted from approximately 

90,000 sq km to 12,180 sq km, and 

much of the suitable habitat within the 

current range is in small patches that are 

not occupied by the NEC. A multi-state, 

regional inventory conducted in 2001–

2004 found New England cottontails 

were absent from 93% of approximately 

2,300 habitat patches within the recent 

historical range (1990 to present) that 

were searched for the presence of the 

species. Many of the occupied sites 

were quite small (3 acres or less) and are 

considered by some researchers to be 

population ‘‘sinks.’’ It is estimated that 

less than one-third of the occupied sites 

occur on lands in conservation status, 

and fewer than 10 percent of these sites 

in conservation status are being 

managed for early successional forest 

species such as the NEC. 

The primary threat to the New 

England cottontail is ongoing 

destruction and modification of its 

remaining habitat through natural 

succession processes and through 

alteration related to human 

development and other activities. 

Isolation of occupied patches of habitat 

by areas of unsuitable habitat, as well as 

predation, appears to be resulting in 

local extirpation of New England 

cottontails from small patches. Based on 

current land uses in the region, the loss 

of about 2 percent of its current range 

per year is expected to continue. 

Additional threats include competition 

for food and habitat with introduced 

eastern cottontails and large numbers of 

native white-tailed deer, and inadequate 

regulatory mechanisms in effect to 

protect the habitat. Based on threats of 

high magnitude that are imminent, we 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 2. (See also the section 

entitled Petition Findings, below) 

Birds 

Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa)—The 

following summary is based on 

information from our files and 

information provided by petitioners. We 

received one petition on August 9, 2004, 

and two others were each received on 

August 5, 2005. 

The rufa subspecies is one of six 

recognized subspecies of red knot and 

one of three subspecies occurring in 

North America (hereafter all mention of 

red knot refers strictly to the rufa 

subspecies). This subspecies makes one 

of the longest distance migrations 

known in the animal kingdom as it 

travels between breeding areas in the 

central Canadian Arctic and wintering 

areas that are primarily in southern 

South America along the coast of Chile 

and Argentina. They migrate along the 

Atlantic coast of the United States 

(U.S.), where they may be found from 

Maine to Florida. The Delaware Bay 

area (in Delaware and New Jersey) is the 

largest known spring migration stopover 

area, with far fewer migrants 

congregating elsewhere along the 

Atlantic coast. The concentration in the 

Delaware Bay area occurs from the 

middle of May to early June, 

corresponding to the spawning season 

of horseshoe crabs. The knots feed on 

horseshoe crab eggs, rebuilding energy 

reserves needed to complete migration 

to the Arctic and arrive on the breeding 

grounds in good condition. 

Surveys at wintering areas and at 

Delaware Bay during spring migration 

indicate a substantial decline in recent 

years. At the Delaware Bay area, peak 

counts between 1982 and 1998 were as 

high as 95,360 knots. Although counts 

may vary considerably between years, 

some of the population fluctuations can 

be attributed to predator-prey cycles in 

the breeding grounds, and counts show 

that knots rebound from such 

reductions. In the past, horseshoe crab 

eggs were so numerous that a knot could 

eat enough in two to three weeks to 

double its weight. Research shows that 

from 1997 to 2002 an increasing 

proportion of red knots leaving the 

Delaware Bay failed to achieve 

threshold departure masses needed to 

fly to breeding grounds and survive an 

initial few days of snow cover, and this 

corresponded to reduced annual 

survival rates. Recently, peak counts at 

the Delaware Bay area have been lower 

than in the past and do not show a 

rebound. The peaks were 13,315 in 

2004, 15,345 in 2005, and 13,455 in 

2006. Counts in recent years at the 

principal wintering areas in South 

America also are substantially lower 

than in the past and do not show a 

rebound. 

The primary factor threatening the red 

knot is destruction and modification of 

its habitat, particularly the reduction in 

key food resources resulting from 

reductions in horseshoe crabs, which 

are harvested primarily for use as bait 

and secondarily to support a biomedical 

industry. Commercial harvest increased 

substantially in the 1990’s. Since 1999, 

a series of timing restrictions and 

substantially lower harvest quotas have 

been adopted by the Atlantic States 

Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), 

as well as New Jersey and Delaware. In 

May 2006, the ASMFC adopted 

restrictions effective from October 1, 

2006 to September 30, 2008, including 

a prohibition on harvest and landing of 

horseshoe crabs in New Jersey and 

Delaware from January 1 through June 7, 

harvest of males only from June 8 

through December 31, and harvest 

limited to no more than 100,000 

horseshoe crabs per state per year. The 

ASMFC also adopted other restrictions 

applicable to Maryland and Virginia. 

New Jersey has established restrictions 

which supersede those of the ASMFC; 

as a result there is a moratorium on all 

horseshoe crab harvest in New Jersey 

from May 15, 2006 through June 7, 

2008, after which the restrictions 

adopted by ASMFC apply. 

The reductions in commercial harvest 

since 1999 are substantial: 726,660 

horseshoe crab landings for bait were 

reported in 1999 in Delaware and New 

Jersey, compared to 173,777 in 2004. 

However, we do not know whether 

horseshoe crab populations will rebuild 

or how long a lag time there may be in 

increased availability of eggs, as they 

need 8–10 years to reach sexual 

maturity and other key information for 

estimating population response is 

lacking. A survey in Delaware Bay 

showed spawning activity was stable or 

slightly declining from 1999 to 2004. In 

2004, availability of horseshoe crab eggs 

on principal shorebird foraging beaches 

increased over recent years. The peak 

number of migrant red knots observed at 

Delaware Bay increased slightly in 2005 

compared to 2004, and in 2006 the peak 

count was similar to that in 2004. Also, 

body weights of red knots at the time of 

departure from Delaware Bay improved 

in 2005 over previous years. Counts of 

red knots at key wintering areas in 

South America, although much reduced 

from the past, were similar in 2006 to 

the counts in 2005. Thus in recent years 

the number of knots has been much 

lower than in the past and the trend in 

the abundance is not improving despite 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53759 

a four-fold reduction in horseshoe crab 

landings since the late 1990’s. 

Other identified threat factors include 

habitat destruction due to beach erosion 

and various shoreline protection and 

stabilization projects that are impacting 

areas used by migrating knots for 

foraging, the inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms, human 

disturbance, and competition with other 

species for limited food resources. Also, 

the concentration of red knots in the 

Delaware Bay area and at a relatively 

small number of wintering areas make 

the species vulnerable to potential largescale events in those areas such as large 

oil spills or severe weather. 

Overall, we conclude that the threats, 

in particular the modification of habitat 

through harvesting of horseshoe crabs to 

such an extent that it puts the viability 

of the knot at substantial risk, are of a 

high magnitude, but are nonimminent 

because of reductions and restrictions 

on harvesting horseshoe crabs. 

Accordingly, we assigned a listing 

priority number of 6 to this subspecies. 

(See also the section entitled Petition 

Findings, below) 

Fish 

Headwater chub (Gila nigra)—We 

previously announced candidate status 

for this species in a separate warrantedbut-precluded 12-month petition 

finding, published on May 3, 2006 (71 

FR 26007). 

Snails 

Black mudalia (Elimia melanoides)—

The following summary is based on 

information in our files. The historical 

and current range of the black mudalia, 

an aquatic snail, is in Alabama. The 

historical range included much of the 

upper half of the Black Warrior River 

drainage, including the main stem Black 

Warrior above Tuscaloosa, as well as the 

Sipsey Fork and Locust Fork. The black 

mudalia is currently known from five 

localized shoals in an approximately 30- 

mile reach of the upper Locust Fork of 

the Black Warrior River, and from two 

shoals in a 1-mile reach of the 

Blackburn Fork of the Little Warrior 

River, a tributary of the Locust Fork. 

The black mudalia requires flowing 

water, and the construction of two major 

dams on the main stem Black Warrior 

River above the Fall Line (Oliver Lock 

and Dam, 1940; Holt Dam, 1966) and 

another dam on the lower Sipsey Fork 

(Bankhead Dam, 1975), impounded 

much of the species’ historical habitat. 

Dams eliminate or reduce currents 

within impounded areas, allowing 

sediments to accumulate on inundated 

channel habitats. Impounded waters 

also experience changes in water 

chemistry that can affect survival or 

reproduction of black mudalia. 

The primary threats to the black 

mudalia in the areas it currently 

occupies involve habitat destruction 

and modification, particularly in 

relation to poor water quality and 

habitat deterioration. Point-source 

discharges and surface runoff cause 

nutrification, decreased dissolved 

oxygen concentration, increased acidity 

and conductivity, and other changes in 

water chemistry which are likely to 

seriously affect aquatic snails. Pollution 

from surface runoff can originate from a 

wide array of land use activities, and 

may include sediments, fertilizers, 

herbicides, pesticides, animal wastes, 

septic tank and gray water leakage, and 

oils and greases. Land uses in the 

vicinity of black mudalia populations 

include pasture, row crops, timber 

production, and chicken farms. Because 

the threats to black mudalia are of a 

high magnitude and are imminent, we 

assigned a listing priority of 2 to this 

species. 

Rough hornsnail (Pleurocera 

foremani)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. The 

rough hornsnail is an aquatic snail 

endemic to the Coosa River system in 

Alabama. It currently is known to occur 

at two locations: The lower Yellowleaf 

Creek in Shelby County, and the lower 

Coosa River below Wetumpka Shoals in 

Elmore County. Searches of historical 

habitats in the Coosa River and its 

tributaries have failed to locate the 

species at other localities. The two 

surviving populations are extremely 

small and localized. The historical 

habitats of the rough hornsnail have 

been extensively modified by six large 

dams constructed for hydropower 

production. Dams eliminate or reduce 

currents within impounded areas, 

allowing sediments to accumulate on 

inundated channel habitats. Impounded 

waters also experience changes in water 

chemistry that can affect survival or 

reproduction of pleurocerid snails. 

Currently, the primary threat to the 

rough hornsnail is habitat destruction 

and modification related to poor water 

quality and habitat deterioration that 

result from point source discharges and/ 

or surface runoff. These actions cause 

nutrification, decreased dissolved 

oxygen concentration, increased acidity 

and conductivity, and other changes in 

water chemistry that can seriously affect 

aquatic snails. Both populations of the 

rough hornsnail are in areas currently 

experiencing high human population 

growth and development. Because the 

threats are ongoing and are of a high 

magnitude, we assigned the rough 

hornsnail a listing priority of 2. 

Insects 

Florida leafwing butterfly (Anaea 

troglodyta floridalis)—The Florida 

leafwing is endemic to south Florida 

and the Keys; it occurs only within pine 

rocklands that retain its sole hostplant, 

pineland croton (Croton linearis). Once 

locally common within the formerly 

widespread pine rockland habitat that 

occurred within Miami-Dade and 

Monroe Counties and less common and 

sporadic within Collier, Martin, Palm 

Beach, and Broward Counties, the 

leafwing now has small and isolated 

populations at only two locations: On 

Big Pine Key in the lower Florida Keys, 

and Long Pine Key on the Florida 

mainland. On Big Pine Key, the 

butterfly and its habitat occur on 

National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR) and 

also on other scattered private and 

public lands within the vicinity of 

NKDR. On the Florida mainland, the 

population on Long Pine Key is within 

Everglades National Park (ENP). Pine 

rockland fragments on the mainland 

near or adjacent to ENP may still retain 

the potential to support some small, 

localized, and sporadic populations of 

the butterfly, but no Florida leafwings 

have been documented as occurring in 

such areas outside ENP for the last 

several years. 

Land developments of various types 

have greatly reduced pinelands in 

Florida. Within the Keys, pinelands 

containing the pineland croton 

hostplant now occur only on Big Pine 

Key, with an estimated 80 hectares (ha) 

(198 acres) within NKDR and small, 

scattered relict sites elsewhere. On the 

mainland, an estimated 1,068 ha (2,638 

acres) of appropriate hostplant-bearing 

habitat occur within ENP on Long Pine 

Key; outside that area, in Miami-Dade 

County, scattered fragments of pine 

rockland containing pineland croton 

occur in fragments that collectively total 

approximately 370 (ha) (916 acres), 

roughly half of which are in private 

ownership. Collectively, the Big Pine 

Key, Long Pine Key, and relict pine 

rocklands adjacent to ENP presently 

support an estimated total of 100–800 

adult Florida leafwing butterflies at any 

given time. 

The Florida leafwing is vulnerable to 

impacts that probably did not pose 

significant risks to its continued 

existence in the past, when suitable 

habitat and the species were much more 

abundant and widespread. Habitat 

destruction and modification is a 

continuing problem on public and 

private lands. This includes habitat loss 

due to unnatural or altered fire regimes. 

Natural fires are important in 

maintaining the herbaceous layer of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53760 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

pine rocklands, of which the butterfly’s 

sole hostplant, pineland croton, is a 

part. Without these fires, succession 

from pinelands to hardwood hammocks 

is rapid, with loss of suitable habitat for 

the Florida leafwing. Due to the 

proximity of remaining pine rockland 

habitat to urban areas in southern 

Florida and the Keys, most natural fires 

have been and are suppressed, often 

replaced by inconsistent regimes of 

managed or prescribed fires that do not 

necessarily result in habitat conditions 

suitable for the Florida leafwing. 

Prescribed burning occurs on portions 

of ENP on Long Pine Key, and ENP is 

working on incorporating 

considerations for life histories of select 

butterfly species into their management. 

At NKDR, private homes and light 

commercial uses are embedded within 

or in close proximity to the firesustained pineland habitat. Thus 

management of pine rocklands is 

particularly difficult due to the mixed 

pattern of land ownership and 

development. Fire suppression to 

protect residential areas results in the 

invasion and replacement of native pine 

rockland habitat by hardwood 

hammocks, thereby causing continued 

loss of habitat for the leafwing. Survey 

data collected from mid-2003 through 

July 2006 indicate a substantial decline 

in leafwing numbers on NKDR, even 

within an area where prescribed 

burning occurs. Outside of NKDR and 

ENP, much of the remaining suitable 

habitat for the Florida leafwing on 

private land is subject to destruction or 

modification due to the effects of fire 

suppression or due to the nature of 

prescribed fire activities, and continued 

economic development that results in 

conversion of pine rocklands to other 

uses. 

The continued existence of the 

Florida leafwing also is threatened due 

to other natural and human-related 

factors. Pesticides used in mosquito 

control practices are a major threat on 

Big Pine Key, where nearly all occupied 

and suitable habitat for the Florida 

leafwing is exposed to mosquito control 

chemicals. Studies have shown that the 

pesticides used for mosquito control at 

field application rates are extremely 

toxic to non-target butterflies, skippers, 

and moths. Essentially all of the pine 

rocklands within NKDR except one area, 

Watson’s Hammock, are sprayed and 

residential areas and roadsides across 

Big Pine Key are treated. Also, chemical 

drift of pesticides has been found 750 

meters (2,460 feet) within the borders of 

the no-spray zone on Watson’s 

Hammock. Mosquito control poses 

much less of a risk to the leafwings in 

ENP, as mosquito control on Long Pine 

Key is limited to residential areas and 

campgrounds. Additional natural and 

human-related factors include the risk 

of direct mortality and habitat loss due 

to extreme weather events (e.g. 

hurricanes, tropical storms), and risk of 

reduced genetic diversity; both of these 

risks are heightened due to the 

reduction of the Florida leafwing to 

small, isolated populations. 

The established interest in specimens 

of the leafwing and information requests 

regarding its location from collectors, 

researchers, and others suggests that 

collection may be occurring and has the 

potential to occur at any time. However, 

we do not have sufficient information to 

conclude that overutilization for 

commercial, recreational, scientific, or 

educational purposes is a factor that 

threatens the Florida leafwing. The 

principal threats to the Florida leafwing 

at this time are the destruction, 

modification, or curtailment of its 

habitat or range, and other natural or 

manmade factors affecting its continued 

existence. Based threats of high 

magnitude that are imminent, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 3 

to the Florida eafwing butterfly. 

Bartram’s hairstreak butterfly 

(Strymon acis bartrami)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. The Bartram’s hairstreak is a 

subspecies endemic to south Florida 

and the Keys. Like the Florida leafwing 

butterfly (described above) it occurs 

only within pine rocklands that retain 

its sole hostplant, pineland croton 

(Croton linearis). Once locally common 

within the formerly widespread pine 

rockland habitat that occurred within 

Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties, and 

less common and sporadic within 

Collier, Palm Beach, and Broward 

Counties, the Bartram’s hairstreak is 

now largely restricted to two locations: 

Big Pine Key in the Florida Keys, and 

Long Pine Key on the Florida mainland. 

On Big Pine Key, the butterfly and its 

habitat occur on National Key Deer 

Refuge and also on other scattered 

private and public lands in the vicinity 

of NKDR. On Long Pine Key the species 

is within Everglades National Park. Pine 

rockland fragments near or adjacent to 

ENP also appear to retain some small, 

localized, and sporadic populations of 

the butterfly. The same factors 

identified as threats to the Florida 

leafwing butterfly (summarized above) 

also threaten Bartram’s hairstreak. Based 

on threats of high magnitude that are 

imminent, we assigned a listing priority 

number of 3 to Bartram’s hairstreak 

butterfly. 

Flowering Plants 

Harrisia aboriginum (Aboriginal 

pricklyapple)—The following summary 

is based on information in our files. 

This cylindrical-stemmed cactus 

currently occurs in coastal strand 

vegetation and tropical coastal 

hammocks on coastal islands of 

Sarasota, Charlotte, and Lee Counties, 

Florida, from Longboat Key south to 

Buck Key in the J.N. ‘‘Ding’’ Darling 

National Wildlife Refuge. Populations 

are likely to be on shell mounds or sites 

with shelly substrates; plants may be 

quite close to the mangrove zone, but 

not in it. This plant always had a 

restricted distribution and is now 

vulnerable to extinction because only 10 

populations are remaining. Each 

population occurs just above sea level 

along the coast, and is threatened by the 

rise in sea level that has occurred during 

the past century and is continuing. Each 

population is also threatened by 

nonnative plant invasions and, in at 

least one case, predation by introduced 

iguanas. Some populations are on 

private lands, and these are all 

vulnerable to habitat destruction and/or 

improper management. Additionally, 

the proximity to the coast, combined 

with the very small number of plants in 

each population, makes the species 

vulnerable to hurricanes which have the 

potential to overwash islands and 

extirpate populations. For these reasons, 

the magnitude of threats is high. 

Overall, threats are nonimminent 

because public land managers have been 

and are continuing to address exotic 

invasive plant issues. Therefore, we 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 5. 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates 

We reviewed the listing priority 

number for all candidate species and are 

changing the numbers for the following 

species. Some of the changes reflect 

actual changes in either the magnitude 

or imminence of the threats, and in one 

case, reflects a change in the taxonomy 

of the species. For some species, our 

changes in the listing priority number 

reflect efforts to ensure national 

consistency as well as closer adherence 

to the 1983 guidelines in assigning these 

numbers, rather than a change in the 

nature of the threats. 

Birds 

Friendly ground-dove, American 

Samoa DPS (Gallicolumba stairi stairi)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. The 

genus Gallicolumba is distributed 

throughout the Pacific and Southeast 

Asia. The genus is represented in the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53761 

oceanic Pacific by six species. Three are 

endemic to Micronesian islands or 

archipelagos, two are endemic to island 

groups in French Polynesia, and G. 

stairi is endemic to Samoa, Tonga, and 

Fiji. All six species have some level of 

threatened status on the International 

Union for Conservation of Nature and 

Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List. 

Some authors recognize two subspecies 

of the friendly ground-dove, one, 

slightly smaller, in the Samoan 

archipelago (G. s. stairi), and one in 

Tonga and Fiji (G. s. vitiensis), but 

morphological differences between the 

two are minimal. 

In American Samoa, the friendly 

ground-dove has been found on the 

islands of Ofu and Olosega (Manua 

Group). Threats to this subspecies have 

not changed over the past year. Of the 

primary threats to the subspecies 

(predation by nonnative species, 

poaching, and habitat loss), predation 

by nonnative species is thought to be 

occurring now, and predation likely has 

been occurring for several decades. This 

predation may be an important 

impediment to increasing the 

population. Predation by introduced 

species has played a significant role in 

reducing, limiting, and extirpating 

populations of island birds, especially 

ground-nesters, in the Pacific and other 

locations worldwide. Nonnative 

predators known or thought to occur in 

the range of the friendly ground-dove in 

American Samoa are feral cats (Felis 

catus), Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans), 

black rats (R. rattus), and Norway rats 

(R. norvegicus). 

In February of 2005, a hurricane 

destroyed the habitat of G. stairi in an 

area on Olosega Island where the 

species had been most frequently 

recorded. Although this species has 

coexisted with severe storms for 

millennia, this example illustrates the 

potential for natural disturbance to 

exacerbate the effect of anthropogenic 

disturbance on small populations. 

Consistent monitoring using a variety of 

methods over the last 5 years yielded 

few observations of this taxon in 

American Samoa. The total population 

size is poorly known, but is unlikely to 

number more than a few hundred pairs. 

The distribution of the friendly grounddove is limited to forested slopes with 

an open understory and a substrate of 

fine scree or exposed earth; this habitat 

is not common in American Samoa. We 

revised the listing priority number from 

a 3 to a 6 to better reflect the fact that 

the threats posed to the friendly grounddove (its small population size and 

nonnative predators) are nonimminent 

but still may occur throughout its range. 

Streaked horned lark (Eremophila 

alpestris strigata)—The following 

information is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received December 11, 2002. 

The streaked horned lark occurs in 

British Columbia (Canada), Washington 

State, and Oregon. The streaked horned 

lark nests on the ground in sparsely 

vegetated sites in short-grass dominated 

habitats, such as native prairies, coastal 

dunes, fallow agricultural fields, lightly 

to moderately grazed pastures, seasonal 

mudflats, airports, and dredged-material 

formed islands in the Columbia River. It 

is essentially extirpated from Canada. In 

Washington State, surveys show that 

there are approximately 380 remaining 

breeding birds (Pearson and Altman 

2005). In Oregon, the breeding 

population is estimated to be 

approximately 400 birds. 

The streaked horned lark’s breeding 

habitat is threatened by loss and 

degradation due to conversion of native 

grasslands to other uses (such as 

agriculture, homes, recreational areas, 

and industry), encroachment of woody 

vegetation, and invasion of nonnative 

plant species (e.g., Scot’s broom and 

sod-forming grasses). Native prairies 

have been nearly eliminated throughout 

the range of the species. It is estimated 

that less than 1 to 3 percent of the native 

grassland and savanna remains. Those 

that remain have been invaded by 

nonnative sod-forming grasses. Coastal 

nesting areas have suffered the same 

fate. Wintering habitats are seemingly 

few, and susceptible to unpredictable 

conversion to unsuitable overwintering 

habitat. Where larks inhabit nonnative 

habitats similar in structure to native 

prairies (such as airports, military 

reservations, agricultural fields, and 

dredge formed islands), they are 

subjected to a variety of unintentional 

human disturbances such as mowing, 

recreational and military activities, 

plowing, flooding, and dredge spoil 

dumping during the nesting season, as 

well as intentional disturbances such as 

at the McChord AFB where falcons and 

dogs are used to haze the birds in order 

to avoid aircraft collisions. In some 

areas, landowners have taken steps to 

improve streaked horned lark nesting 

habitat. 

The magnitude of threat is high due 

to small populations with low genetic 

diversity and patchy and isolated 

habitats in areas desirable for 

development. The threat of invasive 

plant species is high and constant. The 

numbers of individuals are low and the 

numbers of populations are few. 

Overwintering birds are concentrated in 

larger flocks and subject to 

unpredictable wintering habitat loss, 

potentially affecting a large portion of 

the population at one time. In 

Washington, known populations occur 

on airports and two military bases 

where management and training 

activities can negatively affect streaked 

horned lark breeding. In British 

Columbia, the one potentially remaining 

site with breeding birds occurs at an 

airport. The immediacy of threat is 

imminent, due to the continued loss of 

suitable lark habitat, risks to the 

wintering populations, plans for 

development on and adjacent to two of 

its nesting areas, use of falcons and dogs 

to haze breeding birds at McChord AFB, 

planned expansions of the McChord 

AFB west ramp and Olympia airport, 

the planned addition of 130 more 

helicopters at the Gray Army Airfield, 

and annual Air Force military training 

and fire bombing on top of lark nesting 

habitat. Because of the increased 

imminence of threats, we changed the 

listing priority number for the streaked 

horned lark from 6 to 3. 

Reptiles 

Black pine snake (Pituophis 

melanoleucus lodingi)— There are 

historical records for the black pine 

snake from one parish in Louisiana, 14 

counties in Mississippi, and 3 counties 

in Alabama west of the Mobile River 

Delta. Black pine snake surveys and 

trapping indicate that this species has 

been extirpated from Louisiana and 

from two counties in Mississippi. 

Moreover, the distribution of remaining 

populations has become highly 

restricted due to the destruction and 

fragmentation of the remaining longleaf 

pine habitat within the range of the 

species. Most of the known Mississippi 

populations are concentrated on the 

DeSoto National Forest. Populations 

occurring on properties managed by city 

and State agencies as gopher tortoise 

mitigation banks or wildlife 

management areas represent the best 

opportunities for long-term survival of 

the species in Alabama. Other factors 

affecting the black pine snake include 

vehicular mortality and low 

reproductive rates, which magnify other 

threats and increase the likelihood of 

local extinctions. Due to the imminent 

threat of high magnitude caused by the 

past destruction of most of the longleaf 

pine habitat of the black pine snake, and 

the continuing persistent degradation of 

what remains, we assigned a listing 

priority number of 3 to this subspecies. 

Although there is no actual change in 

threats over the past year, habitat loss 

represents an ongoing or imminent 

threat to the black pine snake. 

Therefore, to help ensure consistency in 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53762 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

the application of our listing priority 

process, we changed the listing priority 

number from a 6 to a 3 to reflect that 

the threats are imminent. 

Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis 

ruthveni)—The Louisiana pine snake 

historically occurred in fire-maintained 

longleaf-pine ecosystems of west-central 

Louisiana and extreme east-central 

Texas. Louisiana pine snakes are closely 

associated with Baird’s pocket gophers 

(Geomys breviceps) and make extensive 

use of their burrow systems for foraging, 

nocturnal and diurnal retreats, escape 

from predators and fire, and hibernation 

sites. Within some of the best remaining 

habitat in their historic range, Louisiana 

pine snakes have not been documented 

in over a decade. Results of Louisiana 

pine snake trapping and radiotelemetry 

surveys suggest that extensive 

population declines and local 

extirpations have occurred during the 

last 50 to 80 years. 

Most of the historical longleaf pine 

habitat of the Louisiana pine snake has 

been destroyed, and the habitat quality 

of that which remains has been 

degraded due to logging, fire 

suppression, roadways, short-rotation 

silviculture, and grazing. Louisiana pine 

snake habitat loss is continuing, albeit at 

a slower rate than in the past. The best 

remaining Louisiana pine snake habitat 

occurs on lands where periodic burning 

has continued. Other factors affecting 

Louisiana pine snakes include low 

fecundity (reproductive output), which 

magnifies other threats and increases 

the likelihood of local extinctions, and 

vehicular mortality, which may 

significantly affect Louisiana pine snake 

population and community structure. 

The Candidate Conservation 

Agreement for the Louisiana pine snake, 

a comprehensive and voluntary 

partnership encompassing all Federal 

lands where pine snake occurrences are 

known, was recently completed in order 

to protect known Louisiana pine snake 

populations and maintain the ecosystem 

upon which it depends. Several private 

landowners with known Louisiana pine 

snake populations are interested in 

joining that partnership or developing a 

similar one. The pro-active partnerships 

to address key management concerns 

and research needs are growing and 

these conservation efforts have reduced 

the magnitude of the threats from high 

to moderate. However, the primary 

threat from habitat loss continues and 

is, therefore, imminent. Thus, based on 

threats of moderate to low magnitude 

that are imminent, we have changed the 

listing priority number from a 5 to an 8. 

Amphibians 

Relict leopard frog (Rana onca)—This 

leopard frog was considered extinct 

since the 1950s, until it was 

rediscovered in two relatively small 

areas in southern Nevada and a spring 

in extreme northwestern Arizona. We 

estimate that the current distribution of 

the species is 10 to 20 percent of its 

historical distribution. Habitat 

conversion to agriculture, water 

diversions, habitat fragmentation such 

as construction of Hoover Dam and 

creation of Lake Mead and Lake Mojave, 

and introduction and establishment of 

nonnative predators and competitors are 

believed to be the primary causes of 

historical population declines and 

reduction in the range and distribution 

of the frog. Currently, the primary 

threats are low numbers of individuals 

and populations, nonnative predators 

and competitors, and the potential for 

water diversion or ground water 

pumping. A conservation agreement and 

strategy completed in 2005 will serve as 

the management plan for the species. As 

prescribed in the agreement and 

strategy, annual work plans will be 

developed and implemented to monitor 

threats and the status of the species as 

well as accomplish conservation actions 

for the species. The magnitude of 

existing threats is moderate, which we 

lowered from the previous 

determination of high magnitude in 

2005. This change in magnitude is 

largely based on successful captiverearing and translocation efforts. These 

threats remain nonimminent since there 

are no known projects or actions that 

would adversely affect frog populations 

or threaten surface water associated 

with known sites occupied by the frog. 

Thus, we changed the listing priority 

number from a 5 to an 11 for this 

species. 

Fishes 

Cumberland darter (Etheostoma 

susanae)—The following information is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This fish species is an 

approximately 3-inch member of the 

family Percidae that is endemic to the 

upper Cumberland River system (above 

Cumberland Falls) in Kentucky and 

Tennessee. Currently, the species is 

restricted to 16 headwater streams in 

Kentucky and 2 streams in Tennessee. 

Within these streams, the Cumberland 

darter inhabits low-velocity, shallow 

riffles and backwater areas of moderateto low-gradient stream reaches with 

stable sand or sandy-gravel substrates. 

The primary threat to the species is 

siltation of instream habitats caused by 

coal mining activities, silvicultural 

practices, road construction, and urban 

development. Because the species is 

limited to only 18 known populations, 

the magnitude of threat for the species 

is high; these populations are isolated 

from one another by poor-quality 

habitat, impoundments, or natural 

barriers. The immediacy of threat is 

nonimminent because (1) Federal and 

State water quality laws have reduced 

water quality and habitat threats to 

some degree, (2) non-point pollution 

threats and modification of reach 

geomorphology and hydrology are 

cumulative and gradual, and (3) 

approximately 40 percent of watersheds 

supporting the species are provided 

habitat and water quality protection 

through Federal ownership (Daniel 

Boone National Forest). Consequently, 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

5 to this species. This represents a 

change in the previous listing priority 

number, from 6 to 5, due to a change in 

taxonomic status for the species, not 

because of a change in threat magnitude 

or imminence. The Cumberland Johnny 

darter, E. nigrum susanae, was elevated 

to specific status (E. susanae, 

Cumberland darter) based on new 

molecular evidence showing that this 

subspecies has distinct mitochondrial 

DNA haplotypes not found in the 

Johnny darter, E. nigrum nigrum. 

Rush darter (Etheostoma 

phytophilum)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

This species is endemic to upland 

portions of the Black Warrior River 

system in Alabama where it occurs in 

shallow headwater streams. This species 

is uncommon and sporadic within its 

range, as it favors shallow, flowing 

water in spring runs and springassociated streams with emergent 

vegetation. Only three disjunct 

populations are known: One in the Clear 

Creek system in Winston County, one in 

spring-fed tributaries of Turkey Creek in 

Jefferson County; and one population in 

Little Cove Creek (Cove Springs) in 

Etowah County. 

The Jefferson County population 

(Turkey Creek), which is located in a 

large metropolitan area, is threatened by 

urbanization and commercialization of 

its habitat. Siltation from bridge, road, 

and sewer line construction has been 

recently documented within the Turkey 

Creek watershed by academic 

researchers and Service biologists. The 

major threat to the Winston County 

population of rush darters is erosion in 

Mill Creek, Doe Branch, and Wildcat 

Branch, and the cumulative increase of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53763 

sediments caused from gravel roads and 

roadside ditches. Within the past year, 

biologists have observed increased 

erosion along roads adjacent to Doe and 

Wildcat Branches which resulted in 

increased siltation within those streams. 

Increased urbanization, road 

maintenance and silviculture practices 

contribute to increased sedimentation in 

the watershed. The major threat to the 

Cove Springs population is 

contamination of the water with 

chlorine. Efforts are underway to 

improve habitat and water quality; 

however, at this time all populations are 

being negatively affected by declining 

water quality. The magnitude of threat 

is high due to the limited number of 

populations. We changed the listing 

priority from a 5 to a 2 based on the 

imminent threat; the threat is imminent 

because water quality is currently 

declining for all populations. 

Clams 

Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio 

spinosa)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. The 

Altamaha spinymussel is a freshwater 

mussel endemic to the Altamaha River 

drainage of southeastern Georgia. The 

historical range was restricted to the 

Coastal Plain portion of the Altamaha 

River and the lower portions of its three 

major tributaries, the Ohoopee, 

Ocmulgee, and Oconee Rivers. The 

species is associated with stable, coarse 

to fine sandy sediments of sandbars and 

sloughs and appears to be restricted to 

swiftly flowing water. The species 

appears to be extirpated from the 

Ohoopee and Oconee Rivers, and its 

numbers are greatly reduced in the 

Ocmulgee and Altamaha Rivers. 

Altamaha spinymussels face severe 

habitat degradation from a number of 

sources. Primary among these are 

threats from sedimentation and 

contaminants within the rivers that the 

Altamaha spinymussel inhabits. A new 

threat of deadhead logging has recently 

emerged. These threats to the Altamaha 

spinymussel are further compounded by 

its limited distribution and the low 

population size identified in recent 

survey efforts. Efforts to identify the 

host fish and expand our understanding 

of the spinymussels’ life cycle have not 

produced results, attempts to investigate 

potential impacts caused by heavy 

metals have not received funding, a 

survey conducted in 2004 in the 

Ocmulgee found no spinymussels, and 

deadhead logging presents an added 

threat. Consequently, we now consider 

the threats to be imminent and have 

changed the listing priority number 

from a 5 to a 2 for this species. 

Insects 

Wekiu bug (Nysius wekiuicola)—The 

wekiu bug belongs to the true bug 

family, Lygaeidae, and is endemic to the 

island of Hawaii. This species only 

occurs on the summit of Mauna Kea and 

feeds upon other insect species which 

are blown to the summit of this large 

volcano. The wekiu bug is primarily 

threatened by the loss of its habitat from 

astronomy development. In 2004 and 

early 2005, surveys were conducted that 

found multiple new locations of the 

wekiu bug on Mauna Kea summit. 

Several of these cinder cones within the 

Mauna Kea Science Reserve, as well as 

two other cinder cones located in the 

State Ice Age Natural Area Reserve, are 

not currently undergoing development 

nor is development planned. With the 

discovery of these new locations, the 

threats, though ongoing, do not occur 

across the entire range of the wekiu bug. 

The immediacy of the threats is 

imminent in some part of the weiku 

bug’s range because ongoing 

development is occurring in the Keck 

Observatory Outrigger telescope project 

area. This development will establish 

six new interferometry telescopes 

around the existing Keck facility. A 

mitigation plan is in place that will 

require a 3:1 replacement of damaged 

habitat. However, the effectiveness of 

this mitigation is untested and 

unknown. Although the threats are 

ongoing in some areas of wekiu bug 

habitat, the recent discoveries of new 

locations of the wekiu bug in areas that 

are not subject to the primary threat of 

astronomy development reduces the 

magnitude of the threat from high to 

moderate. Therefore, we are changing 

the listing priority number for this 

species from a 2 to an 8. 

Crustaceans 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Vetericaris 

chaceorum)—Vetericaris chaceorum is 

an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of 

shrimp belonging to the family, 

Procarididae; it is the only species in its 

genus. This species is endemic to the 

Hawaiian Islands and is only known 

from one population in a single pool on 

the island of Hawaii. There are two 

primary threats to this species. First, 

fish do not naturally occur in the pool 

inhabited by the species, and it would 

be highly vulnerable to predation by any 

intentionally or accidentally introduced 

fish. Anchialine pools have been used to 

discard or hold bait-fish and/or 

aquarium fish. Second, the species is 

vulnerable to habitat loss due to 

degradation by dumping or fill, or 

recreational activities. This activity has 

occurred in the past but this pool now 

lies within lands administered by the 

State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands. There are no conservation 

efforts underway to eliminate the 

potential for any of these threats. The 

magnitude of threats remains high 

because of the devastating effect that 

realization of these threats could have 

on the species because of its restriction 

to a single pool. However, we changed 

the listing priority number for this 

species from a 1 to a 4 because the 

threats are nonimminent: Fish have not 

been introduced into the pool (nor is 

there any reason to believe that 

introduction is imminent) and a site 

visit in early 2005 showed there were no 

signs of dumping or fill. 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Metabetaeus 

lohena)—Metabetaeus lohena is an 

anchialine pool inhabiting species of 

shrimp belonging to the family 

Alpheidae. This species is endemic to 

the Hawaiian Islands and is currently 

known from populations on the islands 

of Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii. The 

primary threats to this species are 

predation by fish (which do not 

naturally occur in the pools inhabited 

by this species) and habitat loss from 

degradation. The pools where this 

species occurs on Maui and Hawaii are 

located within State Natural Area 

Reserves (NAR). Hawaii’s State statutes 

prohibit the collection of the species 

and the disturbance of the pools in State 

NARs. However, enforcement of these 

prohibitions is difficult and the negative 

effects from the introduction of fish are 

extensive and happen quickly. 

Therefore, threats to this species are of 

a high magnitude. However, we now 

consider the threat of predation from 

fish to be nonimminent because no fish 

were observed during the surveys 

conducted in the NARs for this shrimp 

in 2004 and no recent habitat 

degradation has occurred. In addition, 

no nonnative fish were observed during 

several site visits to the Oahu location 

in 2005. Therefore, we changed the 

listing priority number of this species 

from a 2 to a 5. 

Anchialine pool shrimp 

(Palaemonella burnsi)—Palaemonella 

burnsi is an anchialine pool inhabiting 

species of shrimp belonging to the 

family, Palaemonidae. This species is 

endemic to the Hawaiian Islands and is 

currently known from three populations 

on the island of Maui and one 

population on the island of Hawaii. The 

primary threats to this species are 

predation by fish (which do not 

naturally occur in the pools inhabited 

by this species) and habitat loss due to 

degradation. The pools where this 

species occurs on Maui are located 

within a State Natural Area Reserve 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53764 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

(NAR). Hawaii’s State statutes prohibit 

the collection of the species and the 

disturbance of the pools in State NARs. 

On the island of Hawaii, the species 

occurs within a National Park and 

collection and disturbance are also 

prohibited. However, enforcement of 

these prohibitions is difficult, and the 

negative effects from the introduction of 

fish are extensive and happen quickly. 

Therefore, threats to this species are of 

high magnitude. However, we no longer 

consider the threats to be imminent, 

because during a 2004 survey no fish 

were observed in the pools where these 

shrimp occur on Maui or the island of 

Hawaii and there was no evidence of 

recent habitat degradation. Therefore, 

the threats of predation from fish and 

habitat degradation are nonimminent, 

and consequently we changed the 

listing priority number of this species 

from a 2 to a 5. 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris 

hawaiana)—Procaris hawaiana is an 

anchialine pool inhabiting species of 

shrimp belonging to the family, 

Procarididae. This species is endemic to 

the Hawaiian Islands and is currently 

known from two populations on the 

island of Maui and one population on 

the island of Hawaii. The primary 

threats to this species are predation 

from fish (which do not naturally occur 

in the pools inhabited by this species) 

and habitat loss due to degradation. The 

pools where this species occurs on Maui 

are located within a State Natural Area 

Reserve (NAR). Hawaii’s State statutes 

prohibit the collection of the species 

and the disturbance of the pools in State 

NARs. However, enforcement of these 

prohibitions is difficult and the negative 

effects from the introduction of fish are 

extensive and happen quickly. There are 

no conservation efforts underway to 

alleviate the potential for any of these 

threats in the one pool on the island of 

Hawaii. Therefore, threats to this 

species remain at high magnitude. 

However, we no longer consider the 

threats to be imminent because, during 

a 2004 survey, no fish were observed in 

the pools where these shrimp occur on 

Maui or the island of Hawaii. In 

addition, there were no signs of 

dumping or fill on a site visit to the 

location on the island of Hawaii in early 

2005. Therefore, we changed the listing 

priority number of this species from a 2 

to a 5. 

Flowering plants 

Abronia alpina (Ramshaw Meadows 

sand-verbena)—Abronia alpina is a 

small perennial herb, 2.5 to 15.2 

centimeters (1 to 6 inches) across 

forming compact mats with lavenderpink, trumpet-shaped, and generally 

fragment flowers. Abronia alpina is 

known from one main population center 

in Ramshaw Meadow on the Kern 

Plateau of the Sierra Nevada, California 

and from one subpopulation found in 

adjacent Templeton Meadow. The total 

estimated area occupied is 

approximately 6 hectares (15 acres). 

Population estimates from 1985–1994 

range from a low of 69,652 plants in 

1986 to 132,215 plants in 1987. Surveys 

conducted since 1994 indicate that no 

significant changes have occurred in 

population size or location, although, 

the 2003 survey showed population 

numbers to be at the low end of the 

range. The population fluctuates from 

year to year without any clear trends. 

The major threats facing A. alpina 

include habitat disturbance and 

trampling from incidental livestock 

trailing, pack animals, and hikers; 

campsite development; and erosion 

associated with such disturbances. An 

additional threat is encroachment of 

lodgepole pine into areas occupied by 

the species. Lodgepole pine 

encroachment has altered the meadow 

and becoming established within A. 

alpina habitat. Lodgepole pine 

encroachment may alter soil 

characteristics by increasing organic 

matter levels, decreasing porosity, and 

moderating diurnal temperature 

fluctuations thus reducing the 

competitive ability of A. alpina to 

persist in an environment more 

hospitable to other plant species. The 

Ramshaw Meadow ecosystem is subject 

to alteration by lowering of the water 

table due to downcutting of the South 

Fork of the Kern River (SFKR). The 

SFKR flows through Ramshaw Meadow, 

at times coming within 15 meters (50 

feet) of A. alpina habitat, particularly in 

the vicinity of five subpopulations. The 

habitat occupied by A. alpina directly 

borders the meadow system supported 

by the SFKR. Drying out of the meadow 

system could affect A. alpina pollinators 

and/or seed dispersal agents. 

Established hiker, packstock, and cattle 

trails pass through A. alpina 

subpopulations. Two main hiker trails 

pass through Ramshaw Meadow, but 

were rerouted out of A. alpina 

subpopulations where feasible, in 1988 

and 1997. Remnants of cattle trails that 

pass through subpopulations in several 

places receive occasional incidental use 

by horses and sometimes hikers. In 

2001, the U.S. Forest Service 

discontinued grazing on the Templeton 

allotment, which includes Ramshaw 

Meadow, for a period of 10 years. 

Consequently, livestock grazing does 

not currently occur in the two meadow 

areas where the species is found. 

However, the Forest Service could 

change their decision when the 10-year 

period ends and livestock grazing 

within A. alpina habitat may resume. To 

ensure consistency in our interpretation 

of the imminence of threats, we revised 

the listing priority for A. alpina from an 

11 to an 8 to reflect the fact that most 

of these moderate threats are imminent. 

Arabis georgiana (Georgia 

rockcress)—The Georgia rockcress 

grows in a variety of dry situations, 

including shallow soil accumulations 

on rocky bluffs, ecotones of gently 

sloping rock outcrops, and in sandy 

loam along eroding river banks. It is 

occasionally found in adjacent mesic 

woods, but it will not persist in heavily 

shaded conditions. Currently a total of 

18 populations are known from the Gulf 

Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Ridge and 

Valley physiographic provinces of 

Alabama and Georgia. Populations of 

this species typically have a limited 

number of individuals over a small area. 

Habitat degradation, more than 

outright habitat destruction, is the most 

serious threat to this species’ continued 

existence. Disturbance associated with 

timber harvesting, road building, and 

grazing has created favorable conditions 

for the invasion of nonnative weeds, 

especially Japanese honeysuckle 

(Lonicera japonica), in this species’

habitat. Eight populations are currently 

or potentially threatened by the 

presence of nonnative plants. The 

heritage programs in Alabama and 

Georgia have initiated plans for exotic 

control at several populations. The 

magnitude of threats to this species is 

moderate to low due to the number of 

populations (18) across multiple 

counties in two states and the insidious 

nature of the threats. However, since a 

number of the populations are currently 

being impacted by nonnative plants, we 

now consider the threats to be 

imminent. Thus, we changed the listing 

priority number from an 11 to an 8 for 

this species. 

Astralagus toritpes (Sleeping Ute 

milkvetch)—The following information 

is based on information contained in 

our files. Sleeping Ute milkvetch is a 

perennial plant that grows only on the 

Smokey Hills layer of the Mancos Shale 

Formation on the Ute Mountain Ute 

Indian Reservation in Montezuma 

County, Colorado. In 2000, 3,744 plants 

were recorded at 24 locations covering 

500 acres within an overall range of 

64,000 acres. Available information 

from 2000 indicates that the species 

remains stable. Threats from borrow pit 

excavation, off-highway vehicles, 

irrigation canal construction, and a 

prairie dog colony have had minor 

impacts that reduced the range and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53765 

number of plants by small amounts in 

the past and are potential future threats. 

Off-highway vehicle use of the habitat is 

reportedly increasing but we do not 

have direct evidence of this. Oil and gas 

development is active in the general 

area, but we have received no 

information from the tribe to indicate 

whether there is development within 

the habitat for the plants on their land. 

Because the threats are nonimminent, 

we changed the listing priority number 

for Sleeping Ute milkvetch from 8 to 11. 

Bidens campylotheca ssp. waihoiensis 

(Kookoolau)—The following 

information is based on information 

contained in our files. Kookoolau is an 

erect, perennial found in wet AcaciaMetrosideros (koa-ohia) forest on Maui, 

Hawaii. Bidens campylotheca ssp. 

waihoiensis is known from one 

population of 200 individuals. It is 

threatened by cattle, which eat this 

plant, and degrade and destroy habitat. 

The area in which all individuals of this 

subspecies are currently found is fenced 

and cattle have been removed. The 

threats remain of high magnitude, but 

predation, and habitat degradation and 

destruction by feral cattle are no longer 

imminent because they are not currently 

occurring. Therefore, we have changed 

the listing priority number for this 

species from 3 to 6. 

Castilleja christii (Christ’s 

paintbrush)—The following information 

is based on information contained in 

our files. This species of paintbrush is 

found in one population on the summit 

of Mount Harrison in Cassia County, 

Idaho. This endemic species is 

considered a hemiparasite and it grows 

in association with subalpine meadow 

and sagebrush habitats. The population 

found on 85 ha (220 ac) may be large in 

number (greater than 10,000 individual 

plants), but, current population 

estimates are not available. Monitoring 

indicates that reproductive stems per 

plant and plant density have decreased 

significantly since 1995. Although these 

trends were upward between 2004 and 

2005, it is not known if that trend will 

continue. The habitat on Mount 

Harrison is bisected by several roads, 

has been until recently utilized by 

unauthorized livestock, and is subject to 

a high degree of recreational use. 

However, these threats occur seasonally 

during the growing season, in latespring and summer periods, and they 

are currently being controlled by the 

U.S. Forest Service with fencing, rock 

barriers, and interpretative signs. The 

largest threat to the species is from 

nonnative invasive plants, the majority 

of which are smooth brome (Bromus 

inermis). The smooth brome infestation 

was treated in 2003, 2004, and 2005 by 

the U.S. Forest Service. The success of 

treating smooth brome that was present 

in 13.6 percent of the range of C. christii 

in 2005 will not be known immediately, 

although there is a commitment in a 

recently signed Conservation Agreement 

by the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service to continue these 

efforts until they are successful or for 

the next 10 years. The magnitude of the 

threats with these conservation 

measures appears low at this time. 

However, the smooth brome continues 

to threaten the habitat for C. christii 

despite control efforts. Plant monitoring 

transects still contained significant 

densities of smooth brome following the 

eradication efforts in 2005. This threat 

from smooth brome is imminent 

because this threat still persists in levels 

that affect the native plant community 

that provides habitat for C. christii. 

Thus, we changed the listing priority 

number from an 11 to an 8 for this 

species since the threats are imminent. 

Chamaesyce deltoidea pinetorum 

(Pineland sandmat)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

largest population of the pineland 

sandmat, estimated at approximately 

10,000 plants, is located on Long Pine 

Key within Everglades National Park. 

All other populations of the pineland 

sandmat are smaller and occur on 

isolated pine rockland fragments in 

heavily urbanized Miami-Dade County. 

Those populations on private lands are 

at risk from development and habitat 

degradation. Populations on most public 

and private lands in urban Miami-Dade 

County are inherently vulnerable to 

invasion by exotic plants, fire 

suppression or inadequate prescribed 

fire, and limited management. Overall, 

the magnitude of threats to this species 

is moderate since by applying regular 

prescribed fire, the National Park 

Service has kept Long Pine Key’s 

pineland vegetation intact and relatively 

free of exotic pest plants. In addition, 

after a thorough review of the status and 

threats to the pineland sandmat, we 

determined that the threats are nonimminent. Therefore, we changed the 

listing priority number from a 9 to a 12 

for this subspecies. 

Erigeron lemmonii (Lemmon 

fleabane)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received in July of 

1975. The species is known from one 

site in a canyon in the Fort Huachuca 

Military Reservation of southeastern 

Arizona. As of 1991, approximately 400 

plants were known from this site. No 

formal surveys have been done since 

that time, but the population seemed 

stable throughout the 1990s. The threats 

to this species are from catastrophic 

wildfire in the canyon and on-going 

drought conditions. We do not know if 

this species has any adaptations to fire. 

Due to its location on cliffs, we suspect 

that fires that may have occurred at 

more regular intervals and burned at 

low intensities may have had little to no 

effect on this species. It is due only to 

lack of fire and the accumulated fuel 

load that the fire intensity and 

associated heat may be high enough to 

damage or kill plants on adjacent cliffs, 

especially near the ground. On the other 

hand, the plants that are much higher 

on the cliff face would probably not be 

affected. Ft. Huachuca has indicated a 

willingness to develop a conservation 

agreement for this species. We now 

consider the magnitude of threats to be 

moderate rather than high because we 

believe that not all of the population 

would be adversely affected by a 

wildfire or drought. The threats are still 

imminent because the likelihood of a 

fire is high. Therefore, we changed the 

listing priority number from a 5 to an 8 

due to moderate, imminent threats. 

Geranium hanaense (Nohoanu)—This 

species is a decumbent shrub found in 

bogs on Maui, Hawaii. This species is 

known from one population with 300 to 

500 individuals. Geranium hanaense is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. 

However, feral pigs have been fenced 

out of and removed from both bogs in 

which this species currently occurs, and 

a control program has reduced 

nonnative plants in all fenced areas. 

This changes the immediacy of the 

threats form imminent to nonimminent. 

Therefore, we have changed the listing 

priority number for this species from 2 

to 5. 

Geranium kauaiense (Nohoanu)—

Nohoanu is a decumbent subshrub 

found in bogs and bog margins on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from three populations totaling 100 to 

200 individuals in the Alakai Swamp 

area. Geranium kauaiense is threatened 

by pigs that directly prey upon it, 

degrade and destroy habitat, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Feral pigs have been fenced 

out of the three bogs where G. kauaiense 

currently occurs, and nonnative plants 

have been greatly reduced in all three 

fenced bogs, and are not found in the 

immediate vicinity of any G. kauaiense 

individuals. Because these threats are of 

high magnitude but no longer are 

imminent, we have changed the listing 

priority number from 2 to 5. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53766 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Pediocactus peeblesianus var. 

fickeiseniae (Fickeisen plains cactus) ‘‘

The Fickeisen plains cactus is a small 

cactus known from the Gray Mountain 

vicinity to the Arizona strip in Coconino 

and Mohave Counties, Arizona. The 

cactus grows on exposed layers of 

Kaibab limestone on canyon margins 

and well-drained hills in Navajoan 

desert or grassland. In 1999, the Arizona 

Game and Fish Department noted 23 

occurrences for the species, including 

historical ones. The species is located 

on BLM, Forest Service, tribal, and 

possibly State lands. Recent reports 

from the BLM and Navajo Nation 

describe populations of the species as 

being in decline. The main humaninduced threats to this cactus are offroad vehicles and trampling associated 

with livestock grazing. Monitoring data 

has detected mortality associated with 

livestock grazing. Illegal collection of 

this species has been noted in the past, 

but we do not know if it is a continuing 

threat. The populations that have been 

monitored have been affected, in part, 

by the continuing drought. There has 

been very low recruitment and rabbits 

and rodents have consumed adult plants 

since there is reduced forage available 

during these dry conditions. In our prior 

assessments, we concluded that threats 

were not imminent. However, using a 

consistent interpretation of imminence 

related to whether threats are on-going, 

we are correcting our ranking to reflect 

that the threats are imminent. As a 

result, we changed the LPN for this 

plant variety from a 6 to a 3. 

Potentilla basaltica (Soldier Meadow 

cinquefoil or basalt cinquefoil)—Soldier 

Meadow cinquefoil is a low growing, 

rhizomatous, herbaceous perennial that 

is associated with alkali meadows, 

seeps, and occasionally marsh habitats 

bordering perennial thermal springs, 

outflows, and meadow depressions. In 

Humboldt County, Nevada, the species 

is known only from Soldier Meadow, 

which is located at the northern extreme 

of the western arm of the Black Rock 

Desert in the transition zone between 

the Basin and Range Physiographic 

Province and the Columbia Plateau 

Province. In northeastern California, the 

species is known from Ash Valley near 

Ash Creek in Lassen County. In Nevada, 

Soldier Meadow cinquefoil has been 

documented from 10 discrete 

occurrences within an area of about 70 

acres that supports about 130,000 

individuals. The California population 

occupies less than an acre on private 

lands and supports fewer than 1,000 

plants. 

The species and its habitat are 

threatened by increasing recreational 

use in the areas where it occurs as well 

as historic livestock grazing and 

activities associated with the use of 

authorized and unauthorized roads. 

Conservation measures implemented 

recently by the Bureau of Land 

Management include the installation of 

fencing to exclude livestock wild 

horses, burros and other large mammals; 

closing of access roads to spring, 

riparian, and wetland areas and the 

limiting of vehicles to designated routes; 

the establishment of a designated 

campground away from the habitats of 

sensitive species; the installation of 

educational signage and, an increased 

staff presence, including law 

enforcement and a volunteer site 

steward during the six-month period of 

peak visitor use. These conservation 

measures have reduced the magnitude 

of threat to the species from high to 

moderate; all remaining threats are 

nonimminent and involve long-term 

changes to the habitat for the species 

resulting from past impacts. In 

consideration of these conservation 

measures, we lowered the listing 

priority number from 5 to 11. 

Other Taxonomic Changes in 

Candidates 

Flowering Plants 

Physaria tuplashensis, (White Bluffs 

bladder-pod)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

This species is in the Cruciferae 

(Mustard family). Historically and 

currently, White Bluffs bladder-pod has 

only been known from a single 

population that occurs along the White 

Bluffs of the Columbia River in Franklin 

County, Washington. Physaria 

tuplashensis was originally described as 

Lesquerella tuplashensis in 1996, which 

is the name we have used for it in prior 

CNORs. In 2002, there was a suggestion 

that the Lesquerella and Physaria genera 

should be united as Physaria, and that 

L. tuplashensis should be reduced to P. 

douglasii subspecies tuplashensis. A 

recent study (2005) recommended 

accepting the new genus name of 

Physaria and, supported by 

metamorphic work, proposed retaining 

full species status for the taxon, and a 

new nomenclature: Physaria 

tuplashensis. We recognize this new 

nomenclature in this notice. There are 

no changes in the magnitude or 

imminence of threats to the taxon, so we 

continue to assign a listing priority 

number of 5 to this species. 

Candidate Removals 

As summarized below, we have 

evaluated the threats to the following 10 

species and considered factors that, 

individually and in combination, 

presently or potentially could pose a 

risk to these species and their habitat. 

After a review of the best available 

scientific and commercial data, we 

conclude that listing these 10 species 

under the Endangered Species Act is not 

warranted because the species are not 

likely to become endangered species 

within the foreseeable future throughout 

all or a significant portion of their range. 

Therefore, we find that proposing a rule 

to list these species is not warranted, 

and we no longer consider them to be 

candidate species for listing. We will 

continue to monitor the status of these 

species, and to accept additional 

information and comments concerning 

this finding. We will reconsider this 

determination in the event that new 

information indicates that the threats to 

these species are of a considerably 

greater magnitude or imminence than 

identified through assessments of 

information in our files, as summarized 

here. The summary below also notes 

four other species for which we 

published separate findings removing 

them from candidate status since the 

most recent CNOR. 

Birds 

Many-colored fruit-dove (Ptilinopus 

perousii perousii)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. P. p. perousii, is 

found in American Samoa on the four 

main islands of Tutuila, Olosega, Ofu, 

and Tau, and in Independent Samoa. It 

is primarily associated with mature 

rainforest habitat. The many-colored 

fruit-dove is highly mobile and may 

travel large distances, presumably in 

search of fruiting banyans (Ficus prolixa 

and F. obliqua). The American Samoa 

population of P. p. perousii is the only 

population of this subspecies under U.S. 

jurisdiction. The primary threats we 

recognized in the past are its small 

population size, stochastic natural 

disturbances such as hurricanes, the 

accidental introduction of new 

pathogens or parasites, and possibly 

predation by introduced mammalian 

predators. We previously assigned a 

listing priority number of 12 to this 

taxon, reflecting threats that we 

determined were of low magnitude and 

not imminent. Five years of monitoring 

documented an increase in the relative 

abundance of the subspecies prior to 

Hurricane Heta in January of 2004 and 

Hurricane Olaf in February 2005. The 

upward trend has been stalled by these 

severe storms, but continued monitoring 

should indicate whether (as we expect) 

effects of the 2004 and 2005 hurricanes 

have caused a temporary, but natural, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53767 

interruption in the trend of increase, or 

whether hurricane effects have reversed 

this trend. Avian malaria, once thought 

to possibly pose a threat to this 

subspecies, likely is not pathogenic in 

Samoa. The stable distribution of the 

subspecies and recent documented 

increase in relative abundance in 

American Samoa suggest that the threats 

summarized above currently are not 

having a detrimental effect on the 

subspecies’ overall population, and it is 

unlikely to become endangered within 

the foreseeable future. Therefore, listing 

is not warranted. 

Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus 

minimus)—See separate revised 12- 

month petition finding published in the 

Federal Register on April 18, 2006 (71 

FR 19953). 

Reptiles 

Cagle’s map turtle (Graptemys 

caglei)—The following information is 

based on information contained in our 

files, including information from the 

petition received April 26, 1991. Cagle’s 

map turtle occurs in scattered sites in 

seven counties in Texas on the 

Guadalupe, San Marcos, and Blanco 

Rivers. We previously identified loss 

and degradation of riverine habitat from 

large and small impoundments (dams or 

reservoirs) as the primary threat to the 

Cagle’s map turtle. One effect of 

impoundment is the loss of riffle and 

riffle/pool transition areas used by 

males for foraging. Depending on its 

size, a dam itself may be a partial or 

complete barrier to Cagle’s map turtle 

movement and could fragment 

populations. In the past, construction of 

smaller impoundments and human 

activities on the rivers known to be 

occupied by the Cagle’s map turtle have 

likely eliminated or reduced foraging 

and basking habitats. Currently, there 

are no firm plans for reservoirs in the 

Guadalupe-San Antonio River System. 

Cagle’s map turtle is also vulnerable to 

overcollecting and target shooting but 

actions taken by Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department (TPWD) have 

increased protection of the species 

against collecting and shooting. Cagle’s 

map turtle was listed as threatened by 

TPWD, effective November 16, 2000, 

and TPWD regulations prohibit the 

taking, possession, transportation, or 

sale of any of the animal species 

designated by state law as endangered 

or threatened without the issuance of a 

permit. Estimates of population 

numbers of the species in the 

Guadalupe and San Marcos Rivers in 

1991 and 2001 indicates an overall 

population increase, although estimated 

populations at some sites declined. 

Because of stable population size, 

increased protection, and no foreseeable 

threats from reservoir construction, we 

find that listing Cagle’s map turtle is not 

warranted. 

Amphibians 

Boreal toad (Southern Rocky 

Mountains DPS) (Bufo boreas boreas)—

see separate revised 12-month petition 

finding published in the Federal 

Register on September 29, 2005 (70 FR 

56880). 

Insects 

Lesser Adams Cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus cataryctos 

Krekeler) and Greater Adams Cave 

beetle (P. pholeter Krekeler)—see 

Federal Register notice published on 

December 8, 2005 (70 FR 72973). 

Po’olanui gall fly (Phaeogramma 

sp.)—Because there is no published 

name or description for this fly, this 

taxa is not considered valid and does 

not meet the Act’s definition of a 

species and is not eligible for listing. 

Therefore, we find that listing is not 

warranted. 

Crustaceans 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Antecaridina 

lauensis)—This species has a disjunct, 

Indo-Pacific distribution. It has been 

reported from the Fiji Islands, 

Mozambique Channel (Madagascar), the 

Red Sea-Dahlak, Ryukyu and Daito 

Islands (Japan), the Solomon Islands 

and the Hawaiian Islands. In Hawaii, A. 

lauensis is known from two pool groups 

on Maui (Ahihi-Kinau State Natural 

Area Reserve) and two pools on the 

southern end of the island of Hawaii 

(Lua o Palahemo, and one on private 

land). Like other anchialine pool shrimp 

species, it is believed that this species 

inhabits an extensive network of waterfilled interstitial spaces (cracks and 

crevices) leading to and from the actual 

pool, and this trait has precluded 

researchers from obtaining population 

size estimates during surveys for the 

species. In Lua o Palahemo on the 

island of Hawaii, A. lauensis co-occurs 

with two other candidate species of 

anchialine pool shrimp, Procaris 

hawaiana and Vetericaris chaceorum, 

and with Calliasmata pholidota (see 

below). 

Although we have information on the 

threats to the population in Hawaii, 

population numbers and threats to the 

species where it occurs elsewhere in the 

world are unknown. We find that listing 

is not warranted because there is 

insufficient information on the species’

status throughout its range to determine 

whether it warrants protection under 

the Act. We are unable to consider 

listing the Hawaii population as a 

distinct population segment since this 

animal is not a vertebrate. 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Calliasmata 

pholidota) ‘‘ This species has a disjunct, 

Indo-Pacific distribution. It has been 

reported from the Red Sea-Sinai 

Peninsula, Funafuti Atoll (Ellice 

Islands), and the Hawaiian Islands of 

Maui and Hawaii. On the island of 

Hawaii, C. pholidota occurs in one pool 

at Ka Lae (South Point) at Lua o 

Palahemo and in one pool group in the 

Manuka Natural Area Reserve (NAR). 

On Maui, C. pholidota is found in four 

pool groups in the Ahihi-Kinau NAR. At 

Lua o Palahemo, C. pholidota co-occurs 

with two other candidate species of 

anchialine pool shrimp, Procaris 

hawaiana and Vetericaris chaceorum, 

and with Antecaridina lauensis (see 

above). Like other anchialine pool 

shrimp species, it is believed that this 

species inhabits an extensive network of 

water-filled interstitial spaces (cracks 

and crevices) leading to and from the 

actual pool, and this trait has precluded 

researchers from obtaining more 

accurate population size estimates 

during surveys for the species. 

Worldwide species status information, 

including population numbers and 

threats to the species outside the U.S. is 

unknown. We find that listing is not 

warranted because there is insufficient 

information on the species status 

throughout its range to determine 

whether this species warrants protection 

under the Act. We are unable to 

consider listing the Hawaii population 

as a distinct population segment since 

this animal is not a vertebrate. 

Flowering Plants 

Aliciella cespitosa (= Gilia caespitosa) 

(wonderland alice-flower or Rabbit 

Valley gilia)—The wonderland aliceflower (also known as Rabbit Valley 

gilia) is a plant within the Phlox family 

found in Wayne County, Utah. The 

species is primarily associated with 

sand-filled pockets and crevices of 

Navajo Sandstone on slopes having 

mechanical weathering or erosion of 

rock in pinyon-juniper/mountain 

mahogany vegetation communities 

between 5,200 and 9,000 feet in 

elevation. 

This species occurs in more sites and 

is much more abundant than was 

initially thought. In 1996 we knew of 6 

population areas with an estimated total 

of 5,000 plants. However, increased 

surveys from 2000 to 2003 identified 50 

known sites at the 6 population areas, 

with an estimated 25,350 individual 

plants. For the past several years our 

assessments of this species concluded 

that threats were moderate to low and 

were nonimminent, and we assigned it 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53768 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

a listing priority number of 11. We 

identified potential collection of plants 

and seeds as a significant threat. 

However, we have no evidence that 

collection is occurring, or if it is 

occurring that it is impacting the overall 

status of the species. We also have no 

information to suggest that collection in 

the future is likely to put populations at 

risk at any of the sites currently known 

to be occupied. Other threats we 

identified included impacts associated 

with recreational trails, off-road vehicle 

use, livestock trampling, and low 

natural recruitment. Although some of 

these threats are ongoing, they are 

localized, and appear to have little 

impact. The majority of sites are not 

easily accessible, and the factors that 

currently or potential could impact 

individuals have not been shown to 

affect the species rangewide, nor do we 

expect that to become the case. In 

addition, a Conservation Agreement and 

Strategy, signed in 1996 and currently 

being updated, promotes continued 

cooperation among the agencies and 

helps to direct a variety of conservation 

actions, including: Inventory remaining 

suitable habitats; identify research 

needs and conduct studies; refine 

monitoring protocols; continue 

monitoring; implement land 

management policies and regulations for 

protection of Navajo endemic plant 

species; and continue to pursue public 

awareness opportunities. Based on our 

updated assessment, we find that listing 

this species is not warranted. 

Astragalus equisolensis (horseshoe 

milkvetch)—Horseshoe milkvetch is a 

plant in the pea family and is found on 

the Duchesne River Formation in Uintah 

county, Utah and Mesa county, 

Colorado. It is associated with mixed 

desert and salt desert shrub vegetation 

communities that are generally 

dominated by sagebrush, shadscale and 

horsebrush. Surveys in 1992 estimated 

the population at 10,000 in Utah and 

there is no recent information indicating 

it has declined; the Colorado population 

is a recent discovery. The only potential 

threat of substance is from future energy 

development, but that does not threaten 

the species through most of its range. 

Based on available information, 

including the recent discovery of the 

species in Colorado and an apparent 

low level of potential threat, we do not 

have sufficient information to justify a 

determination that the species should be 

proposed for listing. Therefore, we find 

that listing this species is not warranted. 

Castilleja aquariensis (Aquarius 

paintbrush)—The Aquarius paintbrush 

is a plant in the figwort family found 

only on the Aquarius plateau of south 

central Utah. Habitat characteristics are 

meadow openings and open spruce-fir 

stands. A recent survey conducted in 

2004 and 2005 counted 74,100 

individuals, a much higher number than 

earlier estimates. Factors affecting the 

species include off-road vehicle use; 

wildlife and livestock grazing; predation 

by pocket gophers, aphids, crickets and 

grasshoppers; and low precipitation. 

However, we do not have any evidence 

that these factors are a significant threat 

to population levels. Therefore, we find 

that listing the species is not warranted. 

Paronychia congesta (Bushy whitlowwort)—Bushy whitlow-wort is endemic 

to Jim Hogg County, Texas, known from 

only two populations that occur within 

the drainage of two tributaries of the 

Arroyo Grande. Historically, this species 

was documented only from the type 

locality with 2,000 individual plants 

counted. A second small population of 

100 individuals was found two miles 

north-northeast of the type locality in 

1987. The two known populations occur 

on small areas that cover approximately 

5 and 15 acres. Little quantitative data 

have been collected for this species, 

therefore we do not know whether 

populations have expanded or 

contracted. The sparse information that 

is available suggests the current range 

and distribution of the species has not 

changed from the historical description. 

The types of factors believed to 

potentially adversely affect this species 

include destruction, modification, and 

fragmentation of the habitat, as well as 

eradication of individual plants. 

However, conversion of rangeland to 

residential development is not 

considered a significant threat since this 

part of southern Texas is not undergoing 

rapid residential or industrial 

development. The extent of alteration of 

the whitlow-wort’s habitat via 

conversion of native brush to nonnative 

forage grasses is unknown since all of its 

habitat is privately owned and not 

accessible. Other potential threats 

include displacement or destruction of 

individual plants by construction 

activities associated with highways, 

pipeline installation, oil and gas 

exploration, well-pad construction and 

right-of-way maintenance. However, we 

do not have any information on the 

likely implementation of these potential 

activities and no ongoing imminent 

threats have been identified for this 

species. We have determined that listing 

is not warranted because insufficient 

information exists on biological 

vulnerability and threats to support a 

proposal to list this species. 

Sidalcea hickmanii parishii (Parish’s 

checkerbloom)—Parish’s checkerbloom 

is an herbaceous perennial plant in the 

mallow family (Malvaceae), with 

multiple stems emerging annually from 

a woody root crown. It most commonly 

appears following fires, apparently 

having evolved to rapidly take 

advantage of unvegetated openings in 

forest or chaparral. Most historic 

collections, and all currently known 

populations, are known from open areas 

along roads, trails, firebreaks, small 

landslides, or in recently burned areas. 

All known populations are on USDA 

Forest Service lands. Parish’s 

checkerbloom has been collected from 

San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, and San 

Luis Obispo Counties, California. Its 

distribution in San Bernardino County 

appears to be particularly restricted, 

although the vagueness of historical 

location information and the plant’s 

emergence primarily following fire 

make it difficult to accurately assess its 

distribution. The discovery of a new, 

albeit small, population found on the 

desert-facing slopes of the San 

Bernardino Mountains in 2000 suggests 

that habitat not previously considered 

suitable may in fact be so. 

Threats identified for this taxon fall 

into two groups—those that negatively 

affect individual or small groups of 

plants (the ‘‘expressed’’ portions of what 

may be larger populations in 

seedbanks), and those that have the 

potential to substantially alter a large 

area of surrounding habitat or damage 

any unexpressed seedbanks that may 

occur in surrounding soils. Activities in 

the former group include livestock 

grazing on individual plants along roads 

and grading of existing roads. Those in 

the later group include altered fire 

regimes (e.g. aggressive fire suppression, 

prescribed burning in winter or spring), 

post-fire livestock grazing, development 

or expansion of roads and facilities (e.g. 

recreational, military communication 

facilities, or development of private 

inholdings), and invasion by nonnative 

species. The southern portion of this 

taxon’s range, in San Bernardino 

County, is most vulnerable to these 

activities due to its more restricted 

distribution there, its closer proximity 

to human population centers, and the 

area’s greater recreational use. 

Review of recent information 

indicates the number of populations 

located is greater and the known range 

of the taxon is larger than we previously 

understood. Also, our conclusion 

regarding the magnitude and the 

immediacy of the threats has shifted 

with the additional information we have 

about the species. We considered the 

magnitude of threats to individuals, as 

well as habitat with unexpressed 

seedbank, was greater when we only 

knew of 3 small extant locations for the 

species as compared to now, when we 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53769 

are aware of 5 extant locations, 

including 1 with a large population. We 

also considered the immediacy of the 

threats to be greater when we only knew 

of 3 small extant locations for the 

species. For some human-caused 

activities, such as road grading and 

construction of fire breaks, we have had 

the opportunity to observe that these 

activities most likely caused the 

expression of a portion of the seedbank, 

in a sense providing some of the same 

habitat conditions that are provided by 

wildfire (removal of litter, scarification 

of seed). This suggests that at least 

certain human activities can be altered 

(such as in timing of grading) so that 

they will not negatively impact the 

species. Although there is great 

uncertainty regarding how and to what 

extent future wildfires may release the 

seedbank of this species, we do not 

believe that the threat from lack of fires 

or any human-caused activities are 

imminent (as compared to a known 

threat from a planned activity with a 

definite timeline, such as a housing 

development) or substantial. Therefore, 

we find that listing is not warranted. 

Petition Findings 

The Act provides two mechanisms for 

considering species for listing. One 

method allows the Secretary, on his 

own initiative, to identify species for 

listing under the standards of section 

4(a)(1). We implement this through the 

candidate program, discussed above. 

The second method for listing a species 

provides a mechanism for the public to 

petition us to add a species to the Lists. 

Under section 4(b)(3)(A), when we 

receive such a petition, we must 

determine within 90 days, to the 

maximum extent practicable, whether 

the petition presents substantial 

information that listing may be 

warranted (a ‘‘90-day finding’’). If we 

make a positive 90-day finding, we must 

promptly commence a status review of 

the species under section 4(b)(3)(A); we 

must then make and publish one of 

three possible findings within 12 

months of the receipt of the petition (a 

‘‘12-month finding’’): 

1. The petitioned action is not 

warranted; 

2. The petitioned action is warranted 

(in which case we are required to 

promptly publish a proposed regulation 

to implement the petitioned action; 

once we publish a proposed rule for a 

species, section 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) 

govern further procedures regardless of 

whether we issued the proposal in 

response to a petition); or 

3. The petitioned action is warranted 

but that (a) the immediate proposal of a 

regulation and final promulgation of 

regulation implementing the petitioned 

action is precluded by pending 

proposals, and (b) expeditious progress 

is being made to add qualified species 

to the lists of endangered or threatened 

species. (We refer to this as a 

‘‘warranted-but-precluded finding.’’) 

Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires 

that when we make a warranted-butprecluded finding on a petition, we are 

to treat such a petition as one that is 

resubmitted on the date of such a 

finding. Thus, we are required to 

publish new 12-month findings on these 

‘‘resubmitted’’ petitions on an annual 

basis. 

On December 5, 1996, we made a final 

decision to redefine ‘‘candidate species’’

to mean those species for which the 

Service has on file sufficient 

information on biological vulnerability 

and threat(s) to support issuance of a 

proposed rule to list, but for which 

issuance of the proposed rule is 

precluded (61 FR 64481, December 6, 

1996). Therefore, the standard for 

making a species a candidate through 

our own initiative is identical to the 

standard for making a warranted-butprecluded 12-month petition finding on 

a petition to list, and we add all 

petitioned species for which we have 

made a warranted-but-precluded 12- 

month finding to the candidate list. 

This publication also provides notice 

of substantial 90-day findings and the 

warranted-but-precluded 12-month 

findings pursuant to section 4(b)(3) for 

candidate species listed on Table 1 that 

we identified on our own initiative, and 

that subsequently have been the subject 

of a petition to list. Even though all 

candidate species identified through our 

own initiative already have received the 

equivalent of substantial 90-day and 

warranted-but-precluded 12-month 

findings, we reviewed the status of the 

newly petitioned candidate species and 

through this CNOR are publishing 

specific section 4(b)(3) findings (i.e., 

substantial 90-day and warranted-butprecluded 12-month findings) in 

response to the petitions to list these 

candidate species. We publish these 

findings as part of the first CNOR 

following receipt of the petition. 

Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the 

Act, once a petition is filed regarding a 

candidate species, we must make a 12- 

month petition finding in compliance 

with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act at least 

once a year, until we publish a proposal 

to list the species or make a final notwarranted finding. We make this annual 

finding for petitioned candidate species 

through the CNOR. 

Section 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the Act 

requires us to ‘‘implement a system to 

monitor effectively the status of all 

species’’ for which we have made a 

warranted-but-precluded 12-month 

finding, and to ‘‘make prompt use of the 

[emergency listing] authority [under 

section 4(b)(7)] to prevent a significant 

risk to the well being of any such 

species.’’ The CNOR plays a crucial role 

in the monitoring system that we have 

implemented for all candidate species 

by providing notice that we are actively 

seeking information regarding the status 

of those species. We review all new 

information on candidate species as it 

becomes available, prepare an annual 

species assessment form that reflects 

monitoring results and other new 

information, and identify any species 

for which emergency listing may be 

appropriate. If we determine that 

emergency listing is appropriate for any 

candidate, whether it was identified 

through our own initiative or through 

the petition process, we will make 

prompt use of the emergency listing 

authority under section 4(b)(7). We have 

been reviewing and will continue to 

review, at least annually, the status of 

every candidate whether or not we have 

received a petition to list it. Thus, the 

CNOR and accompanying species 

assessment forms also constitute the 

Service’s annual finding on the status of 

petitioned species pursuant to section 

4(b)(3)(C)(i). 

On June 20, 2001, the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

held that the 1999 CNOR (64 FR 57534, 

October 25, 1999) did not demonstrate 

that we fulfilled the second component 

of the warranted-but-precluded 12- 

month petition findings for the Gila 

chub and Chiracahua leopard frog 

(Center for Biological Diversity v. 

Norton, 254 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 2001)). 

The court found that the one-line 

designation in the table of candidates in 

the 1999 CNOR, with no further 

explanation, did not satisfy section 

4(b)(3)(B)(iii)’s requirement that the 

Service publish a finding ‘‘together with 

a description and evaluation of the 

reasons and data on which the finding 

is based.’’ The court suggested that this 

one-line statement of candidate status 

also precluded meaningful judicial 

review. 

On June 21, 2004, the United States 

District Court for Oregon agreed that we 

can use the CNOR as a vehicle for 

making petition findings and that our 

reasoning for why listing is precluded 

does not need to be based on an 

assessment at a regional level (as 

opposed to a national level) (Center for 

Biological Diversity v. Norton Civ. No. 

03–1111–AA (D. Or.)). However, this 

court found that our discussion on why 

listing the candidate species were 

precluded by other actions lacked 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53770 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

specificity; in the list of species that 

were the subject of listing actions that 

precluded us from proposing to list 

candidate species, we did not state the 

specific action at issue for each species 

in the list and we did not indicate 

which actions were court-ordered. 

On June 22, 2004, in a similar case, 

the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of California also 

concluded that our determination of 

preclusion may appropriately be based 

on a national analysis (Center for 

Biological Diversity v. Norton No. CV S–

03–1758 GEB/DAD (E.D. Cal.)). This 

court also found that the Act’s 

imperative that listing decisions be 

based solely on science applies only to 

the determination about whether listing 

is warranted, not the question of when 

listing is precluded. 

On March 24, 2005, the United States 

District Court for the District of 

Columbia held that we may not consider 

critical habitat activities in justifying 

our inability to list candidate species, 

requiring that we justify both our 

preclusion findings and our 

demonstration of expeditious progress 

by reference to listing proceedings for 

unlisted species (California Native Plant 

Society v. Norton, Civ. No. 03–1540 (JR) 

(D.D.C.)). The court further found that 

we must adequately itemize priority 

listings, explain why certain species are 

of high priority, and explain why 

actions on these high-priority species 

preclude listing species of lower 

priority. The court approved our 

reliance on national rather than regional 

priorities and workload in establishing 

preclusion and approved our basic 

explanation that listing candidate 

species may be precluded by statutorily 

mandated deadlines, court-ordered 

actions, higher-priority listing activities, 

and a limited budget. 

We drafted the previous CNOR to 

address the concerns of these courts and 

continue to incorporate those changes 

that addressed the courts’ concerns in 

this CNOR. We include a description of 

the reasons why the listing of every 

petitioned candidate species is both 

warranted and precluded at this time. 

We make our determinations of 

preclusion on a nationwide basis to 

ensure that the species most in need of 

listing will be addressed first and also 

because we allocate our listing budget 

on a nationwide basis (see below). 

Regional priorities can also be discerned 

from Table 1, which includes the lead 

region and the listing priority number 

for each species. Our preclusion 

determinations are further based upon 

our budget for listing activities for 

unlisted species and we explain the 

priority system and why the work we 

have accomplished does preclude action 

on listing candidate species. 

Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(ii) and 

the Administrative Procedure Act (5 

U.S.C. 206), any party with standing 

may challenge the merits of any notwarranted or warranted-but-precluded 

petition finding incorporated in this 

CNOR. The analysis included herein, 

together with the administrative record 

for the decision at issue (particularly the 

supporting species assessment form), 

will provide an adequate basis for a 

court to review the petition finding. 

Nothing in this document or any of 

our policies should be construed as in 

any way modifying the Act’s 

requirement that we make a resubmitted 

12-month petition finding for each 

petitioned candidate within one year of 

the date of publication of this CNOR. If 

we fail to make any such finding on a 

timely basis, whether through 

publication of a new CNOR or some 

other form of notice, any party with 

standing may seek judicial review. 

In this CNOR, we are addressing the 

concerns of the courts by adding more 

specific information into our discussion 

on preclusion (see below). In preparing 

this CNOR, we reviewed the current 

status of and threats to the 245 

candidates and 5 listed species for 

which we have received a petition and 

for which we have found listing or 

reclassification from threatened to 

endangered to be warranted-butprecluded. We find that the immediate 

issuance of a proposed rule and timely 

promulgation of a final rule for each of 

these species has been, for the preceding 

months, and continues to be, precluded 

by higher priority listing actions. 

Additional information that is the basis 

for this finding is found in the species 

assessments and our administrative 

record for each species. 

This is the first 12-month petition 

finding for two species, the New 

England cottontail and the red knot, that 

were petitioned prior to this CNOR but 

for which we have not already 

published a separate warranted-butprecluded 12-month finding. We 

previously published a separate 

substantial 90-day petition finding for 

the New England cottontail (69 FR 

39395). 

Our review included updating the 

status of and threats to petitioned 

candidate or listed species for which we 

published findings, pursuant to section 

4(b)(3)(B), in the previous CNOR. We 

have incorporated new information we 

gathered since the prior finding and, as 

a result of this review, we are making 

continued warranted-but-precluded 12- 

month findings on the petitions for 

these species. 

We have identified the candidate 

species for which we received petitions 

by the code ‘‘C*’’ in the category 

column on the left side of Table 1. As 

discussed above, the immediate 

publication of proposed rules to list 

these species was precluded by our 

work on higher priority listing actions, 

listed below, during the period from 

May 2, 2005, through August 23, 2006. 

We will continue to monitor the status 

of all candidate species, including 

petitioned species, as new information 

becomes available. This review will 

determine if a change in status is 

warranted, including the need to 

emergency-list a species under section 

4(b)(7) of the Act. 

In addition to identifying petitioned 

candidate species in Table 1 below, we 

also present brief summaries of why 

these particular candidates warrant 

listing. More complete information, 

including references, is found in the 

species assessment forms. You may 

obtain a copy of these forms from the 

Regional Office having the lead for the 

species, or from the Fish and Wildlife 

Service’s Internet Web site: http:// 

endangered.fws.gov/. As described 

above, under section 4 of the Act we 

may identify and propose species for 

listing based on the factors identified in 

section 4(a)(1), and section 4 also 

provides a mechanism for the public to 

petition us to add a species to the lists 

of species determined to be threatened 

species or endangered species under the 

Act. Below we describe the actions that 

continue to preclude the immediate 

proposal of a regulation and final 

promulgation of a regulation 

implementing the petitioned action, and 

we describe the expeditious progress we 

are making to add qualified species to 

the lists of endangered or threatened 

species. 

Preclusion and Expeditious Progress 

Preclusion is a function of the listing 

priority of a species in relation to the 

resources that are available and 

competing demands for those resources. 

(As described above in the Summary, 

the listing priority of a species is 

represented by the listing priority 

number we assign to it.) Thus, in any 

given fiscal year (FY), multiple factors 

dictate whether it will be possible to 

undertake work on a proposed listing 

regulation or whether promulgation of 

such a proposal is warranted but 

precluded by higher priority listing 

actions. 

The resources available for listing 

actions are determined through the 

annual appropriations process, and we 

cannot spend more than is appropriated 

for the Listing Program without 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53771 

violating the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 

U.S.C. 1341 (a)(1)(A)). The number of 

listing actions that we can undertake in 

a given year also is influenced by the 

complexity of those listing actions, i.e., 

more complex actions generally are 

more costly. For example, for FY 2005, 

the costs (excluding publication costs) 

for conducting a 12-month finding, 

without a proposed rule, ranged from 

approximately $11,000 for one species 

with a restricted range and involving a 

relatively uncomplicated analysis, to 

$305,000 for another species that was 

wide-ranging and involved a complex 

analysis. 

In FY 1998 and for each fiscal year 

since then, Congress placed a statutory 

cap on funds which may be expended 

for listing and critical habitat actions 

(i.e., the Listing Program), equal to the 

amount expressly appropriated for that 

purpose in that fiscal year. This cap was 

designed to prevent funds appropriated 

for other ESA functions, or for other 

Service programs, from being used for 

listing or critical habitat actions (see 

House Report 105–163, 105th Congress, 

1st Session, July 1, 1997). 

Beginning in FY 2002, Congress also 

put in place the critical habitat 

‘‘subcap,’’ which put an upper limit on 

the Listing Program funds that could be 

spent on work related to critical habitat 

designations for already listed species. 

Recognizing that designation of critical 

habitat for species already listed would 

consume most of the overall Listing 

Program appropriation, Congress put the 

subcap in place to ensure that some 

funds would be available to make other 

listing determinations: ‘‘The critical 

habitat designation subcap will ensure 

that some funding is available to 

address other listing activities’’ (H.R. 

Rep. No. 103, 107th Cong., 1st Sess. 

2001 at 30, 2001 WL 695998). Because 

the Service has had to use virtually the 

entire critical habitat subcap to address 

court-mandated designations of critical 

habitat, Congress and the Courts have in 

effect determined, through the listing 

cap, the critical habitat subcap, and the 

amount of funds needed to address 

court-mandated critical habitat 

designations, the amount available for 

other listing activities. It is this amount 

(i.e., the funds in the listing cap other 

than those needed to address courtmandated critical habitat for already 

listed species) that is used in the 

determination here of preclusion and 

expeditious progress. 

Congress also recognized that the 

availability of resources was the key 

element in deciding whether we would 

issue a listing proposal or make a 

‘‘warranted but precluded’’ finding for a 

given species. The Conference Report 

accompanying Public Law 97–304, 

which established the current statutory 

deadlines and the warranted-butprecluded finding, states (in a 

discussion on 90-day petition findings 

that by its own terms also covers 12- 

month findings) that the deadlines were 

‘‘not intended to allow the Secretary to 

delay commencing the rulemaking 

process for any reason other than that 

the existence of pending or imminent 

proposals to list species subject to a 

greater degree of threat would make 

allocation of resources to such a petition 

[i.e., for a lower-ranking species] 

unwise.’’ Therefore, in fiscal year 2005, 

the outer parameter within which 

‘‘expeditious progress’’ must be 

measured is that amount of progress that 

could be achieved by spending $5.6 

million, which included $4.6 million 

available in the Listing Program 

appropriation not within the critical 

habitat subcap plus approximately $1.0 

million from the critical habitat subcap 

that was not needed to comply with 

court orders or court-approved 

settlement agreements for critical 

habitat designations. The rest of the 

critical habitat subcap funds were used 

to comply with court orders or courtapproved settlement agreements for 

designating critical habitat for 

previously listed species, and thus were 

not available for other listing activities. 

Our process is to make our 

determinations of preclusion on a 

nationwide basis to ensure that the 

species most in need of listing will be 

addressed first and also because we 

allocate our listing budget on a 

nationwide basis. However, through 

court orders and court-approved 

settlements, federal district courts have 

mandated that we must complete 

certain listing activities with respect to 

specified species and have established 

the schedules by which we must 

complete those activities. The species 

involved in these court-mandated listing 

activities are not always those that we 

have identified as being most in need of 

listing. A large majority of the 

appropriation available for new listings 

of species (i.e. $5.6 million) was 

consumed by such court-mandated 

listing activities in FY 2005, and by 

ordering or sanctioning these actions the 

courts essentially determined that these 

were the highest priority actions to be 

undertaken with available funding. 

Copies of the court orders and 

settlement agreements referred to below 

are available from the Service and are 

part of the administrative record for 

these resubmitted petition findings. 

On December 8, 2004, the President 

signed the 2005 Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 

108–447), which, as a result of the 

subcap and subsequent rescissions, in 

effect included $4,643,000 for listing 

activities not related to critical habitat 

designations for species that already are 

listed. However, as discussed above, a 

relatively small portion of the critical 

habitat subcap was used for listing 

actions resulting in a total of $5,604,178 

being expended for listing actions. This 

appropriation was fully allocated to 

fund the following categories of actions 

in the Listing Program: Essential 

litigation-related, and administrativeand program-management functions; 

compliance with court orders and courtapproved settlement agreements 

requiring that petition findings or listing 

determinations be completed by a 

specific date; section 4 listing actions 

with absolute statutory deadlines; and a 

few high-priority listing actions. While 

more funds were available in FY 2005 

than in previous years to work on listing 

actions that were not the subject of 

court-orders or court-approved 

settlement agreements, based on the 

available funds and their allocation for 

these purposes, only limited FY 2005 

funds were available for work on 

proposed listing determinations for the 

following candidate species included in 

Table 1 of this notice: Arctic grayling, 

Georgia pigtoe, interrupted rocksnail, 

Astelia waialealae, Cyrtandra 

kaulantha, and Phyllostegia hispida. 

FY 2005 LISTING ALLOCATION

Allocated Available 

balance 

FY05 Appropriation (including space reprogramming) ............................................................................................ $5,604,178 $5,604,178 

Space reprogramming (program’s portion of rent for building space) .................................................................... 254,749 5,349,429 

Regional & Washington Offices (staff salaries & benefits) ..................................................................................... 1,344,660 4,004,769 

Printing ..................................................................................................................................................................... 612,405 3,392,364 

90-day findings ........................................................................................................................................................ 613,224 2,779,140 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53772 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

FY 2005 LISTING ALLOCATION—Continued 

Allocated Available 

balance 

12-month findings .................................................................................................................................................... 1,342,159 1,436,981 

Proposed Listing/CH ................................................................................................................................................ 579,370 857,611 

Final Listing/CH ....................................................................................................................................................... 550,116 307,495 

Attorney Fees/Litigation Expenses .......................................................................................................................... 307,400 95 

Specific details regarding the 

individual actions taken using the FY 

2005 funding, which precluded our 

ability to undertake listing proposals for 

any of the candidate species, except the 

species noted above, are provided below 

(information on the cost of individual 

actions is part of our administrative 

record). 

We note here that the category of 

‘‘high-priority listing actions’’

mentioned above refers to actions for 

which no timeline has been established 

by a court order or settlement 

agreement, and that also are not subject 

to an absolute statutory deadline. Our 

ability to work on such listing actions is 

quite limited. Until FY 2006, our 

allocation of Listing Program funds has 

included a limited amount of funding 

(100,000) to each Regional office to 

ensure that the office maintains minimal 

core capacity (at least one staff person) 

for listing actions (e.g., evaluating the 

status of species to help ensure that a 

emergency listing action can be taken if 

necessary, and participating in work to 

meet the statutory requirement to 

annually review and make findings on 

resubmitted petitions). In a Region that 

faces a relatively limited workload in 

the Listing Program with regard to 

deadlines resulting from court orders or 

settlement agreements, and a relatively 

limited workload related to meeting 

statutory deadlines, some of this 

‘‘capability’’ funding may be available to 

address high priority listing actions. 

However, in most Regions the limited 

amount of capability funding for 

Regional offices included in an 

allocation is used for work associated 

with supporting listing actions related 

to court orders or settlement 

agreements, and for meeting statutory 

deadlines. This work includes providing 

training and oversight of field personnel 

and reviewing their work and making 

recommendations to the Regional 

Director on listing actions. Where this is 

the case, there are no funds available for 

high-priority listing actions. 

The overall Listing Program situation 

in FY 2006 is similar to that in FY 2005. 

For FY 2006, Congress appropriated 

$5,131,000 (after rescissions) to the 

listing program for activities other than 

critical habitat designations for already 

listed species (Pub. L. 109–54, signed on 

August 2, 2005). We have fully allocated 

the $5,131,000 to fund the following 

listing actions: Any emergency listings; 

essential litigation-related, 

administrative, and program 

management functions; compliance 

with court orders or court-approved 

settlement agreements requiring petition 

findings or listing determinations; 

statutorily-required petition findings; 

other high-priority listing actions; and 

work on proposed listing 

determinations for some high-priority 

candidate species. In addition, by the 

end of FY 2005 we had realized some 

savings, largely in printing costs, as 

compared to our estimated costs. 

Therefore, we were able to reallocate 

these remaining FY 2005 funds to help 

cover some of the printing costs 

associated with listing actions in FY 

2006. As a result, The FY 2006 funds 

needed for printing costs were reduced 

and we are able to fund more work than 

otherwise would have been possible 

with only our FY 2006 listing budget. 

FY 2006 LISTING ALLOCATION

Allocated Available \ 

balance 

FY06 Appropriation (including space reprogramming) ............................................................................................ $5,130,594 $5,130,594 

Space reprogramming (program’s portion of rent for building space) .................................................................... 261,817 4,868,777 

Regional & Washington Offices (staff salaries and benefits) .................................................................................. 1,610,150 3,258,627 

Printing ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33,000 3,225,627 

90-day findings ........................................................................................................................................................ 508,796 2,716,831 

12-month findings .................................................................................................................................................... 1,350,653 1,366,178 

Proposed Listing/CH ................................................................................................................................................ 813,460 552,718 

Final Listing/CH ....................................................................................................................................................... 452,718 100,000 

Attorney Fees/Litigation Expenses .......................................................................................................................... 100,000 0 

For FY 2006 we have eliminated 

capability funding, and instead have 

allocated to the regions an amount 

necessary to support a regional office 

staff capable of supervising the 

workload of packages in the region. 

With respect to funds appropriated for 

designation of critical habitat, the 

majority of these funds in the critical 

habitat subcap will be spent complying 

with designating critical habitat under 

court-order or court-approved 

settlement agreements. We allocated a 

small portion of the money not needed 

to fund these critical habitat 

designations for work on statutorilyrequired petition findings. While we 

have more funds in FY 2006 (than in FY 

2005) available for listing actions that 

are not court-ordered or the subject of 

court-approved settlement agreements, 

we must use the majority of these funds 

to work on or complete statutorilyrequired petition findings. During the 

current fiscal year, we will issue 

proposed listing rules for the highest 

priority candidate species only if doing 

so does not jeopardize our ability to 

comply with court orders, courtapproved settlement agreements, or 

unqualified statutory deadlines. Thus, 

as of the date of the publication of this 

CNOR, we anticipate that we will have 

only limited FY 2006 funds available to 

work on proposals to list any of the 

candidate species included in Table 1. 

Consequently we continue to find that 

proposals to list all of the petitioned 

candidate species included in Table 1 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53773 

are warranted but precluded, except the 

Arctic grayling, Georgia pigtoe, 

interrupted rocksnail, Astelia 

waialealae, Cyrtandra kaulantha, and 

Phyllostegia hispida (which are being 

funded this year). We note also that all 

of the actions that demonstrate our 

expeditious progress on listing that we 

have completed to date or will complete 

in FY 2006 (see below) contribute to the 

preclusion of work on listing proposals 

for these candidate species. 

In addition to being precluded by lack 

of available funds, work on proposed 

rules for candidates with lower priority 

(i.e., those that have listing priority 

numbers of 4–12) is also precluded by 

the need to issue proposed rules for 

higher priority species facing highmagnitude, imminent threats (i.e., 

listing priority numbers of 1–3). Table 1 

shows the listing priority number for 

each candidate species. Finally, 

proposed rules for reclassification of 

threatened species to endangered are 

lower priority, since the listing of the 

species already affords the protection of 

the Act and implementing regulations. 

As explained above, part of the basis 

for making a warranted-but-precluded 

finding is that expeditious progress is 

being made to add and remove qualified 

species to the Lists. Our progress in FY 

2005 includes work in the following 

categories: (1) Preparation and 

publication of final listing 

determinations involving 6 species; (2) 

preparation of final listing 

determinations (not completed in FY 

2005) for 13 species; (3) preparation of 

proposed listing actions (not yet 

completed so not yet published) for 8 

species; and (4) listing petition findings 

for 303 species (includes 10 completed, 

33 not completed, and 260 resubmitted 

findings). Specific information 

regarding each of these categories for FY 

2005 is provided below, followed by a 

description of our anticipated FY 2006 

progress. 

FY 2005 (1) Final listing 

determinations—We prepared and 

published in the Federal Register final 

listing determinations for six species, all 

of which had absolute statutory 

deadlines imposed by section 4(b)(6). 

These included final regulations listing 

the following species: 

• Southwest Alaska distinct 

population segment of the northern sea 

otter (70 FR 46365; August 9, 2005; 

LPN=3) (This final listing was not the 

result of a deadline established by a 

court order or a court-approved 

settlement agreement. Rather, this was 

the highest priority listing action for the 

Alaska Region. The Alaska Region 

generally has not faced the relatively 

heavy Listing Program workload 

experienced by several other Regions, 

and consequently was able to use their 

limited Regional office capability 

funding in FY 2005 to support the 

completion of this listing regulation. We 

could not have utilized this capability 

funding to complete listing actions in 

other Regions without eliminating the 

ability of this Region to monitor the 

status of candidate species and address 

any emergency situations that might 

arise). 

• Koster’s springsnail, Roswell 

springsnail, Noel’s amphipod, and 

Pecos assiminea (70 FR 46303; August 

9, 2005, LPN=2) (The work on the final 

listing package that included these four 

species was in response to a courtapproved settlement agreement as well 

as having an absolute statutory 

deadline). 

• Salt Creek tiger beetle (70 FR 58335; 

October 6, 2005; LPN=3) (The work on 

this species was in response to a courtorder). 

We note that the work on these 

species, except the northern sea otter 

and Salt Creek tiger beetle, included 

funding for the designation of critical 

habitat. The critical habitat subcap 

pertains to critical habitat designations 

for species already listed; we may use 

listing funds for critical habitat 

designation work conducted in 

conjunction with a listing action, as was 

the case with these four species. This 

work was necessary to comply with the 

Act’s deadline for designating critical 

habitat: Concurrent with listing or 

within one year thereafter if concurrent 

designation is not determinable. 

(2) We funded work on final listing 

determinations for the Gila chub and 12 

species of picture wing flies from 

Hawaii for which work was not 

completed in FY 2005. The work on 

these species was also in response to 

court-approved settlement agreements. 

(3) We funded work on proposed 

listing determinations for the following 

species for which work was not 

completed in FY 2005: Cowhead Lake 

tui chub (reproposal), fluvial Arctic 

grayling (distinct population segment of 

the Upper Missouri River) (LPN=3) (the 

work on this species was also in 

response to a court-approved settlement 

agreement), Georgia pigtoe (LPN=2), 

interrupted rocksnail (LPN=2), Astelia 

waialealae (LPN=2), Cyrtandra 

kaulantha (LPN=2), Penstemon 

grahamii (Graham’s beardtongue) 

(LPN=2) (the work on this species was 

also in response to a court-approved 

settlement agreement), and Phyllostegia 

hispida (LPN=2). 

(4) We funded work on 300 petition 

findings. This involved 90-day findings, 

initial 12-month findings, and findings 

on resubmitted petitions. As explained 

below, in some instances, the work has 

been based on meeting deadlines 

established by court order or by 

settlement agreements. In other 

instances, the work has been done in 

order to meet statutory deadlines. All 

12-month findings are subject to an 

unqualified statutory deadline. With 

regard to 90-day findings, the decision 

in Biodiversity Legal Foundation v. 

Badgley, 309 F.3d 1166 (9th Cir. 2002), 

held that the Act requires that 90-day 

petition findings (i.e., the initial finding 

as to whether a petition contains 

substantial information, which the Act 

directs us to make within 90 days of 

receipt of a petition, if practicable) must 

be made no later than 12 months after 

receipt of the petition, regardless of 

whether it is practicable to do so. Thus, 

all 90-day findings are arguably subject 

to an absolute statutory deadline. As a 

result of this ruling, which was contrary 

to our previous interpretation of section 

4(b)(3) of the Act, we have been working 

to issue petition findings on most of the 

outstanding petitions for those species 

that we have not previously determined 

to warrant candidate status. 

Some petition findings are 

‘‘complete’’ actions. This includes 12- 

month petition findings in which we 

determine that listing was not warranted 

and 90-day petition findings in which 

we determine that the petition did not 

present substantial information. In these 

cases, our listing work is complete. 

In FY 2005, we funded work on and 

published petition findings for the 

following 10 species: Pygmy rabbit (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (70 FR 

29253; May 20, 2005), California spotted 

owl (substantial 90-day finding) (70 FR 

35607; June 21, 2005), boreal toad (notwarranted 12-month finding) (70 FR 

56880; September 29, 2005), headwater 

chub and Lower Colorado River Basin 

population of the roundtail chub 

(substantial 90-day finding) (70 FR 

39981; July 12, 2005), American eel 

(substantial 90-day finding) (70 FR 

38849; July 6, 2005), 3 springsnails 

(Jackson Lake, Harney Lake, and 

Columbia) (substantial 90-day finding) 

(70 FR 20515; April 20, 2005), and 

Dalea tentaculoides (Gentry indigo 

bush) (not-warranted 12-month finding) 

(70 FR 56426; September 27, 2005). All 

12-month findings have absolute 

statutory deadlines. Because of Badgley, 

all 90-day findings arguably also have 

absolute statutory deadlines. In 

addition, the work on all these species, 

with the following exception, was in 

response to court orders or courtapproved settlement agreements. The 

American eel was the highest priority 

listing action for the Northeast Region. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53774 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

The Northeast Region generally has not 

faced the relatively heavy Listing 

Program workload experienced by 

several other Regions, and consequently 

was able to use their limited Regional 

office capability funding in FY 2005 to 

support the completion of this petition 

finding. We could not have utilized this 

capability funding to complete listing 

actions in other Regions without 

eliminating the ability of this Region to 

monitor the status of candidate species 

and address any emergency situations 

that might arise. 

The allocated funds also supported 

work on petition findings that were not 

completed in FY 2005 for the following 

34 species (we worked on these petition 

findings pursuant to a court order, a 

court-approved settlement agreement, or 

to meet statutory deadlines; those 

marked with a ‘‘+’’ we worked on 

pursuant to a court order/courtapproved settlement agreement, the 

others (unmarked) we worked on to 

meet statutory deadlines): Yellowstone 

population of buffalo (90-day finding), 

New England cottontail (warranted but 

precluded 12-month finding—published 

as part of this CNOR), Douglas County 

subspecies of northern pocket gopher+

(90-day finding), Anacapa deer mouse 

(90-day finding), American dipper+ (90- 

day finding), long-tailed duck+ (90-day 

finding), red knot (90-day finding), 

yellow-billed loon+ (90-day finding), 

southeastern snowy plover and 

wintering population of piping plover 

(90-day finding), cerulean warbler (12- 

month finding), Mexican garter snake+

(90-day finding), northern water snake 

(90-day finding), Berry Cave salamander 

(90-day finding), American eel (12- 

month finding), kokanee (90-day 

finding), longnose sucker (90-day 

finding), California golden trout (12- 

month finding), Yellowstone cutthroat 

trout+ (12-month finding) (we published 

the opening of a comment period for a 

12-month finding for this species on 

September 1, 2005; 70 FR 52059), Black 

Hills (Cooper’s Rocky) mountainsnail+

(90-day finding), Uinta mountainsnail+

(90-day finding), Cicurina cueva+ (12- 

month finding) (we published two 

notices to reopen the comment period 

(on May 23, 2005, and August 16, 2005) 

(70 FR 29471 and 70 FR 48093) in order 

to provide the public an opportunity to 

consider and comment on new 

information we received after 

publishing the 90-day finding for this 

species), 4 subspecies of 

Pseudocopacodes enus (12-month 

finding), Andrew’s dune scarab beetle 

(90-day finding), 3 invertebrates 

(Stygobromus kenki, Stygobromus 

phreaticus, and Acanthocyclops 

columbiensis—90-day finding), 

Castanea ozarkensis (Ozark chinquapin) 

(90-day finding), Gilia (=Alicellia) 

tenuis (Mussentuchit gilia)+ (90-day 

finding), Sidalcea hendersonii 

(Henderson’s checkermallow) (90-day 

finding), Usnea longissima (90-day 

finding). 

In addition, we completed some 

initial and some resubmitted petition 

findings required by statute for a total of 

260 petitioned species that are 

candidates. We published these findings 

on May 11, 2005, as part of the previous 

Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) (70 

FR 24870). Since we had identified the 

majority of these species as candidates 

prior to receiving a petition to list them, 

we had already assessed their status 

using funds from our Candidate 

Conservation Program (a separate 

budget item within the Endangered 

Species Program). 

Our anticipated progress in FY 2006 

includes work in the following 

categories: (1) Work toward preparation 

and publication of final listing actions 

for 15 species; (2) work toward 

preparation and publication of proposed 

listing actions for 6 species; and (3) 

work on petition findings for 72 species 

that are not candidate species (we made 

or are making these petition findings 

pursuant to a court order, a courtapproved settlement agreement, or to 

meet statutory deadlines), initial 

petition findings for 2 species that are 

also included in this notice as candidate 

species, resubmitted petition findings 

for 245 candidate and 5 listed species 

that were petitioned prior to the last 

CNOR, and revised 12-month petition 

findings for 10 candidate species that 

are we removing from candidate status 

through this notice. Specific 

information regarding each of these 

categories for FY 2006 is provided 

below. We note also that Regions will 

continue to monitor the status of 

candidates and prepare emergency 

listing packages as needed. 

FY 2006 (1) We funded work on the 

final listing determinations for the 

following species: Queen Charlotte 

goshawk (remand of our previous listing 

determination), Gila chub (70 FR 66663; 

November 2, 2005, LPN=2), 12 species 

of picture-wing flies from Hawaii (71 FR 

26835; May 9, 2006) (prior to publishing 

the final rule, we published a notice to 

reopen the comment period on the 

proposed listing rule; 70 FR 57851; 

October 4, 2005), and Penstemon 

grahamii (Graham’s beardtongue) (work 

not yet completed). These final listing 

determinations were in response to 

court orders or court-approved 

settlement agreements. Additionally, 

since the Gila chub, 12 species of 

picture-wing flies, and Graham’s 

beardtongue were proposed for listing, a 

final listing determination is subject to 

an absolute statutory deadline. 

(2) We funded listing determinations 

for flat-tailed horned lizard (remand of 

our withdrawal of a proposed rule to 

list) (we published a withdrawal of the 

proposed rule on June 28, 2006; 71 FR 

36745)(we also had published notices to 

reopen the comment period on our 

reinstated proposed rule on March 2 

and again on April 21, 2006; 71 FR 

10631 and 71 FR 20637), fluvial Arctic 

grayling (distinct population segment of 

the Upper Missouri River) (LPN=3) (the 

work on this species was also in 

response to a court-approved settlement 

agreement), Cowhead Lake tui chub 

(reproposal), and Penstemon grahamii 

(Graham’s beardtongue) (71 FR 3157; 

January 19, 2006). We also funded work 

on proposed listing proposals for the 

following 5 high-priority candidate 

species for which work was not 

completed in FY 2006 prior to the 

publication of this CNOR: Rough 

hornsnail (LPN=2), black mudalia 

(LPN=2), Georgia pigtoe (LPN=2), 

interrupted rocksnail (LPN=2), Astelia 

waialealae (LPN=2), Cyrtandra 

kaulantha (LPN=2), and Phyllostegia 

hispida (LPN=2). 

(3) We funded work on and published 

petition findings for the following 

species (listing actions for species 

marked with a ‘‘+’’ are per court order/ 

court-approved settlement agreement in 

addition to having a statutory deadline): 

Gunnison’s prairie dog+ (not-substantial 

90-day finding) (71 FR 6241; February 7, 

2006); Douglas County subspecies of the 

northern pocket gopher+ (notsubstantial 90-day finding (71 FR 7715; 

February 14, 2006); polar bear 

(substantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

6745; January 9, 2006); Black Hills, 

South Dakota, population of the 

American dipper+ (not-substantial 90- 

day finding) (71 FR 4341; January 26, 

2006); Florida scrub-jay+ (notsubstantial 90-day petition findings on 2 

petitions to reclassify as endangered) 

(71 FR 4092; January 25, 2006); 

Gunnison sage-grouse+ (not-warranted 

12-month finding) (71 FR 19953; April 

18, 2006); California spotted owl+ (not 

warranted 12-month finding) (71 FR 

298896; May 24, 2006) (we also 

published a notice to reopen the 

comment period on the 90-day petition 

on October 14, 2005; 70 FR 60051); 

northern Mexican gartersnake+

(substantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 315; 

January 4, 2006); Siskiyou Mountains 

and Scotts Bar salamanders+ (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

23886; April 25, 2006); Distinct 

Population Segment of the roundtail 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53775 

chub in the Lower Colorado River Basin 

and the Headwater chub+ (notwarranted and warranted 12-month 

findings) (71 FR 26007; May 3, 2006), 

Yellowstone cutthroat trout+ (notwarranted 12-month finding) (71 FR 

8818; February 21, 2006); Black Hills 

(Cooper’s Rocky) mountainsnail+ (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 9988; 

February 28, 2006), Uinta 

mountainsnail+ (not-substantial 90-day 

finding) (70 FR 69303; November 15, 

2005); Greater Adams cave beetle and 

Lesser Adams cave beetle (notwarranted 12-month finding) (70 FR 

72973; December 8, 2005); Casey’s June 

beetle (substantial 90-day finding) (71 

FR 44960; August 8, 2006); Andrews’

Dune scarab beetle (not-substantial 90- 

day finding) (71 FR 26444 May 5, 2006); 

island marble butterfly+ (substantial 90- 

day finding) (71 FR 7497; February 13, 

2006); Hermes copper butterfly (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

44966; August 8, 2006); Sand Mountain 

blue butterfly (substantial 90-day 

finding) (FR 71 44988; August 8, 2006); 

Thorne’s hairstreak butterfly (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

44980; August 8, 2006); Cicurina cueva+

(not-warranted 12-month finding) (70 

FR 75071; December 19, 2005); 16 insect 

species from Algondones Dunes (notsubstantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

47765; August 18, 2006); Agave 

eggersiana and Solanum conocarpum+

(not-warranted 12-month finding) (71 

FR 11367; March 7, 2006); Gilia 

(=Aliciella) tenuis+ (Mussentuchit gilia) 

(not-substantial 90-day finding) (71 FR 

4337; January 26, 2006); and Sidalcea 

hendersonii (Henderson’s 

checkermallow—not-substantial 90-day 

finding) (71 FR 8252; February 16, 

2006). We funded work on statutorilyrequired petition findings for the 

following species (not yet completed so 

not yet published): Polar bear (12-month 

finding) (we reopened the comment 

period on the status review for the 12- 

month petition finding on May 17, 2006; 

71 FR 28653) , Utah prairie dog (90-day 

finding on reclassification to 

endangered), black-footed albatross (90- 

day finding), tricolored blackbird (90- 

day finding), long-tailed duck+ (90-day 

finding), southwestern population of 

bald eagle (90-day finding), Columbian 

sharp-tailed grouse (90-day finding), 

yellow-billed loon+ (90-day finding), 

Mono Basin population of greater sagegrouse (90-day finding), southeastern 

snowy plover and wintering population 

of piping plover (12-month finding), 

cerulean warbler (12-month finding), 

northern Mexican garter snake+ (12- 

month finding), northern water snake 

(12-month finding), Tucson shovelnosed snake (90-day finding), Florida 

population of gopher tortoise (90-day 

finding), Berry Cave salamander (12- 

month finding), Jollyville plateau 

salamander (90-day finding), American 

eel (12-month finding), San Felipe 

gambusia (90-day finding), longnose 

sucker (12-month finding), 3 

springsnails (Jackson Lake, Harney 

Lake, and Columbia) (12-month 

finding), 3 invertebrates (Stygobromus 

kenki, Stygobromus phreaticus, and 

Acanthocyclops columbiensis) (12- 

month finding), island marble butterfly+

(12-month finding), Mt. Charleston blue 

butterfly (90-day finding), Astragalus 

anserinus (Goose Creek milkvetch) (90- 

day finding), Astragalus debequaeus 

(DeBeque milkvetch) (90-day finding), 

Castanea ozarkensis (Ozark chinquapin) 

(90-day finding), Sclerocactus 

brevispinus (Pariette cactus) (90-day 

finding). We funded work on statutorilyrequired initial 12-month petition 

findings for the New England cottontail 

(substantial 90-day finding was 

published on June 30, 2004) and red 

knot (we also made the statutorilyrequired 90-day finding through this 

CNOR), which are being published as 

part of this CNOR (warranted but 

precluded findings). We also funded 

work on resubmitted petitions findings 

for 245 candidate species and 5 listed 

species (species petitioned prior to the 

last CNOR). Note, we have not updated 

our resubmitted petition findings for the 

Columbia Basin population of the 

greater sage-grouse or for the Missouri 

River population of fluvial Arctic 

grayling in this notice as we are 

considering new information and will 

update our findings at a later date. As 

explained above, these resubmitted 

petition findings are required by statute 

and findings for these 245 candidates 

and 5 listed species are being published 

as part of this CNOR. We also funded 

revised 12-month petition findings for 

10 candidate species that we are 

removing from candidate status, which 

are being published as part of this 

CNOR (see Summary of Candidate 

Removals). We are also funding work on 

the next annual review of those 

resubmitted petition findings, which 

will be published as part of the next 

CNOR. Because the majority of these 

species were already candidate species 

prior to our receipt of a petition to list 

them, we had already assessed their 

status using funds from our Candidate 

Conservation Program. We also continue 

to monitor the status of these species 

through our Candidate Conservation 

Program. The cost of updating the 

species assessment forms and 

publishing the joint publication of the 

CNOR and resubmitted petition findings 

is shared between the Listing Program 

and the Candidate Conservation 

Program. 

As with our ‘‘precluded’’ finding, 

‘‘expeditious progress’’ is a function of 

the resources that are available and the 

competing demands for those funds. As 

discussed above, the funds in the 

Listing Program that would be otherwise 

available for adding other qualified 

species to the Lists in FY 2005 and FY 

2006 have been spent or must be spent 

on complying with court orders and 

court-approved settlement agreements 

to make petition findings, court orders 

and court-approved settlement 

agreements to make final listing 

determinations for other species, 

meeting statutory deadlines for petition 

findings or listing determinations, a few 

high-priority Service-initiated listing 

determinations, essential litigation 

support, and administrative and 

management tasks. We note that we are 

not discussing specific actions we have 

taken on progress towards removing 

species from the lists of threatened or 

endangered species in this notice since 

that work is conducted with 

appropriations to our Recovery program, 

a separately-budgeted component of the 

Endangered Species Program. However, 

we do note that in FY 2005 we delisted 

one species (Helianthus eggertii 

(Eggert’s sunflower); 70 FR 48482; 

August 18, 2005) and, to date in 

FY2006, we have delisted two species 

(the Arizona Distinct Population 

Segment of the Cactus Ferruginous 

Pygmy-owl; 71 FR 19452; April 14, 

2006; and, Agave arizonica (Arizona 

agave); 71 FR 35195; June 19, 2006). 

The majority of the money to add 

qualified species to the list is consumed 

in complying with court orders or courtapproved settlement agreements 

requiring petition findings or listing 

determinations, and essential litigationrelated, administrative, and program 

management functions related to these 

findings and determinations (including 

preparing and allocating budgets, 

responding to Congressional and public 

inquiries, public outreach, gathering 

and assessing the scientific information 

used as the basis for our listing 

decisions, writing the document, and 

reviewing those listing 

recommendations made by our Field 

and Regional Office staff). Therefore, we 

have endeavored to make our listing 

actions as efficient and timely as 

possible, given the requirements of the 

relevant law and regulations, and 

constraints relating to workload and 

personnel. We are continually 

considering ways to streamline 

processes or achieve economies of scale, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53776 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

such as by batching related actions 

together. Given our limited budget for 

implementing section 4 of the Act, these 

actions described above collectively 

constitute expeditious progress. 

Although we have not been able to 

resolve the listing status of many of the 

candidates, several programs in the 

Service contribute to the conservation of 

these species. In particular, we have a 

separate budgeted program, the 

Candidate Conservation program, which 

focuses on providing technical expertise 

for developing conservation strategies 

and agreements to guide voluntary onthe-ground conservation work for 

candidate and other at-risk species. The 

main goal of this program is to address 

the threats facing candidate species. If 

sufficiently successful, this eliminates 

the need to list them, allowing us to 

remove them from the candidate list. 

Through this program, we work with 

our partners (other Federal agencies, 

State agencies, Tribes, private 

landowners, and private conservation 

organizations) to address the threats to 

candidate species and other species atrisk. We are actively engaged in the 

conservation of these species and have 

over 115 voluntary conservation 

agreements that are being implemented 

for 190 species covering 4.8 million 

acres of habitat. For example, we are 

currently implementing a Candidate 

Conservation Agreement for the 

Louisiana pine snake, a candidate 

species. This agreement between the 

Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest 

Service, U.S. Department of Defense, 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 

and Louisiana Department of Wildlife 

and Fisheries was completed in 2003 

and is designed to identify and establish 

management for the Louisiana pine 

snake on Federal lands in Texas and 

Louisiana. The agreement provides a 

means for all the partnering agencies to 

work cooperatively on projects that 

avoid and minimize impacts to the 

snake. We also have provided funds 

from the Endangered Species Private 

Landowner Incentive Program and 

Private Stewardship Grants to a private 

landowner for habitat restoration and 

prescribed burning at Louisiana pine 

snake sites on their property. Several 

other Service programs (e.g. Fisheries, 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife, Refuge 

Wildlife and Habitat Management, and 

Federal Assistance) contribute to 

candidate conservation. 

Through sustained implementation of 

strategically designed conservation 

efforts, we are actively working to 

conserve many candidate species. In 

some instances, this culminates in 

making listing unnecessary. In the past 

two years, for example, we have 

obviated the need to list six species 

through conservation efforts, including 

four candidate species: The Greater and 

Lesser Adams Cave beetles, Camp 

Shelby burrowing crayfish, and 

Holsinger’s cave beetle. 

Findings for Petitioned Candidate 

Species 

For our revised 12-month petition 

findings for species we are removing 

from candidate status, see summaries 

above under ‘‘Summary of Candidate 

Removals.’’

Mammals 

Pacific Sheath-tailed Bat, American 

Samoa DPS (Emballonura semicaudata 

semicaudata)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. This small bat is a member of 

the Emballonuridae, an Old World bat 

family that has an extensive 

distribution, primarily in the tropics. 

The Pacific sheath-tailed bat was once 

common and widespread in Polynesia 

and Micronesia and it is the only 

insectivorous bat recorded from a large 

part of this area. The species as a whole 

(E. semicaudata) occurred on several of 

the Caroline Islands (Palau, Chuuk, and 

Pohnpei), Samoa (Independent and 

American), the Mariana Islands (Guam 

and the CNMI), Tonga, Fiji, and 

Vanuatu. While populations appear to 

be healthy in some locations, mainly in 

the Caroline Islands, they have declined 

drastically in other areas, including 

Independent and American Samoa, the 

Mariana Islands, Fiji, and possibly 

Tonga. Scientists recognize four 

subspecies: E. s. rotensis, endemic to the 

Mariana Islands (Guam and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands (CNMI)); E. s. sulcata, occurring 

in Chuuk and Pohnpei; E. s. palauensis, 

found in Palau; and E. s. semicaudata, 

occurring in American and Independent 

Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. This 

candidate assessment form addresses 

the distinct population segment of E. s. 

semicaudata that occurs in American 

Samoa. E. s. semicaudata historically 

occurred in American and Independent 

Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. It is 

extant in Fiji and Tonga, but may be 

extirpated from Vanuatu and 

Independent Samoa. 

Current threats to this subspecies 

include habitat loss, predation by 

introduced species, small population 

size, and disturbance to roosting caves. 

The greatest threats at this time are 

likely habitat loss and degradation, the 

small numbers of bats detected in the 

past two decades, and tropical storms. 

Habitat loss and degradation and 

predation by nonnative species are 

believed to have been occurring for 

several decades. The Listing Priority 

Number for E. s. semicaudata remains at 

3 because the magnitude of the threats 

is high, the threats are imminent, and 

the taxon in question is a population of 

a subspecies. 

Pacific Sheath-tailed Bat 

(Emballonura semicaudata rotensis), 

Guam and the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

small bat is a member of the 

Emballonuridae, an Old World bat 

family that has an extensive 

distribution, primarily in the tropics. 

The Pacific sheath-tailed bat was once 

common and widespread in Polynesia 

and Micronesia and it is the only 

insectivorous bat recorded from a large 

part of this area. The species as a whole 

(E. semicaudata) occurred on several of 

the Caroline Islands (Palau, Chuuk, and 

Pohnpei), Samoa (Independent and 

American), the Mariana Islands (Guam 

and the CNMI), Tonga, Fiji, and 

Vanuatu. While populations appear to 

be healthy in some locations, mainly in 

the Caroline Islands, they have declined 

drastically in other areas, including 

Independent and American Samoa, the 

Mariana Islands, Fiji, and possibly 

Tonga. Scientists recognize four 

subspecies: E. s. rotensis, endemic to the 

Mariana Islands (Guam and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands (CNMI)); E. s. sulcata, occurring 

in Chuuk and Pohnpei; E. s. palauensis, 

found in Palau; and E. s. semicaudata, 

occurring in American and Independent 

Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. This 

candidate assessment form addresses 

the Mariana Islands subspecies. E. s. 

rotensis is historically known from the 

Mariana Islands and formerly occurred 

on Guam and in the CNMI on Rota, 

Aguiguan, Tinian (known from 

prehistoric records only), Saipan, and 

possibly Anatahan and Maug. Currently, 

E. s. rotensis appears to be extirpated 

from all but one island in the Mariana 

archipelago. The single remaining 

population of this subspecies occurs on 

Aguiguan, CNMI. 

Threats to this subspecies have not 

changed over the past year. The primary 

threats to the subspecies include 

predation by nonnative species, habitat 

loss and degradation, small population 

size, occurrence on one small island, 

and disturbance to roosting caves. 

Habitat loss and degradation (through 

various means, but mainly by feral 

ungulates at present) and predation by 

nonnative species are believed to be 

occurring now, and likely have been 

occurring for several decades on 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53777 

Aguiguan and are, therefore, affecting 

the entire remaining population of E. s. 

rotensis. The subspecies may be near 

the point where stochastic events, such 

as typhoons, are increasingly likely to 

affect its continued survival. The 

disappearance of the remaining 

population on Aguiguan would result in 

the extinction of the subspecies. In 

addition, scientists believe that a more 

complete genetic examination of the 

subspecies may result in its elevation to 

a distinct species. The Listing Priority 

Number for E. s. rotensis remains at 3 

because the magnitude of the threats is 

high, the threats are imminent, and the 

taxon is question is a subspecies. 

Cottontail, New England (Sylvilagus 

transitionalis)—See above in ‘‘Summary 

of New Candidates.’’ The above 

summary is based on information in our 

file and in the petition dated August 30, 

2000. 

Fisher, West Coast DPS (Martes 

pennanti)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files and in 

the Service’s initial warranted-butprecluded finding published in the 

Federal Register on April 8, 2004 (68 FR 

18770). The fisher is a carnivore in the 

family Mustelidae and is the largest 

member of the genus Martes. 

Historically the West Coast population 

of the fisher extended south from British 

Columbia into western Washington and 

Oregon, and in the North Coast Ranges, 

Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains and Sierra 

Nevada in California. The fisher is 

believed to be extirpated or reduced to 

scattered individuals from the lower 

mainland of British Columbia through 

Washington and in the central and 

northern Sierra Nevada range in 

California. Native populations of fisher 

currently occur in the North Coast 

Ranges of California, the KlamathSiskiyou Mountains of northern 

California and southern Oregon, and in 

isolated populations occurring in the 

southern Sierra Nevada in California. 

Descendents of a fisher reintroduction 

effort also occur in the southern Cascade 

range in Oregon. There is a lack of 

precise empirical data on West Coast 

DPS fisher numbers. However, there is 

a lack of detections over much of the 

fisher’s historic range, even with 

standardized survey and monitoring 

efforts in California, Oregon and 

Washington. There is also a high degree 

of genetic relatedness within some 

populations, and populations of native 

fisher in California are separated by four 

times the species’ maximum dispersal 

distance. The above listed factors all 

indicate that the likely extant fisher 

populations are small and isolated from 

one another. 

Major threats that fragment or remove 

key elements of fisher habitat include 

various forest vegetation management 

practices such as timber harvest and 

fuels reduction treatments. Other 

potential major threats include: Standreplacing fire, Sudden Oak Death 

Phytophthora, urban and rural 

development, recreation development, 

and highways. Major threats to fisher 

that lead to direct mortality and injury 

to fisher include; collisions with 

vehicles, predation, and viral borne 

diseases such as rabies, parvovirus, 

canine distemper and Anaplasma 

phagocytophilum. Existing regulatory 

mechanisms on Federal, State and 

private lands affect key elements of 

fisher habitat and do not provide 

sufficient certainty that conservation 

efforts will be effective or will be 

implemented. The magnitude of threats 

is high as they occur across the range of 

the DPS resulting in a negative impact 

on fisher distribution and abundance. 

However, the threats are non-imminent 

as the greatest long-term risks to the 

fisher in its west coast range are the 

subsequent ramifications of the isolation 

small populations, and the three 

remaining areas containing fisher 

populations appear to be stable or not 

rapidly declining based on recent 

survey and monitoring efforts. We 

assigned this DPS a listing priority 

number of 6 due to nonimminent threats 

of a high magnitude. 

Mazama pocket gopher (Thomomys 

mazama (ssp. couchi, glacialis, louiei, 

melanops, pugetensis, tacomensis, 

tumuli, yelmensis)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received December 11, 2002. 

These eight subspecies of pocket gopher 

are associated with glacial outwash 

prairies in western Washington. Of 

these eight subspecies, six are likely still 

extant (couchi, glacialis, melanops, 

pugetensis, tumuli, and yelmensis). Few 

of these glacial outwash prairies remain 

in Washington today. Historically, such 

prairies were only patchily distributed. 

Now, residential and commercial 

development, fire regime alteration, and 

ingrowth of woody vegetation have 

further reduced their numbers. In 

addition, development in or adjacent to 

these prairies has likely increased 

predation on Mazama pocket gophers by 

dogs and cats. 

The magnitude of threat is high for 

these subspecies due to their patchy and 

isolated distribution, location in 

habitats desirable for residential and 

commercial development, threat of 

invasive plants, and limited dispersal 

capability of the species. Where human 

development occurs in proximity to 

Mazama pocket gophers, predation by 

domestic pets is an additional threat to 

the species. The immediacy of threat is 

imminent. Two of the subspecies (T. m. 

louiei and T. m. tacomensis) are likely 

extinct. Gravel pits threaten persistence 

of one of the remaining subspecies (Roy 

Prairie), and the populations of two 

other subspecies (T. m. couchi and T. m. 

yelmensis) are located on airports with 

planned development. Yelm pocket 

gophers (T. m. yelmensis) are also 

threatened by other proposed 

development on Fort Lewis. Thus we 

assign a listing priority number of 3 to 

these subspecies. 

Palm Springs round-tailed ground 

squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus 

chlorus)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

range for the Palm Springs round-tailed 

ground squirrel is generally described as 

the Coachella Valley region that roughly 

spans between San Gorgonio Pass and 

the Salton Sea. A recent study 

demonstrated that the primary habitat 

for the Palm Springs round-tailed 

ground squirrel in the Coachella Valley 

is the mesquite sand dune/hummock 

community. They are also found in 

other low flat sandy areas or sand dunes 

containing various types of desert shrub 

communities, including creosote and 

Atriplex ssp. Squirrels are also 

occasionally found in fine sand 

accumulated along banks, roads, and 

among shrubs; as well as areas with 

more coarse, hard-packed sand and 

gravel. 

Rapid growth of desert cities such as 

Palm Springs and Palm Desert has 

raised concerns about the conservation 

of a squirrel restricted to the Coachella 

Valley. Urban development and drops 

in the groundwater table have 

eliminated all but approximately 10 

percent of Prosopis glandulosa var. 

torreyana (mesquite) in the Valley; the 

plant with which this squirrel is 

strongly associated with. The mesquite 

sand dune/hummock community is also 

threatened by the decreasing water table 

in the Coachella Valley. Mesquite is 

phreatophytic, meaning that its roots are 

adapted to grow deep into the water 

table. Increasing water consumption 

associated with growing urbanization is 

lowering the water table below the level 

at which mesquite roots can reach. No 

formal protection is currently available 

to this species in the majority of its 

range. The California Environmental 

Quality Act affords some indirect 

protection to S. tereticaudus chlorus by 

addressing impacts to other protected 

species, most notably, the federally 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53778 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

threatened Coachella Valley fringe-toed 

lizard (Uma inornata). In 1993, the 

Coachella Valley Association of 

Governments initiated the Coachella 

Valley Multiple Species Habitat 

Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for the 

Coachella Valley to address rare species 

including S. tereticaudus chlorus. 

However, this planning effort remains in 

preparation and has not yet been 

approved or implemented. Further, the 

Coachella Valley MSHCP is proposing 

to protect only 136 ha (336 acres) of 

mesquite hummocks, which is only 35 

percent of the remaining mesquite 

hummocks left within the planning area 

of the Coachella Valley MSHCP. 

Mesquite hummocks near faults in the 

Upper valley are not directly addressed 

by the Coachella Valley Water District 

Water Management Plan, and are 

threatened by the planned and proposed 

groundwater pumping for the rapidly 

growing cities of Desert Hot Springs, 

Cathedral City, and Indio. 

We assigned the Palm Springs ground 

squirrel subspecies a listing priority of 

3 because the threats are ongoing and 

are of a high magnitude. This roundtailed ground squirrel has lost 

approximately 90 percent of its 

preferred habitat, mesquite sand dune/ 

hummocks and suitable habitat in the 

Coachella Valley has a high rate of 

development. 

Southern Idaho ground squirrel 

(Spermophilus brunneus endemicus)—

The following summary is based on 

information in our files. The southern 

Idaho ground squirrel is endemic to four 

counties in southwest Idaho; its total 

known range is approximately 209,628 

hectares (518,000 acres). Threats to 

southern Idaho ground squirrels include 

habitat deterioration and fragmentation, 

direct killing from shooting, trapping or 

poisoning, predation, competition with 

Columbian ground squirrels, and 

inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms. Habitat deterioration and 

fragmentation appear to be the primary 

threats to the species. Nonnative 

annuals now dominate much of this 

species’ range, have changed the species 

composition of vegetation, and have 

altered the fire regime in a perpetuating 

cycle throughout much of the range. 

Habitat deterioration, destruction, and 

fragmentation are thought to have 

resulted in the current patchy 

distribution of southern Idaho ground 

squirrels. Based on recent genetic work, 

southern Idaho ground squirrels are 

subject to more genetic drift and 

inbreeding than expected. Cost-effective 

methods of habitat restoration are 

currently unknown for southern Idaho 

ground squirrels. Two Candidate 

Conservation Agreements with 

Assurances (CCAAs) have been 

completed for this species, both of 

which allow agency access for 

population and habitat surveys and 

habitat enhancement/restoration work. 

The magnitude of threat is low to 

moderate for this species due to the two 

CCAAs that have been completed, and 

ongoing survey and habitat 

enhancement/restoration efforts 

conducted by other agencies. The 

immediacy of the threat is imminent for 

this species due to the prevalence and 

dominance of nonnative vegetation and 

the current patchy distribution of the 

species. Thus, we assign a listing 

priority number of 9 to this species. 

Washington ground squirrel 

(Spermophilus washingtoni)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on March 2, 2000. 

The Washington ground squirrel is one 

of the smallest members of the subgenus 

Spermophilus and is found within the 

shrub-steppe habitat of the Columbia 

Basin ecosystem of Oregon and 

Washington. The soil types used by the 

squirrels are distributed sporadically 

within the species’ range, and have been 

significantly fragmented by human 

development in the Columbia Basin. 

Approximately two-thirds of the 

Washington ground squirrel’s total 

historic range has been converted to 

agriculture. When agriculture occurs, 

little evidence of ground squirrel use 

has been documented, and reports 

indicate that agriculture (along with 

other development) continues to 

eliminate Washington ground squirrel 

habitat in portions of its range. 

Most remaining habitat is threatened 

by the occurrence and spread of 

nonnative species, particularly 

cheatgrass. Nonnative plants threaten 

squirrels by out-competing native 

plants, thereby altering available cover, 

food quantity and quality, and altering 

fire intervals. The ultimate effects of 

cheatgrass invasion on this species are 

not fully understood. While Washington 

ground squirrels eat cheatgrass, it is not 

likely a viable long-term dietary option 

since cheatgrass populations are 

unstable during drought and contain 

large amounts of indigestible silica 

which may make it a poor nutrition 

source. Fire recurrence intervals 

typically switch from 20–100 years in 

sagebrush-grassland ecosystems to 3–5 

years in cheatgrass-dominant sites. 

Increased fire occurrence reduces native 

bunchgrass and shrub cover (by 

competition or preventing the reestablishment of shrub cover) and 

allows exotic species to further outcompete native species. 

The most contiguous, least-disturbed 

expanse of suitable Washington ground 

squirrel habitat within the species’

range occurs on the Boeing site and 

Naval Weapons Training Facility near 

Boardman, Oregon. In Washington, the 

largest expanse of known suitable 

habitat occurs on State and Federal 

land. In Washington, recent declines in 

some colonies have been precipitous for 

unknown (possibly weather-related) 

reasons. For example, in 2001 entire 

colonies of ground squirrels were no 

longer occupied on the Columbia 

National Wildlife Refuge and Seep 

Lakes Management Area near Othello, 

Washington, despite protection for 

species in this area. Recent surveys have 

located additional sites in Washington 

and Oregon. However, detections are 

primarily located in the three disjunct 

metapopulations, indicating 

fragmentation and increased 

vulnerability to natural and man-made 

factors is still a widespread threat. 

In Oregon, some threats are addressed 

by the State listing of this species, and 

by the recently signed Threemile 

Canyon Farms Multi-Species Candidate 

Conservation Agreement with 

Assurances (Agreement). Participants in 

the 25-year agreement include 

Threemile Canyon Farms, The Nature 

Conservancy, Portland General Electric 

(PGE), the Oregon Department of Fish 

and Wildlife (ODFW), and the Service. 

Parties will implement habitat 

management, operational modifications, 

and conservation measures for four nonlisted species, including the Washington 

ground squirrel. Under this agreement, 

22,600 ac (9,145 ha) of the Boeing tract 

was placed in a permanent ODFW 

conservation easement (Boardman 

Conservation Area) and 888 ac (356 ha) 

of PGE property will be managed as part 

of the BCA for the duration of the 

Agreement. 

Current threats to the long-term 

persistence of this species include the 

following: Historic and current habitat 

loss from the conversion of habitat to 

agriculture and other development, 

habitat fragmentation, limited dispersal 

corridors, recreational shooting, genetic 

isolation and drift, spread of nonnative 

species, and predation. Potential threats 

include disease, drought, and possible 

competition with related ground 

squirrel species in disturbed habitat at 

the periphery of their range. While there 

are a variety of conservation actions and 

research activities, they do not address 

all of the threats throughout the species’

range. Due to the widespread current 

and potential threats to the species we 

conclude the magnitude of threats 

remains high. Because the Agreement 

addressed the imminent loss of a large 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53779 

portion of habitat to agriculture, and 

because there are no other known, largescale efforts to convert suitable habitat 

to agriculture, overall the threats are 

nonimminent. We, therefore, kept the 

listing priority number at 5. 

Birds 

Spotless crake, American Samoa DPS 

(Porzana tabuensis)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. P. 

tabuensis is a small, dark, cryptic rail 

found in wetlands and rank scrub or 

forest in the Philippines, Australia, Fiji, 

Tonga, Society Islands, Marquesas, 

Independent Samoa, and American 

Samoa (Ofu, Tau). The genus Porzana is 

widespread in the Pacific, where it is 

represented by numerous islandendemic and flightless species (many of 

which are extinct as a result of 

anthropogenic disturbances) as well as 

several more cosmopolitan species, 

including P. tabuensis. No subspecies of 

P. tabuensis are recognized. The 

American Samoa population is the only 

population of spotless crakes under U.S. 

jurisdiction. The available information 

indicates that distinct populations of the 

spotless crake, a species not noted for 

long-distance dispersal, are definable. 

The population of spotless crakes in 

American Samoa is discrete in relation 

to the remainder of the species as a 

whole, which is distributed in widely 

separated locations. Although the 

spotless crake (and other rails) have 

dispersed widely in the Pacific, island 

rails have tended to reduce or lose their 

power of flight over evolutionary time 

and so become isolated (and vulnerable 

to terrestrial predators such as rats). The 

population of this species in American 

Samoa is therefore distinct based on 

geographic and distributional isolation 

from spotless crake populations on 

other islands in the oceanic Pacific, the 

Philippines, and Australia. The 

American Samoa population of the 

spotless crake links the Central and 

Eastern Pacific portions of the species’

range. The loss of this population could 

cause an increase of roughly 500 miles 

in the disjunction between the central 

and eastern Polynesian portions of the 

spotless crake’s range, and could result 

in the isolation of the Marquesas and 

Society Islands populations by further 

limiting the potential for even rare 

genetic exchange. Based on the 

discreteness and significance of the 

American Samoa population of the 

spotless crake, we consider this 

population to be a distinct vertebrate 

population segment which warrants 

review for listing under the Act. 

Threats to this species have not 

changed over the past year. The 

population in American Samoa is 

threatened by small population size, 

limited distribution, predation by 

nonnative mammals, continued 

development of wetland habitat, and 

natural catastrophes such as hurricanes. 

The co-occurrence of a known predator 

of ground-nesting birds, the Norway rat, 

and the only known population of the 

spotless crake under U.S. jurisdiction, 

along with the extremely restricted 

observed distribution and low numbers, 

indicate that the American Samoa 

distinct population segment of this 

species continues to merit status as a 

candidate for listing. Based on our 

assessment of existing information 

about the imminence and high 

magnitude of these threats, we assigned 

the spotless crake a listing priority 

number of 3. 

Kauai creeper (Oreomystis bairdi)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Kauai creeper is a small, insectivorous 

forest bird that is found only on the 

Hawaiian island of Kauai. It occurs in 

mesic and wet montane forests at higher 

elevations on the Alakai Plateau. 

Surveys in 2000 showed that in the last 

30 years the range of the Kauai creeper 

has decreased from 88 to 36 square 

kilometers (21,750 to 8,896 acres), that 

the species has disappeared from much 

of the periphery of its range, and that 

the estimated population has declined 

from 6,832 ± 966 to 1,472 ± 680 birds. 

The creeper is primarily threatened by 

diseases carried by nonnative 

mosquitoes that occur over most or all 

of its range. Experimental evidence has 

shown that the malarial parasite does 

not develop in birds below 13° Celsius 

(C) (55° Fahrenheit (F)), and field 

studies have found that maximum 

malaria transmission occurs where 

mean ambient summer temperature is 

17 °C (63 °F). There are no forested areas 

on Kauai where mean ambient 

temperature is below 13 °C (55 °F), 

meaning all areas are subject to malaria 

at least periodically. Mosquitoes have 

been found recently near the highest 

elevations on Kauai. The disappearance 

of the Kauai creeper from lowland 

habitats indicates the species has not 

evolved resistance to these diseases, and 

it is very unlikely that such evolution 

could occur rapidly enough to keep 

pace with expansion of mosquito 

populations. The creeper’s habitat is 

being adversely affected by invasive 

nonnative plants and by the browsing 

and rooting of feral ungulates. 

Nonnative plants displace native plant 

species required by the creeper, and 

ungulates destroy the forest understory 

and spread the seeds of nonnative 

plants. Efforts are underway to control 

nonnative plants in some areas, but over 

most of the species range there is no 

effective control of nonnative plants or 

feral ungulates. Based on the imminent 

threats of a high magnitude, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Yellow-billed cuckoo, western U.S. 

DPS (Coccyzus americanus)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on February 9, 

1998. See also our 12-month petition 

finding published on July 25, 2001 (66 

FR 38611). The yellow-billed cuckoo is 

a medium-sized bird of about 12 inches 

(30 centimeters) in length with a 

slender, long-tailed profile and a fairly 

stout and slightly down-curved bill. 

Plumage is grayish-brown above and 

white below, with rufous primary flight 

feathers with the tail feathers boldly 

patterned with black and white below. 

Western cuckoos breed in large blocks 

of riparian habitats (particularly 

woodlands with cottonwoods (Populus 

fremontii) and willows (Salix sp.). 

Dense understory foliage appears to be 

an important factor in nest site 

selection, while cottonwood trees are an 

important foraging habitat in areas 

where the species has been studied in 

California. We consider the yellowbilled cuckoos that occur in the western 

U.S. a distinct population segment 

(DPS). The area for this DPS is west of 

the crest of the Rocky Mountains. 

The threats currently facing the 

yellow-billed cuckoo include habitat 

loss, cattle grazing, and pesticide 

application. Principal causes of riparian 

habitat losses are conversion to 

agricultural and other uses, dams and 

river flow management, stream 

channelization and stabilization, and 

livestock grazing. Available breeding 

habitats for cuckoos have also been 

substantially reduced in area and 

quality by groundwater pumping and 

the replacement of native riparian 

habitats by invasive nonnative plants, 

particularly tamarisk. Overuse by 

livestock has been a major factor in the 

degradation and modification of 

riparian habitats in the western U.S. The 

effects include changes in plant 

community structure and species 

composition and in relative abundance 

of species and plant density. These 

changes are often linked to more 

widespread changes in watershed 

hydrology. Livestock grazing in riparian 

habitats typically results in reduction of 

plant species diversity and density, 

especially of palatable broadleaf plants 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53780 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

like willows and cottonwood saplings, 

and is one of the most common causes 

of riparian degradation. In addition to 

destruction and degradation of riparian 

habitats, pesticides may affect cuckoo 

populations. In areas where riparian 

habitat borders agricultural lands, e.g., 

in California’s central valley, pesticide 

use may indirectly affect cuckoos by 

reducing prey numbers, or by poisoning 

nestlings if sprayed directly in areas 

where the birds are nesting. We retain 

a listing priority number of 3 for the 

yellow-billed cuckoo due to imminent 

threats of a high magnitude. 

Friendly ground-dove, American 

Samoa DPS (Gallicolumba stairi stairi)—

See above in ‘‘Summary of Listing 

Priority Changes in Candidates.’’ The 

above summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Streaked horned lark (Eremophila 

alpestris strigata)—See above in 

‘‘Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on 

January 7, 2003. 

Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of New 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information in our files and in 

the petitions dated August 6, 2004, July 

28, 2005, and August 2, 2005. 

Kittlitz’s murrelet (Brachyramphus 

brevirostris)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on May 

9, 2001. Kittlitz’s murrelet is a small 

diving seabird whose entire North 

American population, and most of the 

world’s population, inhabits Alaskan 

coastal waters discontinuously from 

Point Lay south to northern portions of 

Southeast Alaska. Most recent 

population estimates (9,500–26,700 

birds) indicate that it has the smallest 

population of any seabird considered a 

regular breeder in Alaska. This species 

appears to have undergone significant 

population declines in four of its core 

population centers—Prince William 

Sound, Malaspina Forelands, Glacier 

Bay, and Kenai Fjords. As populations 

become smaller, they become 

increasingly vulnerable to events that 

may result in local extirpation. Causes 

for the declines in populations are not 

well known, but we believe that glacial 

retreat and oceanic regime shifts are the 

most likely causes. Kittlitz’s murrelets 

seem to prefer areas near stable or 

advancing tidewater glacier faces as 

these areas have higher primary 

productivity compared to siltier, less 

saline fjords with receding glaciers, but 

the ecological mechanisms linking 

Kittlitz’s murrelets to their preferred 

habitats remains a topic for further 

research. Other causes of decline may 

include: Habitat loss or degradation, 

increased adult and juvenile mortality, 

and low recruitment. Existing regulatory 

mechanisms appear inadequate to stop 

or reverse population declines or to 

reduce the threats to this species. Due 

to the nonimminent threats of high 

magnitude, we retained a listing priority 

number of 5 for this species. 

Xantus’s murrelet (Synthliboramphus 

hypoleucus)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on April 

16, 2002. The Xantus’s murrelet is a 

small seabird in the Alcid family that 

occurs along the west coast of North 

America in the U.S. and Mexico. The 

species has a very limited breeding 

distribution, only nesting on the 

Channel Islands in southern California 

and on islands off the west coast of Baja 

California, Mexico. Nesting populations 

in the U.S. and Mexico appear to have 

declined due to a wide variety of 

threats, with substantial declines 

evident at some of the largest nesting 

colonies and extirpations on three of the 

seven Mexican islands. Some identified 

threats include the possibility of oil 

spills, reductions in prey availability, 

introduced nonnative predators at 

several nesting colonies, chronic human 

disturbance, and artificial light 

pollution. A dramatic decline (up to 70 

percent) from 1977 to 1991 was detected 

at the largest nesting colony in southern 

California, possibly due to high levels of 

predation on eggs by the endemic deer 

mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus 

elusus). Data on population trends from 

other islands are scarce, particularly on 

the Mexican nesting islands. Although 

substantial declines in the Xantus’s 

murrelet population appear to have 

occurred over the last century, some of 

the largest threats are being addressed, 

and, to some degree, ameliorated in the 

U.S.. Declines and extirpations of 

Xantus’s murrelets at several nesting 

colonies were thought to have been 

caused by nonnative predators such as 

rats (Rattus sp.) and feral cats (Felis 

catus), which have been removed from 

many of the islands where they once 

occurred. Most notably, in 2002, rats 

were eradicated from Anacapa Island in 

southern California, which has resulted 

in immediate improvements in 

reproductive success at that island. 

The Service has been working with 

the State of California, National Park 

Service, and National Oceanographic 

and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA Fisheries) to address the threats 

of light pollution and human 

disturbance. Many nocturnal seabirds 

are attracted to bright lights on 

commercial fishing vessels. Xantus’s 

murrelets and other seabirds become 

exhausted by their continual attraction 

and fluttering near lights or collide with 

lighted vessels, the impact resulting in 

injury or death. Chicks have been 

known to become separated from their 

parents due to vessel lights, and this 

would have resulted in death of the 

chicks because they are dependent on 

their parents for survival. High-wattage 

lights on commercial market squid 

(Loligo opalescens) fishing vessels are 

used at night to attract squid to the 

surface of the water. These boats have 

been reported operating in shallow 

waters near Xantus’s murrelet nesting 

colonies in the California Channel 

Islands, with several vessels often 

fishing simultaneously in the same area. 

Unusually high predation on Xantus’s 

murrelets by Western Gulls and Barn 

Owls was reported at Santa Barbara 

Island in 1999, and was attributed to 

bright lights from the squid fishing that 

occurred directly offshore for much of 

the breeding season. To address this 

threat, the California Fish and Game 

Commission requires light shields and a 

limit of 30,000 watts per boat, made 

effective on May 31, 2000. The resulting 

effects are still unknown. 

The recent proposal to build a liquid 

natural gas (LNG) facility 600 meters 

(1,969 feet) off Islas Los Coronados in 

Baja California, Mexico, is another 

threat to the species. This island 

contains one of the largest nesting 

populations of Xantus’s murrelets in the 

world. The construction and operation 

of the proposed LNG facility at Islas Los 

Coronados could increase human 

disturbance to Xantus’s murrelets. 

Potential sources of disturbance 

include: (1) Bright lights at night from 

the facility and visiting tanker vessels; 

(2) noise from the facility; (3) noise from 

helicopters visiting the facility; (4) 

ingress and egress of tanker vessels; and 

(5) other vessels transporting personnel 

and supplies. Due to the imminent 

threats of high magnitude, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus 

pallidicinctus)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files and the petition 

received on October 5, 1995. Additional 

information can be found in the 12- 

month finding published on June 7, 

1998 (63 FR 31400). Biologists estimate 

that the occupied range has declined by 

92 percent since the 1800s. The most 

serious threats to the lesser prairiechicken are loss of habitat from 

conversion of native rangelands to 

introduced forages and cultivation, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53781 

cumulative habitat degradation caused 

by severe grazing, woody plant invasion 

of open prairies, fire suppression, 

herbicides, and habitat fragmentation 

caused by structural and transportation 

developments. Many of these threats 

may exacerbate the normal effects of 

periodic drought on lesser prairiechicken populations. In many cases, the 

remaining suitable habitat has become 

fragmented by the spatial arrangement 

of these individual threats. We view 

current and continued habitat 

fragmentation to be a serious ongoing 

threat that facilitates the extinction 

process through several mechanisms: 

Remaining habitat patches may become 

smaller than necessary to meet the 

yearlong requirements of individuals 

and populations, necessary habitat 

heterogeneity may be lost to large areas 

of monoculture vegetation and/or 

homogeneous habitat structure, areas 

between habitat patches may harbor 

high levels of predators or brood 

parasites, and the probability of 

recolonization decreases as the distance 

between suitable habitat patches 

expands. 

The Service is currently working to 

quantify the ongoing level of habitat 

fragmentation throughout the range of 

the species. Although Federal lands 

comprise only five percent of currently 

occupied habitat, these tracts are located 

in areas essential to population recovery 

and dispersal. As a result, the Service 

views habitat management 

considerations on Federal lands within 

current and historic range as very 

important. Due to their potential to 

affect the species, current planning 

efforts for grazing and wind, oil, and gas 

development on public lands is of 

particular relevance to the future listing 

status of the species. 

Based on all currently available 

information, we find that ongoing 

threats to the lesser prairie-chicken, as 

outlined in the 12-month finding, 

remain unchanged and lesser prairiechickens continue to warrant Federal 

listing as threatened. We have 

determined that the overall magnitude 

of threats to the lesser prairie-chicken 

throughout its range is moderate, and 

that the threats are ongoing and thus, 

imminent. Consequently, a listing 

priority number of 8 remains 

appropriate for the species. 

Greater sage-grouse, Columbia Basin 

DPS (Centrocercus urophasianus)—We 

have not updated our finding with 

regard to the Columbian Basin DPS of 

the greater sage-grouse in this notice. In 

the May 4, 2004, notice, we found that 

a listing proposal for this DPS was still 

warranted but precluded by higher 

priorities, and maintained its listing 

priority number of 6. The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files and a petition, dated May 14, 1999, 

requesting the listing of the Washington 

population of western sage grouse (C. u. 

phaios). Currently, the American 

Ornithologists’ Union recognizes two 

subspecies of greater sage-grouse. 

Compared to the eastern subspecies (C. 

u. urophasianus), the western 

subspecies has reduced white markings 

and darker grayish-brown feathering, 

resulting in a more dusky overall 

appearance. Pursuant to Service policy 

(61 FR 4722), on May 7, 2001, we 

concluded that listing the Columbia 

Basin DPS of western sage grouse, 

which was historically found in 

northern Oregon and central 

Washington, was warranted, but 

precluded by higher priority listing 

actions (66 FR 22984). The Service 

subsequently received two petitions 

requesting the listing of the entire 

ranges of the nominal western and 

eastern subspecies of greater sagegrouse, dated January 24 and July 3, 

2002, respectively. However, based on 

communications with recognized 

experts, disagreement as to the validity 

of these subspecies designations exists. 

When informed taxonomic opinion is 

not unanimous, the Service must 

evaluate the available information with 

regard to our section 4 listing 

responsibilities under the Endangered 

Species Act (USFWS 1992). We 

subsequently concluded that the 

subspecies designations for greater sagegrouse are inappropriate given current 

taxonomic standards (68 FR 6500 and 

69 FR 933). In response to recent 

judicial direction (Institute for Wildlife 

Protection v. Norton (9th Cir. 2005, 

Unpublished opinion)), we are in the 

process of revisiting our current 

interpretation of the taxonomic status of 

the greater sage-grouse subspecies. We 

will publish an updated finding 

addressing the Columbia Basin DPS in 

the Federal Register, either in the next 

CNOR or in a separate notice, following 

our judicially-directed reassessment of 

the species’ taxonomy. 

Band-rumped storm-petrel, Hawaii 

DPS (Oceanodroma castro)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on May 8, 1989. 

No new information was provided in 

the second petition received on May 11, 

2004. The band-rumped storm-petrel is 

a small seabird that is found in several 

areas of the subtropical Pacific and 

Atlantic Oceans. In the Pacific, there are 

three widely separated breeding 

populations—one in Japan, one in 

Hawaii, and one in the Galapagos. 

Populations in Japan and the Galapagos 

are comparatively large and number in 

the thousands, while the Hawaiian birds 

represent a small, remnant population 

of possibly only a few hundred pairs. 

Band-rumped storm-petrels are most 

commonly found in close proximity to 

breeding islands. The three populations 

in the Pacific are separated by long 

distances across the ocean where birds 

are not found. Extensive at-sea surveys 

of the Pacific have revealed a broad gap 

in distribution of the band-rumped 

storm-petrel to the east and west of the 

Hawaiian Islands, indicating the 

distribution of birds in the central 

Pacific around Hawaii is disjunct from 

other nesting areas. The available 

information indicates that distinct 

populations of band-rumped stormpetrels are definable and that the 

Hawaiian population is distinct based 

on geographic and distributional 

isolation from other band-rumped 

storm-petrel populations in Japan, the 

Galapagos, and the Atlantic Ocean. A 

population also can be considered 

discrete if it is delimited by 

international boundaries across which 

exist differences in management control 

of the species. The Hawaiian population 

of the band-rumped storm-petrel is the 

only population within U.S. borders or 

under U.S. jurisdiction. Loss of the 

Hawaiian population would cause a 

significant gap in the distribution of the 

band-rumped storm-petrel in the 

Pacific, and could result in the complete 

isolation of the Galapagos and Japan 

populations without even occasional 

genetic exchanges. 

The band-rumped storm-petrel 

probably was common on all of the 

main Hawaiian Islands when 

Polynesians arrived about 1,500 years 

ago, based on storm-petrel bones found 

in middens on the island of Hawaii and 

in excavation sites on Oahu and 

Molokai. Nesting colonies of this 

species in the Hawaiian Islands 

currently are restricted to remote cliffs 

on Kauai and Lehua Islet and highelevation lava fields on Hawaii. 

Vocalizations of the species were heard 

in Haleakala Crater on Maui in 1992, but 

have not been detected there recently. 

The significant reduction in numbers 

and range of the band-rumped stormpetrel from prehistoric population levels 

is due primarily to predation by humans 

and nonnative predators introduced by 

humans, including the domestic cat 

(Felis catus), small Indian mongoose 

(Herpestes auropunctatus), common 

barn owl (Tyto alba), black rat (R. 

rattus), Polynesian rat (Rattus exulans), 

and Norway rat (R. norvegicus), which 

occur throughout the main Hawaiian 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53782 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Islands, with the exception of the 

mongoose, which is not established on 

Kauai but may have an incipient 

population there. Attraction of 

fledglings to artificial lights and 

collisions with artificial structures such 

as communication towers and utility 

lines are also a threat. Erosion of nest 

sites caused by the actions of nonnative 

ungulates and feral rabbits is a threat in 

some locations. Efforts are underway in 

some areas to reduce light pollution and 

mitigate the threat of collisions, but 

there are no large-scale efforts to control 

nonnative predators in the Hawaiian 

Islands. Based on the imminent threats 

of a high magnitude, we assign this 

distinct population segment a listing 

priority number of 3. 

Elfin woods warbler (Dendroica 

angelae)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. The elfin woods warbler is a 

small, entirely black and white warbler, 

endemic to Puerto Rico. This species 

was at first thought to occur only in the 

high-elevation dwarf or elfin forests, but 

it has since been found at lower 

elevations, including shade coffee 

plantations and secondary forests. 

Dendroica angelae builds a compact cup 

nest, usually close to the trunk and well 

hidden among the epiphytes of a small 

tree, and its breeding season extends 

from March to June. This species forages 

in the middle part of trees, gleaning 

insects from leaves in the outer portion 

of the tree crown. Dendroica angelae 

has been documented from four 

locations: Luquillo Mountains, Sierra de 

Cayey, and the Commonwealth forests 

of Maricao and Toro Negro. However, it 

has not been recorded again in Toro 

Negro and Cayey, following Hurricane 

Hugo in 1989. Although there is no 

estimate of total population of D 

angelae, the latest estimate of 138 pairs 

for the Luquillo Mountains suggests that 

the total population may be less than 

300 pairs. 

Habitat destruction from expansion of 

public facilities within the forests, 

potential construction of additional 

telecommunication towers and their 

maintenance, disruption of breeding 

activities from pedestrians and high 

human use areas, switching from shade 

to sun coffee plantations, timber 

management practices, potential 

predators, and catastrophic natural 

events such as hurricanes and forest 

fires threaten this species. Although 

these threats are not imminent, because 

most of the range of D. angelae is within 

protected lands and there are no known 

projects or management activities 

planned that would result in mortality 

of this species, the magnitude of threat 

to D. angelae is high, due to its 

restricted distribution and low 

population numbers. Therefore, we 

assign a listing priority number of 5 to 

this species. 

Reptiles 

Sand dune lizard (Sceloporus 

arenicolus)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and in the petition received June 6, 

2002. The sand dune lizard is endemic 

to a small area in southeastern New 

Mexico (Chaves, Eddy, Lea, and 

Roosevelt Counties) and adjacent west 

Texas (Andrews, Crane, Ward, and 

Winkler Counties). Within this area, the 

known occupied and potentially 

occupied habitat is only 1,697 square 

kilometers (655 square miles) in New 

Mexico and an area of unknown size in 

west Texas. The sand dune lizard’s 

distribution is localized and fragmented 

(i.e., known populations are separated 

by vast areas of unoccupied habitat), 

and the species is restricted to sand 

dune blowouts associated with active 

sand dunes and shinnery oak (Quercus 

harvardii) and scattered sandsage 

(Artemisia filifolia) vegetation. Sand 

dune lizards are not found at sites 

lacking shinnery-oak dune habitat. 

Extensive surveys within New 

Mexico, conducted in conjunction with 

a 5-year study, documented sand dune 

lizards at only half of the sites surveyed. 

Since February 2003, a Stakeholder 

Group has met to create a conservation 

strategy for the conservation of 

shinnery-oak habitat that offers a range 

of specific actions for the recovery of the 

lesser prairie-chicken and sand dune 

lizard and takes into account other uses 

of the land. The group has broad 

representation from the oil and gas and 

livestock industries, conservation/ 

environmental interests, local 

governments, sportsmen/recreation, 

State and Federal agencies (New Mexico 

State Land Office, New Mexico 

Department of Agriculture, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, Fish 

and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of 

Land Management), and independent 

technical advisors. The group 

completed its Conservation Strategy that 

outlines broad policies and plans for 

land management and a set of voluntary 

conservation efforts by stakeholders. 

It is clear that shinnery-oak removal 

(e.g., by treating with the herbicide 

Tebuthiuron for livestock range 

improvements) results in dramatic 

reductions and extirpation of sand dune 

lizards. Scientists repeatedly confirmed 

the extirpation of sand dune lizards 

from areas with herbicide treatment to 

remove shinnery oak. In 1999, biologists 

estimated that about 25 percent of the 

total sand-dune-lizard habitat in New 

Mexico had been eliminated in the 

previous 10 years. The population of 

sand dune lizards has also been affected 

by oil and gas field development. An 

estimated 50-percent decline in sand 

dune lizard populations can be expected 

in areas with approximately 25 to 30 oil 

and/or gas wells per section. The 

distribution of sand dune lizards is 

localized and fragmented, and this 

species is a habitat specialist. Therefore, 

impacts to its habitat will most likely 

greatly decrease populations. If current 

herbicide application continues and oil 

and gas development progresses as 

expected, the magnitude of threat to 

sand dune lizards will increase. 

Continued pressure to develop oil and 

gas resources in areas with sand dune 

lizards poses an imminent threat to the 

species. Therefore, we continue to 

assign this species a listing priority 

number of 2. 

Eastern massasauga (Sistrurus 

catenatus catenatus)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

eastern massasauga is one of three 

recognized subspecies of massasauga. It 

is a small, thick-bodied rattlesnake that 

occupies shallow wetlands and adjacent 

upland habitat in portions of Illinois, 

Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Missouri, New York, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario. 

Although the current range of S. c. 

catenatus resembles the subspecies’

historical range, the geographic 

distribution has been restricted by the 

loss of the subspecies from much of the 

area within the boundaries of that range. 

Approximately 40 percent of the 

counties that were historically occupied 

by S. c. catenatus no longer support the 

subspecies. S. c. catenatus is currently 

considered imperiled in every State and 

province in which it occupies. Each 

State and Canadian province across the 

range of S. c. catenatus has lost more 

than 30 percent, and for the majority 

more than 50 percent, of their historical 

populations. Furthermore, less than 35 

percent of the remaining populations 

are considered secure. Approximately 

59 percent of the remaining S. c. 

catenatus populations occur wholly or 

in part on public land, and state-wide 

and/or site-specific Candidate 

Conservation Agreements with 

Assurances (CCAAs) are currently being 

developed for many of these areas in 

Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin. Populations soon to be 

under CCAs and CCAAs have a high 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53783 

likelihood of persisting and remaining 

viable. Other populations are likely to 

suffer additional losses in abundance 

and genetic diversity and some will 

likely be extirpated unless threats are 

removed in the near future. Therefore, 

the magnitude of threats from habitat 

modification, habitat succession, 

incompatible land management 

practices, illegal collection for the pet 

trade, and human persecution is 

moderate overall, with most imminent 

threats occurring to remaining 

populations on private lands. Due in 

large part to the numerous CCAAs 

currently being developed and 

implemented, we do not believe 

emergency listing is warranted and have 

kept the listing priority number at 9 for 

the eastern massasauga subspecies. 

Black pine snake (Pituophis 

melanoleucus lodingi)—See above in 

‘‘Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. 

Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis 

ruthveni)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on July 19, 2000. 

Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon 

sonoriense longifemorale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Sonoyta mud turtle occurs in a spring 

and pond at Quitobaquito Springs on 

Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument 

in Arizona, and in the Rio Sonoyta and 

Quitovac Spring of Sonora, Mexico. 

Loss and degradation of stream habitat 

from water diversion and groundwater 

pumping, along with its very limited 

distribution, is the primary threat to the 

Sonoyta mud turtle. Sonoyta mud 

turtles are highly aquatic and depend on 

permanent water for survival. The area 

of southwest Arizona and northern 

Sonora where the Sonoyta mud turtle 

occurs is one of the driest regions of the 

southwest. Due to continuing irrigated 

agriculture and development in the 

region, surface water in the Rio Sonoyta 

can be expected to dwindle further. This 

species may also be vulnerable to aerial 

spraying of pesticides on nearby 

agricultural fields. Due to imminent 

threats of a high magnitude, we are 

keeping the listing priority number of 3 

for this subspecies. 

Amphibians 

Columbia spotted frog, Great Basin 

DPS (Rana luteiventris)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files and the petition 

received on May 1, 1989. Currently, 

Columbia spotted frogs appear to be 

widely distributed throughout 

southwestern Idaho, eastern Oregon, 

and northeastern and central Nevada, 

but local populations within this entire 

general area appear to be small and 

isolated from each other. Recent work 

by researchers in Idaho and Nevada has 

documented the loss of historically 

known sites, reduced numbers of 

individuals within local populations, 

and declines in the reproduction of 

those individuals. Habitat degradation 

and fragmentation are probably a 

combined result of past and current 

influences of heavy livestock grazing, 

spring alterations, agricultural 

development, urbanization, beaver 

control, and mining activities. 

Fragmentation of habitat may be one of 

the most significant barriers to 

Columbia spotted frog recovery and 

population persistence. Loss of 

vegetation and/or lowering of the water 

table as a result of the above mentioned 

activities can significantly threaten frogs 

moving from one area to another. 

Likewise, fragmentation and loss of 

habitat can prevent frogs from 

colonizing suitable sites elsewhere. 

Two conservation agreements and 

strategies were signed by Federal, State, 

county, and university representatives 

on September 30, 2003, for the central 

and northeast Nevada subpopulations. 

The goals of the conservation 

agreements are to reduce threats to 

Columbia spotted frogs and their habitat 

to the extent necessary to prevent 

populations from becoming extirpated 

throughout all or a portion of their 

historic range and to maintain, enhance, 

and restore a sufficient number of 

populations of Columbia spotted frogs 

and their habitat to ensure their 

continued existence throughout their 

historic range. Despite the signing of 

these two conservation agreements and 

implementation of many actions in one 

of them, population levels have not 

increased significantly over levels that 

were present at the time the agreements 

were signed. There are several reasons 

for this, including the fact that the 

agreements do not cover entire range of 

the species (Oregon and Idaho are not 

included); the agreements mainly focus 

on data collection and research to assess 

current threats and distribution and 

abundance, and important factors 

affecting the populations are outside the 

scope of the agreement/conservation 

actions. Factors outside the agreements 

are threats such as disease, winter kill, 

and unexpected habitat degradation due 

to impacts of unauthorized livestock use 

at a core population site of the species. 

Also, implementation of one of the 

agreements has been severely 

constrained due to funding limitations 

faced by the implementing agency. 

Based on imminent threats of high 

magnitude, we are continuing to assign 

a listing priority number of 3 to this DPS 

of the Columbia spotted frog. 

Mountain yellow-legged frog, Sierra 

Nevada DPS (Rana muscosa)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on February 8, 

2000. Also see our 12-month petition 

finding published on January 16, 2003 

(68 FR 2283). The mountain yellowlegged frog inhabits the high elevation 

lakes, ponds, and streams in the Sierra 

Nevada Mountains of California, from 

near 4,500 feet (1,370 meters) to 12,000 

feet (3,650 meters). The distribution of 

the mountain yellow-legged frog is from 

Butte and Plumas counties in the north 

to Tulare and Inyo counties in the 

south. A separate population in 

southern California is already listed as 

endangered (67 FR 44382). 

Predation by introduced trout is the 

best-documented cause of the decline of 

the Sierra Nevada mountain yellowlegged frog, because it has been 

repeatedly observed that nonnative 

fishes and mountain yellow-legged frogs 

rarely co-exist. Mountain yellow-legged 

frogs and trout (native and nonnative) 

do co-occur at some sites, but these cooccurrences probably are mountain 

yellow-legged frog populations with 

negative population growth rates in the 

absence of immigration. To help reverse 

the decline of the mountain yellowlegged frog, the Sequoia and Kings 

Canyon National Parks have been 

removing introduced trout since 2001. 

Over 18,000 introduced trout have been 

removed from 11 lakes since the project 

started in 2001. The lakes are 

completely-to-mostly fish-free and 

substantial mountain yellow-legged frog 

population increases have resulted. The 

California Department of Fish and Game 

(CDFG) has also removed or is in the 

process of removing nonnative trout 

from a total of between 10 and 20 water 

bodies in the Inyo, Humboldt-Toiyabe, 

Sierra, and El Dorado National Forests. 

In the El Dorado National Forest, golden 

trout were removed from Leland Lakes, 

and attempts have been made to remove 

trout from two sites near Gertrude Lake 

and a tributary of Cole Creek; no data 

showing increase in mountain yellowlegged frogs at these sites were 

available. 

In California, chytridiomycosis, more 

commonly known as chytrid fungus, has 

been detected in many amphibian 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53784 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

species, including the mountain yellowlegged frog within the Sierra Nevada. 

Recent research has shown that this 

pathogenic fungus is widely distributed 

throughout the Sierra Nevada, and that 

infected mountain yellow-legged frogs 

die soon after metamorphosis. Several 

infected and uninfected populations 

were monitored in Sequoia and Kings 

Canyon National Parks over multiple 

years, documenting dramatic declines 

and extirpations in infected but not in 

uninfected populations. In the summer 

of 2005, 39 of 43 populations assayed in 

Yosemite National Park were positive 

for chytrid fungus. 

The current distribution of the Sierra 

Nevada mountain yellow-legged frog is 

restricted primarily to publicly managed 

lands at high elevations, including 

streams, lakes, ponds, and meadow 

wetlands located on national forests, 

including wilderness and nonwilderness on the forests, and national 

parks. In several areas where detailed 

studies of the effects of chytrid fungus 

on the mountain yellow-legged frog are 

ongoing, substantial declines have been 

observed over the past several years. For 

example, in 2005 surveys in Yosemite 

National Park mountain yellow-legged 

frogs were not detectable at 37 percent 

of 113 sites where they had been 

observed in 2000 to 2002; in 2005 in 

Sequoia and Kings Canyon National 

Parks, mountain yellow-legged frogs 

were not detected at 47 percent of sites 

where they had been recorded 3 to 8 

years earlier. A compounding effect of 

disease-caused extinctions of mountain 

yellow-legged frogs is that 

recolonization may never occur, because 

streams connecting extirpated sites to 

extant populations now contain 

introduced fishes, which act as barriers 

to frog movement within 

metapopulations. The listing priority for 

the mountain yellow-legged frog in the 

Sierra Nevada is highest for a 

population and is a 3. 

Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on May 4, 1989. 

Historically, the Oregon spotted frog 

ranged from British Columbia to the Pit 

River drainage in northeastern 

California. Based on surveys of 

historical sites, the Oregon spotted frog 

is now absent from at least 76 percent 

of its former range. The majority of the 

remaining Oregon spotted frog 

populations are small and isolated. 

The threats to the species’ habitat 

include development, livestock grazing, 

introduction of nonnative plant species, 

changes in hydrology due to 

construction of dams and alterations to 

seasonal flooding, and poor water 

quality. Additional threats to the species 

are predation by nonnative fish and 

introduced bullfrogs; competition with 

bullfrogs for habitat; and diseases, such 

as oomycete water mold Saprolegnia 

and chytrid fungus infections. The 

magnitude of threat is high for this 

species because the small populations 

with patchy and isolated distributions 

are subject to a wide range of threats to 

both individuals and their habitats that 

could seriously reduce or eliminate any 

of these isolated populations and further 

reduce the range of the species. Habitat 

restoration and management actions 

have not prevented a decline in the 

reproductive rates in some populations. 

The threats are imminent because each 

population is faced with multiple 

ongoing and potential threats. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for the Oregon spotted frog. 

Relict leopard frog (Rana onca)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of Listing Priority 

Changes in Candidates.’’ The above 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files and the petition 

received on May 9, 2002. 

Ozark hellbender (Cryptobranchus 

alleganiensis bishopi)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Since the species was elevated to 

candidate status in 2001 (66 FR 54808), 

the known threats have increased. In 

particular, recreational pressures on 

Ozark hellbender rivers have increased 

substantially on an annual basis. The 

Missouri Department of Conservation 

reports that gigging popularity and 

pressure have increased, and present a 

significant threat to hellbenders during 

the breeding season as they tend to 

move greater distances and congregate 

in small groups where they are an easy 

target for giggers. Canoe, kayak, and 

motor/jet boat traffic has increased in 

recent years on the Jacks Fork, Current, 

Eleven Point, and North Fork Rivers. 

The popularity of these float streams has 

grown to the point that the National 

Park Service is considering alternatives 

to reducing the number of boats that can 

be launched daily by concessionaires. In 

2003, the Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources added a 7-mile 

stretch of the Jacks Fork River to the list 

of impaired waters for organic wastes 

(fecal coliform). 

To date, nothing has been done to 

reduce or ameliorate ongoing threats to 

Ozark hellbenders. The Ozarks region 

continues to experience rapid 

urbanization, expansion of industrial 

agricultural practices such as 

concentrated animal feeding operations 

(chickens, turkeys, hogs, cattle), and 

logging. No laws are in place that 

preclude livestock from grazing in 

riparian corridors and resting in or 

along streams and rivers. Missouri is the 

second largest beef cattle producing 

state in the nation, with the majority of 

animal units produced in the Ozarks. 

Both Arkansas and Missouri are the 

leading States in poultry production. 

The fact that the majority of the Ozarks 

region in Missouri and Arkansas is 

comprised of karst topography (caves, 

springs, sinkholes, and losing streams) 

further complicates the containment 

and transport of potential contaminants. 

In short, the abundance of waste being 

generated and lack of adequate 

treatment facilities or practices for both 

human and livestock waste poses a 

significant and ever increasing threat to 

aquatic ecosystems. The decrease in 

Ozark hellbender range and population 

size and the shift in age structure are 

likely caused by a variety of historic and 

ongoing activities. The primary causes 

of these trends are habitat destruction 

and modification. Among these are 

impoundment, channelization, and 

siltation and water quality degradation 

from a variety of sources, including 

industrialization, agricultural runoff, 

mine waste, and timber harvest. 

Overutilization of hellbenders for 

commerce and scientific purposes is 

also likely contributing to their decline. 

The regulations in place that could 

prevent these impacts, including the 

Clean Water Act and State laws, have 

been inadequate in preventing Ozark 

hellbender declines to this point. 

Finally, most of the remaining Ozark 

hellbender populations are small and 

isolated, making them vulnerable to 

individual catastrophic events and 

reducing the likelihood of 

recolonization after localized 

extinctions. Due to the existence of 

ongoing, high magnitude threats, 

particularly the substantial increases in 

recreational pressures on Ozark 

hellbender rivers on an annual basis, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 3 

to the subspecies. 

Austin blind salamander (Eurycea 

waterlooensis)—The following summary 

is based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Austin blind salamander is known to 

occur in and around three of the four 

spring sites that comprise the Barton 

Springs complex in the City of Austin, 

Travis County, Texas. 

Primary threats to this species are 

degradation of water quality and 

quantity due to expanding urbanization. 

The Austin blind salamander depends 

on a constant supply of clean water in 

the Edwards Aquifer discharging from 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53785 

Barton Springs for its survival. 

Urbanization dramatically alters the 

normal hydrologic regime and water 

quality of an area. Increased impervious 

cover caused by development increases 

the quantity and velocity of runoff that 

leads to erosion and greater pollution 

transport. Pollutants and contaminants 

that enter the Edwards Acquifer are 

discharged in salamander habitat at 

Barton Springs and have serious 

morphological and physiological effects 

to the salamander. As the human 

population increases in central Texas, 

greater demand on groundwater sources 

occurs. Increased pumping of the 

Edwards Aquifer can result in reduced 

springflows that may also detrimentally 

impact the salamander. The Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

adopted the Edwards Rules in 1995 and 

1997, which require a number of water 

quality protection measures for new 

development occurring in the recharge 

and contributing zones of the Edwards 

Aquifer. However, Chapter 245 of the 

Texas Local Government Code permits 

‘‘grandfathering’’ of state regulations. 

Grandfathering allows developments to 

be exempted from any new local or state 

requirements for water quality controls 

and impervious cover limits if the 

developments were planned prior to the 

implementation of such regulations. As 

a result of the grandfathering law, very 

few developments have followed these 

ordinances. New developments are still 

obligated to comply with regulations 

that were applicable at the time when 

project applications for development 

were first filed. In addition, it is 

significant that even if they were 

followed with every new development, 

these ordinances do not span the entire 

watershed for Barton Springs. 

Consequently, development occurring 

outside these jurisdictions can have 

negative consequences on water quality 

and thus impact the species. Despite 

having the Edwards Rules in place and 

the existence of other local ordinances, 

10 years of trend data continues to show 

that water quality at Barton Springs is 

declining. Because of the limited 

distribution of this species, the 

magnitude of the threats facing it is 

high. We also consider the threats to be 

imminent because urbanization is 

ongoing and continues to expand over 

the Barton Springs Segment of the 

Edwards Aquifer and water quality 

continues to degrade. Thus, we retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Georgetown salamander (Eurycea 

naufragia)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Georgetown salamander is know from 

spring outlets along five tributaries to 

the San Gabriel River and one cave in 

the City of Georgetown, Williamson 

County, Texas. The Georgetown 

salamander has a very limited 

distribution and depends on a constant 

supply of clean water from the Northern 

Segment of the Edwards Aquifer for its 

survival. 

Primary threats to this species are 

degradation of water quality and 

quantity due to expanding urbanization. 

Increased impervious cover by 

development increases the quantity and 

velocity of runoff that leads to erosion 

and greater pollution transport. 

Pollutants and contaminants that enter 

the Edwards Aquifer are discharged 

from spring outlets in salamander 

habitat and have serious morphological 

and physiological effects to the species. 

As the human population increases in 

central Texas, greater demand on 

groundwater sources occurs. Increased 

pumping of the Edwards Aquifer results 

in reduced springflows that may also 

detrimentally impact the salamander. 

The information regarding the 

Edwards Rules described above in 

relation to the Austin blind salamander 

also applies to the Georgetown 

salamander and is incorporated here by 

reference. Because of the limited 

distribution of the Georgetown 

salamander, the magnitude of the 

threats facing it is high. The threats are 

also imminent because urbanization is 

ongoing and continues to expand over 

the Northern Segment of the Edwards 

Aquifer. Thus, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Salado salamander (Eurycea 

chisolmensis)—The following summary 

is based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Salado salamander is historically known 

from two spring sites, Big Boiling 

Springs and Robertson Springs, near 

Salado, Bell County, Texas. 

Salamanders have not been located at 

Robertson Springs since 1991. 

Primary threats to this species are 

habitat modification and degradation of 

water quality and quantity due to 

expanding urbanization. Many of the 

spring outlets in the City of Salado have 

been modified by dam construction. 

Because Big Boiling Springs is located 

near Interstate 35 and in the center of 

the city, increasing traffic and 

urbanization increase threats of 

contamination from spills, higher levels 

of impervious cover, and subsequent 

impacts to groundwater. Several 

groundwater contamination incidents 

have occurred within Salado 

salamander habitat. The Salado 

salamander depends on a constant 

supply of clean water from the Northern 

Segment of the Edwards Aquifer for its 

survival. Pollutants and contaminants 

that enter the Edwards Aquifer 

discharge in salamander habitat and 

have serious morphological and 

physiological effects to the salamander. 

As the human population increases in 

central Texas, greater demand on 

groundwater sources occurs. Increased 

pumping of the Edwards Aquifer can 

result in reduced springflows that may 

also detrimentally impact the 

salamander. 

Controls of nonpoint source pollution 

in the watershed are implemented 

through the Edwards Rules (water 

quality protection measures for the 

recharge and contributing zones of the 

Edwards Aquifer) adopted by the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ) in 1995 and 1997. Although 

implementation of the Edwards Rules in 

other areas of the Northern Segment of 

the Edwards Aquifer may have the 

potential to affect conditions at spring 

sites occupied by the Salado 

salamander, the jurisdiction of TCEQ 

does not extend into Bell County. For 

this reason, compliance with the 

Edwards Rules is not required in this 

part of the Edwards Aquifer. There are 

no other local or regional water 

protection measures that have been put 

in place for areas that feed the springs 

known to be occupied by the Salado 

salamander. Because of the limited 

distribution of this species, the 

magnitude of the threats facing it is 

high. We also consider the threats to be 

imminent because urbanization is 

ongoing and contamination events are 

occurring near spring sites known to 

support Salado salamanders. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Yosemite toad (Bufo canorus)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on April 3, 2000. 

See also our 12-month petition finding 

published on December 10, 2002 (67 FR 

75834). Yosemite toads are moderately 

sized toads with females having black 

spots edged with white or cream that are 

set against a grey, tan or brown 

background. Males have a nearly 

uniform coloration of yellow-green to 

olive drab to greenish brown. Yosemite 

toads are most likely to be found in 

areas with thick meadow vegetation or 

patches of low willows near or in water, 

and use rodent burrows for 

overwintering and temporary refuge 

during the summer. Breeding habitat 

includes the edges of wet meadows, 

slow flowing streams, shallow ponds 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53786 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

and shallow areas of lakes. The historic 

range of Yosemite toads in the Sierra 

Nevada occurs from the Blue Lakes 

region north of Ebbetts Pass (Alpine 

County) to south of Kaiser Pass in the 

Evolution Lake/Darwin Canyon area 

(Fresno County). The historic 

elevational range of Yosemite toads is 

1,460 to 3,630 meters (4,790 to 11,910 

feet). 

The threats facing the Yosemite toad 

include cattle grazing, timber 

harvesting, recreation, disease, and 

climate change. Inappropriate grazing 

has shown to cause loss in vegetative 

cover and destroying peat layers in 

meadows, which lowers the 

groundwater table and summer flows. 

This may increase the stranding and 

mortality of tadpoles, or make these 

areas completely unsuitable for 

Yosemite toads. Grazing can also 

degrade or destroy moist upland areas 

used as non-breeding habitat by 

Yosemite toads and collapse rodent 

burrows used by Yosemite toads as 

cover and hibernation sites. Timber 

harvesting and associated road 

development could severely alter the 

terrestrial environment and result in the 

reduction and occasional extirpation of 

amphibian populations in the Sierra 

Nevada. These habitat gaps may act as 

dispersal barriers and contribute to the 

fragmentation of Yosemite toad habitat 

and populations. Trails (foot, horse, 

bicycle, or off-highway motor vehicle) 

compact soil in riparian habitat, which 

increases erosion, displaces vegetation, 

and can lower the water table. 

Trampling or the collapsing of rodent 

burrows by recreationists, pets, and 

vehicles could lead to direct mortality of 

all life stages of the Yosemite toad and 

disrupt their behavior. Various diseases 

have been confirmed in Yosemite toads. 

Mass die-offs of amphibians have been 

attributed to: Chytrid fungal infections 

of metamorphs and adults; Saprolegnia 

fungal infections of eggs; iridovirus 

infection of larvae, metamorphs, or 

adults; and bacterial infections. 

Yosemite toads probably are exposed to 

a variety of pesticides and other 

chemicals throughout their range. 

Environmental contaminants could 

negatively affect the species by causing 

direct mortality; suppressing the 

immune system; disrupting breeding 

behavior, fertilization, growth or 

development of young; and disrupting 

the ability to avoid predation. We 

retained a listing priority number of 11 

for the Yosemite toad since the threats 

are of moderate to low magnitude and 

the threats are nonimminent at this 

time. 

Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus 

alabamensis)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. The Black Warrior 

waterdog inhabits streams above the 

Fall Line within the Black Warrior River 

Basin in Alabama. There is very little 

specific locality information available 

on the historical distribution of the 

Black Warrior waterdog since little 

attention was given to this species 

between its description in 1937 and the 

1980’s. There are a total of only 11 

known historical records from 4 

Alabama counties. Two of these sites 

have now been inundated by 

impoundments. Extensive survey work 

was conducted in the 1990’s to look for 

additional populations. Currently, the 

species is known from 14 sites in 5 

counties. 

Water quality degradation is the 

biggest threat to the continued existence 

of the Black Warrior waterdog. Most 

streams that have been surveyed for the 

waterdog showed evidence of pollution 

and many appeared biologically 

depauperate. Sources of point and 

nonpoint pollution in the Black Warrior 

River Basin have been numerous and 

widespread. Pollution is generated from 

inadequately treated effluent from 

industrial plants, sanitary landfills, 

sewage treatment plants, poultry 

operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface 

mining represents another threat to the 

biological integrity of waterdog habitat. 

Runoff from old, abandoned coal mines 

generates pollution through 

acidification, increased mineralization, 

and sediment loading. The North River, 

Locust Fork, and Mulberry Fork, all 

streams that this species inhabits are all 

on the Environmental Protection 

Agency’s list of impaired waters. An 

additional threat to the Black Warrior 

waterdog is the creation of large 

impoundments that have flooded 

thousands of square hectares (acres) of 

its habitat. These impoundments are 

likely marginal or unsuitable habitat for 

the salamander. Due to the continuing, 

imminent, high magnitude of the 

pervasive water quality degradation in 

the Black Warrior Basin, we assigned a 

listing priority number of 2 to this 

species. 

Fishes 

Arkansas darter (Etheostoma 

cragini)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Arkansas darter is a small fish in the 

perch family native to portions of the 

Arkansas River basin. The species’ range 

includes sites in extreme northwestern 

Arkansas, southwestern Missouri, and 

northeastern Oklahoma. It also occurs in 

a number of watersheds and isolated 

streams in eastern Colorado, southcentral and southwestern Kansas, and in 

the Cimarron watershed in northwest 

Oklahoma. The species is most often 

found in small spring-fed streams with 

sand substrate and aquatic vegetation. It 

appears stable at most sites where 

spring flows persist. It has declined in 

areas where spring flows have decreased 

or been eliminated. We estimate that 

currently there are approximately 145 

locality occurrences of the Arkansas 

darter distributed across the 5 States. 

However, status information from much 

of the Arkansas darter’s range is dated, 

and new surveys are needed; some 

survey work is being conducted in 2006. 

Major threats to the species include 

stream dewatering resulting from 

groundwater pumping in the western 

portion of the species’ range, and 

development pressures in portions of its 

eastern range. Spills and runoff from 

confined animal feeding operations also 

threaten the species locally throughout 

its range. We have retained a listing 

priority number of 11 for this species 

based on nonimminent threats of a 

moderate magnitude. 

Cumberland darter (Etheostoma 

susanae)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pearl darter (Percina aurora)—The 

following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. Little 

is known about the specific habitat 

requirements or natural history of the 

Pearl darter. Pearl darters have been 

collected from rivers and streams with 

a variety of attributes, but are mainly 

found over a gravel bottom substrate. 

This species is historically known only 

from localized sites within the 

Pascagoula and Pearl River drainages in 

Louisiana and Mississippi. Currently, 

the Pearl darter is considered extirpated 

from the Pearl River drainage and rare 

in the Pascagoula River drainage. Since 

1983, the range of the Pearl darter has 

decreased by 55 percent. Pearl darters 

are vulnerable to the cumulative 

impacts of a variety of non-point 

pollution types, such as sedimentation 

and chemical, and also to more 

localized and concentrated pollution 

events. The steady yet gradual change in 

river and tributary geomorphology and 

hydrology over time is believed to 

impact this species. Efforts are 

underway to improve habitat by 

reducing these threats and to increase 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53787 

and augment the numbers of Pearl 

darters through husbandry efforts. The 

magnitude of threat to this species is 

high due to the species limited and 

disjunct populations and threat due to 

high vulnerability to sedimentation. 

However, this threat is nonimminent 

since no known projects are planned 

directly affecting the species and the 

decline of water quality is slow and 

gradual. Therefore, we assigned this 

species a listing priority number of 5. 

Rush darter (Etheostoma 

phytophilum)—See above in ‘‘Summary 

of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. 

Yellowcheek darter (Etheostoma 

moorei)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

yellowcheek darter is endemic to four 

headwater tributaries of the Little Red 

River. Factors affecting the remaining 

populations include loss of suitable 

breeding habitat, habitat and water 

quality degradation, population 

isolation, and severe population 

declines exacerbated by stochastic 

drought conditions. It is vulnerable to 

alterations in physical habitat 

characteristics such as the 

impoundment of Greers Ferry Reservoir, 

channel maintenance in the Archey 

Fork, increased sedimentation from 

eroding stream banks and poor riparian 

management, and illegal gravel mining. 

A 2004–2005 threats assessment by 

Service personnel documented 

occurrences of eroding stream banks, 

poor riparian management, and illegal 

gravel mining, and found 52 sites of 

these activities on the Middle Fork, 28 

sites on the South Fork, 8 sites on 

Archey Fork, and 1 site in the Turkey/ 

Beech/Devils Fork system that are 

potential contributors to the decline of 

the species. The Middle Fork was listed 

as an impaired waterbody by the 

Arkansas Department of Environmental 

Quality in 2004 due to excessive 

bacteria and low dissolved oxygen. 

Recent studies have documented 

significant declines in the numbers 

(60,000 in 1981; 10,300 in 2000) of this 

fish in the remaining populations and 

continuing range restriction within the 

tributaries (130.4 to 65.0 stream km). 

According to a 2000 status survey, 

yellowcheek darter numbers had 

declined over a 20-year period by 83 

percent in both the Middle Fork and 

South Fork, and 60 percent in the 

Archey Fork. No yellowcheek darters 

were found in the Turkey Fork between 

1999 and 2005; the species has 

apparently been extirpated in that reach. 

Due to imminent threats of a high 

magnitude that are not currently 

targeted by conservation actions, we 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 2. 

Fluvial arctic grayling, upper 

Missouri River DPS (Thymallus 

arcticus)—We have not updated our 

finding with regard to fluvial arctic 

grayling DPS in this notice. We received 

a petition to list this species on October 

2, 1992, and published our 12-month 

finding on July 25, 1994 (59 FR 37738). 

In the 2004 CNOR (70 FR 24870), we 

found that a listing proposal for this 

species was still warranted but 

precluded by higher priorities, with a 

listing priority number of 3. We are in 

the process of considering new 

information and conducting additional 

evaluations regarding the fluvial arctic 

grayling. Upon completion, we intend to 

publish a listing determination for this 

DPS species in the Federal Register. 

Chucky madtom (Noturus 

crypticus)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

chucky madtom is a rare catfish known 

from only 15 specimens collected from 

two Tennessee streams. A lone 

individual was collected in 1940 from 

Dunn Creek (a Little Pigeon River 

tributary) in Sevier County and 14 

specimens have been encountered since 

1991 in Little Chucky Creek (a 

Nolichucky River tributary) in Greene 

County. Only 3 specimens have been 

encountered since 1994 from two riffle 

areas in a short reach of Little Chucky 

Creek. All Little Chucky Creek 

specimens have been collected from 

stream runs with slow to moderate 

current over pea gravel, cobble, or slabrock substrates. 

Threats to the chucky madtom 

include both extrinsic and intrinsic 

factors. Extrinsic factors include 

potential degradation of water quality 

and breeding and sheltering habitat due 

primarily to agricultural landuse 

practices and secondarily to urban and 

rural development in the watersheds of 

Little Chucky and Dunn creeks. The 

Service believes that intrinsic factors 

including the potential demographic 

effects of inbreeding, limited species 

distribution, presumed low number of 

individuals, and presumed low 

fecundity and short life span 

characteristic of closely related madtom 

species pose imminent threats of a high 

magnitude to the chucky madtom in its 

only known extant and historic 

locations. Therefore, we assigned the 

chucky madtom a listing priority 

number of 2. 

Grotto sculpin (Cottus sp., sp. nov.)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Grotto sculpin is restricted to two karst 

areas (limestone regions characterized 

by sink holes, abrupt ridges, caves, and 

underground streams), the Central 

Perryville Karst and Mystery-Rimstone 

Karst in Perry County, southeast 

Missouri. Grotto sculpins have been 

documented in only 5 caves. The 

current overall range of the grotto 

sculpin has been estimated to 

encompass approximately 260 square 

kilometers (100 square miles). 

The small population size and 

endemism of the grotto sculpin make it 

vulnerable to extinction due to genetic 

drift, inbreeding depression, and 

random or chance changes to the 

environment. The species’ karst habitat 

is located down-gradient of the city of 

Perryville, Missouri, which poses a 

potential threat if contaminants from 

this urban area enter cave streams 

occupied by grotto sculpins. Various 

agricultural chemicals, such as 

ammonia, nitrite/nitrate, chloride, and 

potassium have been detected at levels 

high enough to be detrimental to aquatic 

life within the Perryville Karst area. 

More than half of the sinkholes in Perry 

County contain anthropogenic refuse, 

ranging from household cleansers and 

sewage to used pesticide and herbicide 

containers. As a result, potential water 

contamination from various sources of 

point and non-point pollution poses a 

significant threat to the grotto sculpin. 

Of the 5 cave systems documented to 

have grotto sculpins, populations in one 

cave system were likely eliminated, 

presumably as the result of point-source 

pollution. When the cave was searched 

in the spring of 2000, a mass mortality 

of grotto sculpin was noted, and 

subsequent visits to the cave have failed 

to document a single live grotto sculpin. 

Thus, the species appears to have 

suffered a 20-percent decrease in the 

number of populations from the single 

event. Predatory fish such as common 

carp, fat-head minnow, yellow bullhead, 

green sunfish, bluegill, and channel 

catfish occur in all of the caves 

occupied by grotto sculpin. These 

potential predators may escape surface 

farm ponds that unexpectedly drain 

through sinkholes into the underground 

cave systems and enter grotto sculpin 

habitat. No regulatory mechanisms are 

in place that would provide protection 

to the grotto sculpin. Current threats to 

the habitat of the grotto sculpin may 

exacerbate potential problems 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53788 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

associated with its low population 

numbers and increase the likelihood of 

extinction. Due to the high magnitude of 

ongoing threats we assigned this species 

a listing priority number of 2. 

Sharpnose shiner (Notropis 

oxyrhynchus)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

The sharpnose shiner is a small, slender 

minnow, endemic to the Brazos River 

Basin in Texas. Historically, the 

sharpnose shiner existed throughout the 

Brazos River and several of its major 

tributaries within the watershed. It has 

also been found in the Wichita River 

(within the Red River Basin), where it 

may have once naturally occurred but 

has since been extirpated. Current 

information indicates that the 

population within the Upper Brazos 

River drainage (upstream of Possum 

Kingdom Reservoir) is apparently stable, 

while the population within the Middle 

and Lower Brazos River Basins may 

only exist in remnant areas of suitable 

habitat, or may be completely 

extirpated, representing a reduction of 

approximately 68 percent of its 

historical range. 

The most significant threat to the 

existence of the sharpnose shiner is 

potential reservoir development within 

its current range. Additional threats 

include irrigation and water diversion, 

sedimentation, industrial and municipal 

discharges, agricultural activities, instream sand and gravel mining, and the 

spread of invasive saltcedar. The current 

limited distribution of the sharpnose 

shiner within the Upper Brazos River 

Basin makes it vulnerable to 

catastrophic events such as the 

introduction of competitive species or 

prolonged drought. The magnitude of 

threat is high since the major threat of 

reservoir development within the 

current range of the species may render 

its remaining habitat unsuitable. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

due to major reservoir projects not likely 

occurring in the near future and the 

potential implementation of other water 

supply options that could preclude 

reservoir development. For these 

reasons, we assigned a listing priority 

number of 5 to this species. 

Smalleye shiner (Notropis buccula)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

smalleye shiner is a small, pallid 

minnow endemic to the Brazos River 

Basin in Texas. The population of 

smalleye shiners within the Upper 

Brazos River drainage (upstream of 

Possum Kingdom Reservoir) is 

apparently stable. However, the shiner 

has not been collected since 1976 

downstream from the reservoir, and in 

all likelihood the species is completely 

extirpated from this area, representing a 

reduction of approximately 54 percent 

of its historical range. 

The most significant threat to the 

existence of the smalleye shiner is 

potential reservoir development within 

its current range. Additional threats 

include irrigation and water diversion, 

sedimentation, industrial and municipal 

discharges, agricultural activities, instream sand and gravel mining, and the 

spread of invasive saltcedar. The current 

limited distribution of the smalleye 

shiner within the Upper Brazos River 

Basin makes it vulnerable to 

catastrophic events such as the 

introduction of competitive species or 

prolonged drought. The magnitude of 

threat is high since the major threat of 

reservoir development within the 

current range of the species may render 

its remaining habitat unsuitable. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

due to major reservoir projects not likely 

occurring in the near future and the 

potential implementation of other water 

supply options that could preclude 

reservoir development. For these 

reasons, we assigned a listing priority 

number of 5 to this species. 

Zuni bluehead sucker (Catostomus 

discobolus yarrowi)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

range of the Zuni bluehead sucker has 

been reduced by over 90 percent. The 

Zuni bluehead sucker currently 

occupies 9 river miles in 4 areas of New 

Mexico, and approximately 6 miles in 

one stream of Arizona. Zuni bluehead 

sucker range reduction and 

fragmentation is caused by 

discontinuous surface water flow, 

separation of inhabited reaches by 

reservoirs, and habitat degradation from 

fine sediment deposition. The principal 

uses of surface and ground water within 

the Zuni River watershed are human 

consumption, raising livestock, and 

irrigation. Diverting water for 

agricultural use is the primary purpose 

of at least five impoundments, and 

several other reservoirs act as floodcontrol structures. Degradation of the 

upper watershed has led to increased 

sedimentation, and many of the 

reservoirs are now only shallow, 

eutrophic (low oxygen) ponds or 

wetlands with little or no storage 

capacity. The impoundments have also 

changed the downstream channel 

morphology and substrate composition 

of streams. Another major impact to 

populations of Zuni bluehead sucker 

was the application of fish toxicants 

through at least two dozen treatments in 

the Nutria and Pescado rivers between 

1960 and 1975. Large numbers of Zuni 

bluehead suckers were killed during 

these treatments. 

For several years, the New Mexico 

Department of Game and Fish has been 

the lead agency to develop a 

conservation plan for Zuni bluehead 

sucker. A study funded through section 

6 of the Act was initiated in 2000, and 

continued through 2005. The grant 

included funding for development and 

implementation of a Zuni Bluehead 

Sucker Conservation Plan and the 

acquisition of additional information on 

distribution, life history, and species 

associations. The Zuni Bluehead Sucker 

Recovery Plan was approved by the 

New Mexico State Game Commission 

during a State Game Commission on 

December 15, 2004. The Recovery Plan 

recommends preservation and 

enhancement of extant populations and 

restoration of historical Zuni bluehead 

sucker populations. The recovery 

actions prescribed by the State Recovery 

Plan that we believe will reduce and 

remove threats to this subspecies, will 

require further discussions and 

authorizations before they can be 

implemented. Still, because of the 

ongoing threats of high magnitude, 

including loss of habitat, degradation of 

remaining habitat, and others (i.e., 

drought and fire), we maintained the 

current listing priority number of 3 for 

this subspecies. 

Clams 

Texas hornshell (Popenaias popei)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Texas hornshell is a freshwater mussel 

found in the Black River of New Mexico 

and one confirmed locality in the 

mainstem Rio Grande of Texas and 

Mexico. The primary threats are habitat 

alterations such as stream bank 

channelization, impoundments, and 

diversions for agriculture and flood 

control; contamination of water by the 

oil and gas industry; alterations in the 

natural riverine hydrology; and 

increased sedimentation from prolonged 

overgrazing and loss of native 

vegetation. Riverine habitats in both the 

Black River and the Rio Grande are 

under constant threats from these 

adverse changes. The magnitude of 

threats is high because of the existence 

of only one confirmed location in New 

Mexico and Texas each, which makes 

this species highly vulnerable to 

extinction. The threats are imminent 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53789 

because past alterations to riverine 

habitats have already occurred that 

resulted in the much reduced 

distribution of this species and demands 

for water from the Rio Grande continue 

to increase and make future habitat 

degradation likely. Thus, we maintained 

the listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Fluted kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus 

subtentum)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

fluted kidneyshell is a freshwater 

mussel (Unionidae) endemic to the 

Cumberland and Tennessee River 

systems (Cumberlandian Region) in 

Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and 

Virginia. It requires shoal habitats in 

free-flowing rivers to survive and 

successfully recruit new individuals 

into its populations. Habitat destruction 

and alteration (e.g., impoundments, 

sedimentation, and pollutants) are the 

chief factors contributing to its decline. 

This species has been extirpated from 

numerous regional streams and is no 

longer found in the State of Alabama. 

The fluted kidneyshell was historically 

known from at least 37 streams but is 

currently restricted to no more than 14 

isolated stream segments, of which only 

1 (upper Clinch River) appears to be 

stable and viable. The threats are high 

in magnitude since all populations of 

this species are potentially threatened 

by impoundments, sedimentation, small 

population size, isolation of 

populations, gravel mining, municipal 

pollutants, agricultural run-off, nutrient 

enrichment, and coal processing 

pollution. However, the threats are 

nonimminent at this time, and therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

5 for this mussel. 

Neosho mucket (Lampsilis 

rafinesqueana)—The following 

summary is based on information from 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. The Neosho mucket is a 

freshwater mussel native to Arkansas, 

Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. The 

species has been extirpated from 

approximately 62 percent (835 river 

miles) of its range, most of which has 

occurred in Kansas and Oklahoma. The 

Neosho mucket survives in four river 

drainages, however, only two of these, 

the Spring and Illinois Rivers, currently 

support relatively large populations. 

Significant portions of the historic 

range have been inundated by the 

construction of at least 11 dams. 

Channel instability downstream of these 

dams has further reduced suitable 

habitat and mussel distribution. Range 

restriction and population declines have 

occurred due to habitat degradation 

attributed to impoundments, mining, 

sedimentation, and agricultural 

pollutants. Rapid development and 

urbanization in the Illinois River 

watershed will likely continue to 

increase sedimentation and 

eutrophication to this river but 

populations are currently stable in this 

river. The remaining extant populations 

are vulnerable to random catastrophic 

events (e.g., flood scour, drought, toxic 

spills), land use changes within the 

limited range, and genetic isolation and 

the deleterious effects of inbreeding. 

These threats have led to the species 

being intrinsically vulnerable to 

extirpation. Although State regulations 

limit harvest of this species, there is 

little protection for habitat. The threats 

are high in magnitude, as they occur 

throughout the range of this species. 

While some of the threats are ongoing 

and thus, imminent, others are 

nonimminent, but on the balance are 

nonimminent. Thus, we assigned a 

listing priority number of 5 to this 

species. 

Alabama pearlshell (Margaritifera 

marrianae)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Alabama pearlshell inhabits shallow 

riffles and pool margins of small creeks 

and streams of southwest Alabama. 

Only three populations of Alabama 

pearlshell have been confirmed to 

survive during the past 15 years. One of 

these has declined significantly over the 

past few years, apparently due to 

increased sedimentation at this location 

and possibly other forms of non-point 

source (NPS) pollution. The other two 

populations appear to be small, but 

relatively stable and recruiting. We 

assigned the Alabama pearlshell a 

listing priority of 2 due to the 

vulnerability of small stream habitat to 

continuing NPS pollution and the 

decline of one of three known 

populations. 

Slabside pearlymussel (Lexingtonia 

dolabelloides)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

The slabside pearlymussel is a 

freshwater mussel (Unionidae) endemic 

to the Cumberland and Tennessee River 

systems (Cumberlandian Region) in 

Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and 

Virginia. It requires shoal habitats in 

free-flowing rivers to survive and 

successfully recruit new individuals 

into its populations. Habitat destruction 

and alteration (e.g., impoundments, 

sedimentation, and pollutants) are the 

chief factors contributing to its decline. 

This species has been extirpated from 

numerous regional streams and is no 

longer found in the State of Kentucky. 

The slabside pearlymussel was 

historically known from at least 32 

streams but is currently restricted to no 

more than 10 isolated stream segments. 

Current status information for most of 

the nine populations deemed to be 

extant is available from recent periodic 

sampling efforts (sometimes annually) 

and other field studies. Comprehensive 

surveys have taken place in the Middle 

and North Forks Holston River, Paint 

Rock River, and Duck River in the past 

several years. Based on recent 

information, the overall population of 

the slabside pearlymussel is declining 

rangewide and the species remains in 

good numbers and is clearly viable in 

just four streams. Two of the four largest 

populations have undergone recent 

declines (i.e., Middle and upper North 

Fork Holston Rivers) and most of the 

other populations are of doubtful 

viability for the long term. Since the 

nine remaining populations of the 

slabside pearlymussel face potential 

threats from impoundments, 

sedimentation, small population size, 

isolation of populations, gravel mining, 

municipal pollutants, agricultural runoff, nutrient enrichment, and coal 

processing pollution, the threats are 

high in magnitude but are 

nonimminent. Thus, we continue to 

assign a listing priority number of 5 to 

this mussel. 

Georgia pigtoe (Pleurobema 

hanleyanum)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. The Georgia pigtoe was 

historically found in shallow runs and 

riffles in large creeks and rivers of the 

Coosa River drainage of Alabama, 

Georgia, and Tennessee. The species is 

currently known from localized portions 

of the upper Conasauga River in Murray 

and Whitfield Counties, Georgia. In 

2005, the Coosa River in Cherokee 

County, Alabama, was removed as 

‘‘Current Range,’’ due to a lack of 

documentation that the species 

continues to exist at that locality. The 

Georgia pigtoe is very rare, with only a 

few observations of living animals over 

the past 15 years. Impoundment and 

pollution are implicated in the decline 

and disappearance of the species; 

pollution remains an ongoing threat. We 

assigned the Georgia pigtoe a listing 

priority of 2 due to its restricted range 

and continued lack of success in 

locating living animals. 

Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio 

spinosa)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53790 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Snails 

Ogden mountainsnail (Oreohelix 

peripherica wasatchensis)—The 

following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Ogden mountain snail is known from a 

single population near the mouth of 

Ogden Canyon, Weber County, Utah. 

The total occupied habitat is an area 

approximating 100 meters (328 ft) wide 

by 1 kilometer (0.5 miles) long. The 

restricted range of this snail, the 

proximity to an expanding residential 

area, and impacts from relatively heavy 

recreational use, makes it vulnerable to 

extirpation from stochastic or humancaused events. Threats to the colony 

have not substantially changed or 

increased over the past year. Recent 

molecular phylogenic studies are 

expected to clarify the level of 

uniqueness of this taxon. With the 

threats continuing at a moderate to low 

and imminent level, we retained a 

listing priority number of 9 for this 

subspecies. 

Bonneville pondsnail (Stagnicola 

bonnevillensis)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

fat-whorled pondsnail, also known as 

the Bonneville pondsnail, occupies four 

spring pools north of the Great Salt Lake 

in Box Elder County, Utah. While the 

number of individuals is unknown, the 

total known occupied habitat is less 

than one hectare. As a result of the 

implementation of a Conservation 

Agreement and Strategy, surveys are 

being conducted to determine if other 

populations are present. Previous and 

ongoing threats include chemical 

contamination of the groundwater. 

Significant actions are underway to 

remediate this threat, including 

implementation of a Corrective Action 

Plan to characterize and remediate 

groundwater contamination, 

implementation of a site management 

plan, and development of a groundwater 

model and risk assessment. These 

efforts have not been underway for a 

sufficient period to reduce the threat 

from contamination, so we retained a 

listing priority number of 8 for this 

species, reflecting imminent threats of a 

moderate magnitude. 

Interrupted rocksnail (Leptoxis 

foremani (= downei)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Interrupted rocksnails historically 

occurred in shoals, riffles, and reefs of 

small to large rivers in the Coosa River 

Basin of Alabama and Georgia. Today, 

only a single surviving natural 

population is known from a short reach 

of the Coosawattee River, Georgia. 

During a 1999 census, 10 to 45 

interrupted rocksnail snails per square 

meter were found in this reach. In 2004, 

a 6 man-hour search was required to 

find 20 individuals. We believe water 

quality was the cause of this decline. A 

captive colony of approximately 200 

snails was established at the Tennessee 

Aquarium Research Institute (TNARI) in 

2000 for study and propagation. During 

the winter of 2003, the Alabama 

Department of Conservation and Natural 

Resources (ADCNR) released about 3000 

juvenile interrupted rocksnails from the 

TNARI colony into the Coosa River 

above Wetumpka, Elmore County, 

Alabama. In 2004 and 2005 

approximately 1200 and 3000 juvenile 

snails, respectively, from the TNARI 

culture were released at the lower Coosa 

River site by ADCNR. A small number 

of the 2003 hatchery-cultured 

interrupted rocksnails were observed in 

the vicinity of the release site in 2005. 

The magnitude of threat is high for this 

species since it is only known from one 

naturally occurring site. Despite the 

ongoing conservation efforts, threats 

remain imminent, as water quality 

degradation of the stream is currently 

occurring and evident, in that the 

natural population has undergone a 

precipitous decline. Thus, we assigned 

a listing priority of 2 to the interrupted 

rocksnail. 

Sisi snail (Ostodes strigatus)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

sisi snail is a ground-dwelling species in 

the Potaridae family and is endemic to 

American Samoa. The species is now 

known from a single population on the 

island of Tutuila, American Samoa. 

This species is currently threatened 

by habitat loss and modification and by 

predation from nonnative predatory 

snails. The decline of the sisi in 

American Samoa have resulted, in part, 

from loss of habitat to forestry and 

agriculture and loss of forest structure to 

hurricanes and alien weeds that 

establish after these storms. All live sisi 

snails have been found in the leaf litter 

beneath remaining intact forest canopy. 

No snails were found in areas bordering 

agricultural plots or in forest areas that 

were severely damaged by three 

hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). 

Under natural historic conditions, loss 

of forest canopy to storms did not pose 

a great threat to the long-term survival 

of these snails; enough intact forest with 

healthy populations of snails would 

support dispersal back into newly 

regrown canopy forest. However, the 

presence of alien weeds such as mile-aminute vine (Mikania micrantha) and 

weedy tree species such as Funtumia 

elastica may reduce the likelihood that 

native forest will re-establish in areas 

damaged by the hurricanes. This loss of 

habitat to storms is greatly exacerbated 

by an expanding agriculture. 

Agricultural plots have spread from low 

elevation up to middle and some high 

elevations on all the islands, greatly 

reducing the forest area and thus 

reducing the resilience of native forests 

and its populations of native snails. 

These reductions also increase the 

likelihood that future storms will lead to 

the extinction of populations or species 

that rely on the remaining canopy forest. 

In an effort to eradicate the giant African 

snail, Euglandia rosea and another alien 

predatory snail, Gonaxis kibweziensis, 

were introduced in 1980 and 1977, 

respectively. Euglandia rosea have 

spread throughout the main island of 

Tutuila and by 1984 was considered to 

be well-established on Tutuila. Gonaxis 

kibweziensis is also present on Tutuila 

though it seems to be in decline. 

Numerous studies show that E. rosea 

feeds on endemic island snails 

including the sisi, and is a major agent 

in their declines and extirpations. At 

present, the major threat to long-term 

survival of the native snail fauna in 

American Samoa is predation by 

nonnative predatory snails. There are no 

conservation efforts being implemented 

to alleviate these threats and all these 

threats are ongoing and are therefore 

imminent. Since the threats occur 

throughout the entire range of the 

species, they are of a high magnitude. 

Therefore we assigned this species an 

LPN of 2. 

Diamond Y Spring snail 

(Pseudotryonia adamantina) and 

Gonzales springsnail (Tryonia 

circumstriata)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Diamond Y Spring snail and Gonzales 

springsnail are small aquatic snails 

endemic to Diamond Y Spring in Pecos 

County, Texas. The spring and its 

outflow channel are owned and 

managed by The Nature Conservancy. 

These snails are primarily threatened 

with habitat loss due to springflow 

declines from drought and from 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53791 

pumping of groundwater. Additional 

threats include water contamination 

from accidental releases of petroleum 

products, as their habitat is in an active 

oil and gas field. Also, a nonnative 

aquatic snail (Melanoides sp.) was 

recently introduced into the native 

snails’ habitat and may compete with 

endemic snails for space and resources. 

The magnitude of threats is high 

because limited distribution of these 

narrow endemics makes any impact 

from increasing threats (e.g., loss of 

springflow, contaminants, nonnative 

species) likely to result in the extinction 

of the species. These species occur in 

one location in an arid region currently 

plagued by drought and ongoing aquifer 

withdrawals, making the eventual loss 

of spring flow an imminent threat of 

total habitat loss. Thus, we maintain the 

listing priority number of 2 for both 

species. 

Fragile tree snail (Samoana fragilis)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. A 

tree-dwelling species, the fragile tree 

snail is a member of the Partulidae 

family of snails and is endemic to the 

islands of Guam and Rota (Mariana 

Islands). Requiring cool and shaded 

native forest habitat, the species is now 

known only from a single population on 

Rota. This species is currently 

threatened by habitat loss and 

modification and by predation from 

nonnative predatory snails. On Rota, 

large numbers of pigs, goats and deer, 

along with extensive logging, further 

contribute to the expansion of savanna 

grasslands and directly alter the 

understory plant community and overall 

forest microclimate. Savanna grassland 

habitat is unsuitable for tree snails. 

Predation by the alien rosy carnivore 

snail (Euglandina rosea) is a serious 

threat to the survival of the fragile tree 

snail. Field observations have 

established that the rosy carnivore snail 

will readily feed on native Pacific island 

tree snails, including the Partulidae, 

such as those of the Mariana Islands. 

The rosy carnivore snail has caused the 

extirpation of many populations and 

species of native snails throughout the 

Pacific islands. All of the threats occur 

rangewide and no efforts to control or 

eradicate the nonnative predatory snail 

species or to reduce habitat loss are 

being undertaken. The magnitude of 

threats is high because limited 

distribution of this narrow endemic 

makes any impact from increasing 

threats (e.g., nonnative species) likely to 

result in the extinction of the species. 

The threats are also ongoing and thus 

are imminent. Therefore, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Guam tree snail (Partula radiolata)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. A 

tree-dwelling species, the Guam tree 

snail is a member of the Partulidae 

family of snails and is endemic to the 

island of Guam. Requiring cool and 

shaded native forest habitat, the species 

is now known from only 11 populations 

on Guam. This species is currently 

threatened by habitat loss and 

modification and by predation from 

nonnative predatory snails. On Guam, 

open agricultural fields and other areas 

prone to erosion were seeded with 

tangantangan (Leucaena leucocephala) 

by the U.S. Military. Tangantangan 

grows as a single species stand with no 

substantial understory. The 

microclimatic condition is dry, with 

little accumulation of leaf litter humus 

and is particularly unsuitable as Guam 

tree snail habitat. In addition, native 

forest cannot reestablish and grow 

where this alien weed has become 

established. Large numbers of pigs, 

goats, and deer, along with extensive 

logging, further contribute to the 

expansion of savanna grasslands and 

directly alter the understory plant 

community and overall forest 

microclimate. Savanna grassland habitat 

is unsuitable for tree snails. Predation 

by the alien rosy carnivore snail 

(Euglandina rosea) is a serious threat to 

the survival of the Guam tree snail. 

Field observations have established that 

the rosy carnivore snail will readily feed 

on native Pacific island tree snails, 

including the Partulidae, such as those 

of the Mariana Islands. The rosy 

carnivore snail has caused the 

extirpation of many populations and 

species of native snails throughout the 

Pacific islands. All of the threats occur 

range wide and no efforts to control or 

eradicate the nonnative predatory snail 

species or to reduce habitat loss are 

being undertaken. The magnitude of 

threats is high because limited 

distribution of this narrow endemic 

makes any impact from increasing 

threats (e.g., nonnative species) likely to 

result in the extinction of the species. 

The threats are also ongoing and thus 

are imminent. Therefore, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Humped tree snail (Partula gibba)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. A 

tree-dwelling species, the humped tree 

snail is a member of the Partulidae 

family of snails, and was originally 

known from the island of Guam and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands (islands of Rota, Aguijan, 

Tinian, Saipan, Anatahan, Sarigan, 

Alamagan, and Pagan). Most recent 

surveys revealed a total of 28 

populations on the islands of Guam, 

Rota, Aguijan, Tinian, Anatahan, 

Sarigan, Alamagan, and Pagan. 

Although still the most widely 

distributed tree snail endemic in the 

Mariana Islands, remaining population 

sizes are often small. 

This species is currently threatened 

by habitat loss and modification and by 

predation from nonnative predatorial 

snails. In recent times, remaining 

populations of the snail have been 

threatened by ongoing development. For 

example, a road was cut within the 

coastal area containing the remaining 

three Guam populations of the snail, 

and it is believed that the decline in 

these populations may be due to the 

indirect effects of this road. Throughout 

the Mariana Islands, feral ungulates 

(pigs (Sus scrofa), Philippine deer 

(Cervus mariannus), cattle (Bos taurus), 

water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), and 

goats (Capra hircus)) have caused severe 

damage to native forest vegetation by 

browsing directly on plants, causing 

erosion, and retarding forest growth and 

regeneration. This in turn reduces the 

quantity and quality of forested habitat 

for the humped tree snail. Currently, 

populations of feral ungulates are found 

on the islands of Guam (deer, pigs, and 

water buffalo), Rota (deer and cattle), 

Aguiguan (goats), Tinian (cattle), Saipan 

(deer, pigs, and cattle), Anatahan (pigs 

and goats), Alamagan (goats, pigs, and 

cattle), and Pagan (cattle, goats, and 

pigs). Goats were eradicated from 

Sarigan in 1998 and the humped tree 

snail has increased in abundance on 

that island, likely in response to the 

removal of all the goats. However, the 

population of humped tree snails on 

Anatahan is likely extirpated due to the 

massive volcanic explosions of the 

island beginning in 2003 and still 

continuing, and the resulting loss of up 

to 95 percent of the vegetation on the 

island. Predation by the alien rosy 

carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea) is 

also a serious threat to the survival of 

the Humped tree snail. Field 

observations have established that the 

rosy carnivore snail will readily feed on 

native Pacific island tree snails, 

including the Partulidae such as those 

of the Mariana Islands. The rosy 

carnivore snail has caused the 

extirpation of many populations and 

species of native snails throughout the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53792 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Pacific islands. All of the threats occur 

range-wide and no efforts to control or 

eradicate the nonnative predatory snail 

species or to reduce habitat loss are 

being undertaken. The magnitude of 

threats is high because limited 

distribution of this species makes any 

impact from increasing threats (e.g., 

nonnative species) likely to result in the 

extinction of the species. The threats are 

also ongoing and thus are imminent. 

Therefore, we assigned this species a 

listing priority number of 2. 

Lanai tree snail (Partulina 

semicarinata)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. A tree-dwelling species, 

P. semicarinata is a member of the 

Achatinellidae family of snails. 

Endemic to the island of Lanai, the 

species is currently known from 3 

populations totaling 29 individuals. 

This species is highly threatened 

throughout its limited range by habitat 

loss and modification and by predation 

from rats. No efforts are being 

undertaken to remove rats in areas that 

P. semicarinata occur. The threat from 

this predator is expected to continue or 

increase unless the rats are actively 

controlled or eradicated. Habitat loss 

also continues due to the trampling and 

browsing of native vegetation required 

by P. semicarinata by nonnative 

ungulates. Although the snails are in an 

area to be fenced, until the fence is 

constructed and the ungulates have 

been removed, the habitat will continue 

to be degraded. The small number of 

individuals and the small number of 

populations make this species very 

susceptible to the negative effects of 

stochastic events such as hurricanes and 

storms. There is a population in 

captivity that is protected from the 

effects of unexpected droughts, though 

the effects of severe storms may still 

affect this population as evidenced by 

the loss of snails when a severe flood 

interrupted the power supply to the 

University and temperatures increased 

within the environmental chambers 

containing the snails. In addition, these 

snails are likely subjected to the same 

concerns of reproductive vigor and loss 

of genetic variability. The magnitude of 

threats is high because limited 

distribution of this narrow endemic 

makes any impact from increasing 

threats (e.g., nonnative species) likely to 

result in the extinction of the species. 

The threats are also ongoing and thus 

are imminent. Therefore, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Lanai tree snail (Partulina 

variabilis)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. A tree-dwelling species, P. 

variabilis is a member of the 

Achatinellidae family of snails. 

Endemic to the island of Lanai, the 

species is currently known from 12 

populations totaling 90 individuals. 

This species is highly threatened 

throughout its limited range by habitat 

loss and modification and by predation 

from rats. No efforts are being 

undertaken to remove rats in areas that 

P. variabilis occur. The threat from this 

predator is expected to continue or 

increase unless the rats are actively 

controlled or eradicated. Habitat loss 

also continues due to the trampling and 

browsing of native vegetation required 

by P. variabilis by nonnative ungulates. 

Although the snails are in an area to be 

fenced, until the fence is constructed 

and the ungulates have been removed, 

the habitat will continue to be degraded. 

The small number of individuals and 

the small number of populations make 

this species very susceptible to the 

negative effects of stochastic events 

such as hurricanes and storms. There is 

a population in captivity that is 

protected from the effects of unexpected 

droughts, though the effects of severe 

storms may still affect this population as 

evidenced by the loss of snails when a 

severe flood interrupted the power 

supply to the University and 

temperatures increased within the 

environmental chambers containing the 

snails. In addition, these snails are 

likely subjected to the same concerns of 

reproductive vigor and loss of genetic 

variability as the wild population. The 

magnitude of threats is high because 

limited distribution of this narrow 

endemic makes any impact from 

increasing threats (e.g., nonnative 

species) likely to result in the extinction 

of the species. The threats are also 

ongoing and thus are imminent. 

Therefore, we assigned this species a 

listing priority number of 2. 

Langford’s tree snail (Partula 

langfordi)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. A tree-dwelling species, 

Langford’s tree snail is a member of the 

Partulidae family of snails and is known 

from one population on the island of 

Aguiguan. This species is currently 

threatened by habitat loss and 

modification and by predation from 

nonnative predatorial snails. In the 

1930s, the island of Aguiguan was 

mostly cleared of native forest to 

support sugar cane and pineapple 

production. The abandoned fields and 

airstrip are now overgrown with alien 

weeds. The remaining native forest 

understory has greatly suffered from 

large and uncontrolled populations of 

alien goats and the invasion of weeds. 

Goats (Capra hircus) have caused severe 

damage to native forest vegetation by 

browsing directly on plants, causing 

erosion, and retarding forest growth and 

regeneration. This in turn reduces the 

quantity and quality of forested habitat 

for Langford’s tree snail. Predation by 

the alien rosy carnivore snail 

(Euglandina rosea) is also a serious 

threat to the survival of Langford’s tree 

snail. Field observations have 

established that the rosy carnivore snail 

will readily feed on native Pacific island 

tree snails, including the Partulidae 

such as those of the Mariana Islands. 

The rosy carnivore snail has caused the 

extirpation of many populations and 

species of native snails throughout the 

Pacific islands. All of the threats occur 

rangewide and no efforts to control or 

eradicate the nonnative predatory snail 

species or to reduce habitat loss are 

being undertaken. The magnitude of 

threats is high because limited 

distribution of this narrow endemic 

makes any impact from increasing 

threats (e.g., nonnative species) likely to 

result in the extinction of the species. 

The threats are also ongoing and thus 

are imminent. Therefore, we assigned 

this species a listing priority number of 

2. 

Phantom Cave snail (Cochliopa 

texana) and Phantom springsnail 

(Tryonia cheatumi)—The following 

summary is based on information from 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Phantom Cave snail and 

Phantom springsnail are small aquatic 

snails that occur in three spring 

outflows in the Toyah Basin in Reeves 

and Jeff Davis Counties, Texas. The 

primary threat to both species is the loss 

of surface flows due to declining 

groundwater levels from drought and 

pumping for agricultural production. 

Although much of the land immediately 

surrounding their habitat is owned and 

managed by The Nature Conservancy, 

Bureau of Reclamation, and Texas Parks 

and Wildlife Department, the water 

needed to maintain their habitat has 

declined due to a reduction in spring 

flows, possibly as a result of private 

groundwater pumping in areas beyond 

that controlled by these landowners. As 

an example, Phantom Lake Spring, one 

of the sites of occurrence, has already 

ceased flowing and aquatic habitat is 

supported only by a pumping system. 

The magnitude of the threats is high 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53793 

because spring flow loss would result in 

complete habitat destruction and 

permanent elimination of all 

populations of the species. The 

immediacy of the threats is imminent, 

as evidenced by the drastic decline in 

spring flow at Phantom Lake Spring that 

is happening now and will likely 

extirpate this population in the near 

future. Declining spring flows in San 

Solomon Spring are also becoming 

evident and will affect that spring site 

as well within the foreseeable future. 

Thus, we maintained the listing priority 

number of 2 for both species. 

Tutuila tree snail (Eua zebrina)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. A 

tree-dwelling species, the Tutuila tree 

snail is a member of the Partulidae 

family of snails and is endemic to 

American Samoa. The species is now 

known only from two populations on 

the island of Tutuila. 

This species is currently threatened 

by habitat loss and modification and by 

predation from nonnative predatory 

snails. All live Tutuila tree snails were 

found on understory vegetation beneath 

remaining intact forest canopy. No 

snails were found in areas bordering 

agricultural plots or in forest areas that 

were severely damaged by three 

hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). 

Under natural historical conditions, loss 

of forest canopy to storms did not pose 

a great threat to the long-term survival 

of these snails; enough intact forest with 

healthy populations of snails would 

support dispersal back into newly 

regrown canopy forest. However, the 

presence of alien weeds such as mile-aminute vine (Mikania micrantha) and 

weedy tree species such as Funtumia 

elastica, may reduce the likelihood that 

native forest will re-establish in areas 

damaged by the hurricanes. This loss of 

habitat to storms is greatly exacerbated 

by an expanding agricultural footprint. 

Agricultural plots have spread from low 

elevation up to middle and some high 

elevations on all the islands, greatly 

reducing the forest area and thus 

reducing the resilience of native forests 

and its populations of native snails. 

These reductions also increase the 

likelihood that future storms will lead to 

the extinction of populations or species 

that rely on the remaining canopy forest. 

In an effort to eradicate the giant African 

snail, Euglandina rosea and another 

alien predatory snail, Gonaxis 

kibweziensis, were introduced in 1980 

and 1977, respectively. Euglandia rosea 

have spread throughout the main island 

of Tutuila and by 1984, was considered 

to be well established on Tutuila. 

Gonaxis kibweziensis is also present on 

Tutuila though it seems to be in decline. 

Numerous studies show that E. rosea 

feeds on endemic island snails, 

including the Tutuila tree snail, and is 

a major agent in their declines and 

extirpations. At present, the major threat 

to the long-term survival of the native 

snail fauna in American Samoa is 

predation by nonnative predatory snails. 

There are currently no conservation 

efforts being implemented to alleviate 

the threats to this species. The 

magnitude of threats is high because 

limited distribution of this narrow 

endemic makes any impact from 

increasing threats (e.g., nonnative 

species) likely to result in the extinction 

of the species. The threats are also 

ongoing and thus are imminent. 

Therefore, we assigned this species a 

listing priority number of 2. 

Chupadera springsnail (Pyrgulopsis 

chupaderae)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files and the petition received on 

November 20, 1985. See also our 12- 

month petition finding published on 

October 4, 1988 (53 FR 38969). This 

aquatic species is endemic to Willow 

Spring on the Willow Spring Ranch 

(formerly Cienega Ranch) at the south 

end of the Chupadera Mountains in 

Socorro County, New Mexico. The 

Chupadera springsnail has been 

documented from two hillside 

groundwater discharges that flow 

through grazed areas among rhyolitic 

gravels containing sand, mud, and 

hydrophytic plants. Regional and local 

groundwater depletion, springrun 

dewatering, and riparian habitat 

degradation represent the principal 

threats. The survival and recovery of the 

Chupadera springsnail is contingent 

upon protection of the riparian corridor 

immediately adjacent to Willow Spring 

and the availability of perennial, 

oxygenated flowing water within the 

species’ thermal range. Due to several 

factors, including the extremely 

localized distribution of the snail, its 

occurrence only on private property, the 

lack of regulatory protection of its 

habitat, and the inability of land 

managers to participate in its 

management, the magnitude of the 

threats to this species is high. There is 

an imminent threat to this species 

because the threats are ongoing (e.g., 

grazing of cattle, water withdrawal, and 

fire). Therefore, due to the continuing 

high magnitude and imminence of 

threats to this species, we retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Elongate mud meadows springsnail 

(Pyrgulopsis notidicola)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pyrgulopsis notidicola is endemic to 

Soldier Meadow, which is located at the 

northern extreme of the western arm of 

the Black Rock Desert, in the transition 

zone between the Basin and Range 

Physiographic Province and the 

Columbia Plateau Province, Humboldt 

County, Nevada. The type locality, and 

the only known location of the species, 

occurs in a stretch of thermal (between 

45° Celsius (C) (113° Fahrenheit (F)) and 

32 °C (90 °F)) aquatic habitat that is 

approximately 300 m (984 ft) long and 

2 m (6.7 ft) wide. Pyrgulopsis notidicola 

occurs only in shallow, flowing water 

on gravel substrate. The species does 

not occur in deep water (i.e., 

impoundments) where water velocity is 

low, gravel substrate is absent, and 

sediment levels are high. The present or 

threatened destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range by 

recreational bathers in the thermal 

waters is the greatest threat to the 

species. The small size of their habitat 

and their limited range makes them 

highly susceptible to any factors that 

negatively affect their habitat. 

Regulatory mechanisms are beginning to 

be put in place, but few actions have 

been implemented to date. Based on 

imminent threats of high magnitude, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Gila springsnail (Pyrgulopsis gilae)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on November 20, 

1985. Also see our 12-month petition 

finding published on October 4, 1988 

(53 FR 38969). The Gila springsnail is 

an aquatic species known from 13 

populations in New Mexico. The longterm persistence of the Gila springsnail 

is contingent upon protection of the 

riparian corridor immediately adjacent 

to springhead and springrun habitats 

(i.e., habitat at the springhead and along 

the watercourse running from the 

springhead), thereby ensuring the 

maintenance of perennial, oxygenated 

flowing water within the species’

required thermal range. Sites on both 

private and Federal lands are subject to 

levels of recreational use and livestock 

grazing that negatively affect this 

species, thus placing the long-term 

survival of the Gila springsnail at risk. 

Natural events such as drought, forest 

fire, sedimentation, and flooding; 

wetland habitat degradation by 

recreational bathing in thermal springs; 

and poor watershed management 

practices represent the primary threats 

to the Gila springsnail. Fire suppression 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53794 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

activities and fire retardant chemicals 

have potentially deleterious effects on 

this species. Because several of the 

springs occur on U.S. Forest Service 

land, management options for the 

protection of the snail should be 

possible. However, randomly occurring 

events, especially fire and drought, 

could have a major impact on the 

species. Moderate use by 

recreationalists and livestock is ongoing. 

If these uses remain at current or lower 

levels, they will not pose an imminent 

threat to the species. Of greater concern 

is the current drought that could affect 

spring discharge and which increases 

the potential for fire. Significant fires 

have occurred in the Gila National 

Forest, and subsequent floods and ash 

flows have severely affected aquatic life 

in streams. If the drought continues or 

worsens, the imminence of threats from 

decreased discharge or fire will 

increase. Based on these nonimminent 

threats that are currently of a low 

magnitude, we retained a listing priority 

number of 11 for this species. 

Gonzales springsnail (Tryonia 

circumstriata)—See paragraph above 

under Diamond Y Spring snail 

(Pseudotryonia adamantina). 

Huachuca springsnail (Pyrgulopsis 

thompsoni)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Huachuca springsnail inhabits 13 

springs and cienegas at elevations of 

4,500 to 7,200 feet in southeastern 

Arizona (11 sites) and adjacent portions 

of Sonora, Mexico (2 sites). The 

springsnail is typically found in the 

shallower areas of springs or cienegas, 

often in rocky seeps at the spring 

source. Potential threats include habitat 

modification, wildfire, cattle grazing, 

and groundwater pumping. Recent 

communication with personnel from 

Fort Huachuca indicates they are in the 

process of evaluating the status of this 

species on Department of Defense lands 

and developing conservation strategies; 

this may result in a reduction or 

elimination of threats in the future. 

Currently, however, due to 

nonimminent threats of a high 

magnitude, we retained a listing priority 

number of 5 for this species. 

New Mexico springsnail (Pyrgulopsis 

thermalis)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on 

November 20, 1985. Also see our 12- 

month petition finding published on 

October 4, 1988 (53 FR 38969). The New 

Mexico springsnail is an aquatic species 

known from only two separate 

populations associated with a series of 

spring-brook systems along the Gila 

River in the Gila National Forest in 

Grant County, New Mexico. The longterm persistence of the New Mexico 

springsnail is contingent upon 

protection of the riparian corridor 

immediately adjacent to springhead and 

springrun habitats (i.e., habitat at the 

springhead and along the watercourse 

running from the springhead), thereby 

ensuring the maintenance of perennial, 

oxygenated flowing water within the 

species’ required thermal range. While 

the New Mexico springsnail populations 

may be stable, the sites inhabited by the 

species are subject to levels of 

recreational use and livestock grazing 

that can negatively affect this species. 

Wetland habitat degradation by 

recreational use and overgrazing in or 

near the thermal springs and/or 

inadequate watershed management 

practices represent the primary threats 

to the New Mexico springsnail. 

Moderate use by recreationalists and 

livestock is ongoing. If these uses 

remain at the current or lower levels, 

they will not pose an imminent threat 

to the species. Of greater concern is the 

current drought, which could affect 

spring discharge and increases the 

potential for fire. Significant fires have 

occurred in the Gila National Forest and 

subsequent floods and ash flows have 

severely affected aquatic life in streams. 

If the drought continues or worsens, the 

imminence of threats from decreased 

discharge and fire will increase. Based 

on these nonimminent threats of a low 

magnitude, we retained a listing priority 

number of 11 for this springsnail. 

Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis 

morrisoni)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Page springsnail is known to exist only 

within a complex of springs located 

within an approximately 1.5-kilometer 

(0.93-mile) stretch along the west side of 

Oak Creek around the community of 

Page Springs, Yavapai County, Arizona. 

Many of the springs where the 

springsnail occurs have been subjected 

to some level of modification for 

domestic, agricultural, ranching, fish 

hatchery, and recreational activities. 

Arizona Game and Fish Department 

management plans for the Bubbling 

Ponds and Page Springs fish hatcheries 

include commitments to replace lost 

habitat and to monitor remaining 

populations of invertebrates such as the 

Page springsnail. Based on recent survey 

data, it appears that the Page springsnail 

is abundant within its habitats and is 

more widely distributed than previously 

known. Monitoring by Arizona Game 

and Fish Department and Service 

biologists no longer entails snail 

removal, which appears to have had a 

temporary positive impact on 

population numbers. The threat of 

groundwater withdrawal is not 

imminent because recent studies 

indicate that the groundwater system of 

the Verde Valley has not yet been 

affected by development, and base flow 

in the Verde River Valley has remained 

virtually unchanged since 1915. 

However, the magnitude of threats is 

high because limited distribution of this 

narrow endemic makes any impact from 

the threat (e.g., groundwater 

withdrawal) likely to result in the 

extinction of the species. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 5 

for this species. 

Three Forks springsnail (Pyrgulopsis 

trivialis)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Three Forks springsnail is an endemic 

species with distribution limited to the 

Three Forks Springs and Boneyard 

Springs spring complexes in the North 

Fork East Fork Black River Watershed of 

east-central Arizona. The springsnail is 

known from free-flowing spring heads, 

concrete boxed spring heads, spring 

runs, and spring seepage at these sites. 

The primary threats include habitat 

modification from recreational 

activities, damage from elk wallowing, 

and predation from nonnative crayfish. 

The Arizona Game and Fish Department 

currently maintains an active 

monitoring program for the Three Forks 

springsnail in cooperation with the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. 

Forest Service. This program includes 

population monitoring, habitat 

sampling, and removal of nonnative 

predatory crayfish. However, in the 

absence of a management strategy to 

effectively address the threat from both 

elk and crayfish in the long-term, the 

threats are ongoing and therefore, 

imminent. The magnitude of threats is 

high because limited distribution of this 

narrow endemic makes any impact from 

the threats likely to result in the 

extinction of the species. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for the Three Forks springsnail. 

Newcomb’s tree snail (Newcombia 

cumingi)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. A tree-dwelling species, 

Newcomb’s tree snail is a member of the 

snail family, Achatinellidae. The 

species is endemic to the island of 

Maui, where it is currently known from 

a single remaining population. The 

greatest threats to the Newcomb’s tree 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53795 

snail are the loss of the only known 

remaining population due to stochastic 

events and predation from rats and 

Euglandina rosea. There are no efforts 

being made to reduce the threat from the 

carnivorous snail and only minimal rat 

control in the area occupied by this 

snail. Our attempts to raise this species 

in a captive propagation facility have 

been unsuccessful. We have assigned a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species because threats are occurring in 

the only known remaining population 

making it of high magnitude and 

because the threats are ongoing which 

make them imminent. 

Insects 

Warm Springs Zaitzevian riffle beetle 

(Zaitzevia thermae)—The following 

summary is based on information from 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. The warm springs riffle 

beetle is an aquatic flightless beetle 

endemic to a single warm spring in 

southwestern Montana whose surface 

area is approximately 35 square meters. 

Because of its naturally limited range, 

this riffle beetle is at risk of randomly 

occurring natural- and human-caused 

events. The warm spring is under the 

jurisdiction of the Service, which built 

a structure that provides a considerable 

level of physical protection for the 

warm spring. Because of the physical 

and jurisdictional protection, we 

determined that the magnitude of 

threats is low and the threats are 

nonimminent. Based on this, we 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 11. 

Wekiu bug (Nysius wekiuicola)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of Listing Priority 

Changes in Candidates.’’ The above 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Mariana eight spot butterfly 

(Hypolimnas octucula mariannensis)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Mariana eight spot butterfly is a 

nymphalid butterfly species that feeds 

upon two host plants, Procris 

pedunculata and Elatostema calcareum. 

Endemic to the islands of Guam and 

Saipan, the species is now known from 

ten populations on Guam. This species 

is currently threatened by alien 

predation and parasitism and impacts to 

its host plants by browsing ungulates. 

The Mariana eight spot butterfly has 

extremely high mortality of eggs and 

larvae due to predation by alien ants 

and wasps. Nonnative deer degrade the 

habitat by browsing, trampling, and 

uprooting the butterfly’s host plants. 

The threats of habitat loss by nonnative 

deer, and parasitism and predation by 

nonnative insects occur range-wide. The 

magnitude of threats is high because 

limited distribution of this narrow 

endemic makes any impact from these 

threats likely to result in the extinction 

of the species. Direct threats to the 

Mariana eight spot butterfly from alien 

predators and parasites and indirect 

threats from impacts to its host plants 

by browsing ungulates are all imminent 

because they have been occurring for 

many years and are ongoing. Therefore, 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

3 for this subspecies. 

Mariana wandering butterfly (Vagrans 

egestina)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. The Mariana wandering butterfly 

is a nymphalid butterfly species which 

feeds upon a single host plant species, 

Maytenus thompsonii. Originally known 

from and endemic to the islands of 

Guam and Rota, the species is now 

known only from one population on 

Rota. This species is currently 

threatened by alien predation and 

parasitism and impacts to its host plants 

by browsing ungulates. The Mariana 

wandering butterfly has extremely high 

mortality of eggs and larvae due to 

predation by alien ants and wasps. 

Nonnative deer degrade the habitat by 

browsing, trampling, and uprooting the 

butterfly’s host plants. The threats of 

habitat loss by nonnative deer, and 

parasitism and predation by nonnative 

insects occur range-wide. The 

magnitude of threats is high because 

limited distribution of this narrow 

endemic makes any impact from these 

threats likely to result in the extinction 

of the species. Direct threats to the 

Mariana wandering butterfly from alien 

predators and parasites and indirect 

threats from impacts to its host plants 

by browsing ungulates are all imminent 

because they have been occurring for 

many years and are ongoing. Therefore, 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Miami blue butterfly (Cyclargus 

thomasi bethunebakeri)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files and in the petition 

received on June 15, 2000. The Miami 

blue appears to be endemic to south 

Florida. Historically, it occurred 

throughout the Florida Keys, north to 

Hillsborough and Volusia Counties. 

None were documented between 1996 

and 1999. In 1999, an extant population 

was discovered at Bahia Honda State 

Park on Bahia Honda Key. It is now 

restricted to that park, other than several 

larvae that were documented on West 

Summerland Key, on unprotected land 

approximately 2.2 miles west of the 

Bahia Honda site, in November 2003. 

This butterfly occupies about 1.28 acres 

on Bahia Honda. The Miami blue is 

predominantly a coastal species, 

occurring in disturbed and early 

successional habitats such as the edges 

of tropical hardwood hammock, coastal 

berm forest, and along trails and other 

open sunny areas, and historically in 

pine rocklands. These habitats provide 

larval host plants and adult nectar 

sources that are required to occur in 

close juxtaposition, due to the very 

restricted range of movement exhibited 

by the butterfly. The magnitude of threat 

is high for this species, due to threats 

associated with limited population size 

and range, mosquito control activities, 

and hurricanes. The threats are 

nonimminent since the current range is 

within a state park wherein threats from 

mosquito control actions are 

substantially controlled, and because 

threats associated with small population 

size and stochastic events (like 

hurricanes) are long-term, not 

immediate threats. Therefore, the Miami 

blue is assigned a listing priority 

number of 6. 

Sequatchie caddisfly (Glyphopsyche 

sequatchie)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Sequatchie caddisfly is known from two 

spring runs that emerge from caves in 

Marion County, Tennessee: Owen 

Spring Branch (the type locality) and 

Martin Spring run in the Battle Creek 

system. The Owen Spring Branch 

population occurs within Sequatchie 

Cave Park, which is a Class II NaturalScientific State Natural Area, thus 

providing statutory protection from 

collection for the population in Owen 

Spring Branch. Estimated population 

sizes are 500 to 5000 individuals for 

Owen Spring Branch and 2 to 10 times 

higher at Martin Spring, due to the 

greater amount of apparently suitable 

habitat. Threats to the species include 

siltation; agricultural, municipal, and 

industrial chemical runoff (both direct 

and from subsurface flows); vandalism; 

and pollution from trash thrown into 

the springs. This species is vulnerable to 

extinction due to its restricted 

distribution and small population sizes. 

These threats are gradual and/or not 

necessarily imminent but are of a high 

magnitude; therefore, we retained a 

listing priority number of 5 for this 

species. 

Beaver Cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus major)—The 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53796 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Beaver Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, 

reddish-brown predatory insect that 

feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It 

is cave dependent and is not found 

outside the cave environment. The 

Beaver Cave beetle is only known from 

one privately owned Kentucky cave. 

The limestone cave in which this 

species is found provide a unique and 

fragile environment that supports a 

variety of species that have evolved to 

survive and reproduce under the 

demanding conditions found in cave 

ecosystems. The species was observed 

in 2005 during a survey of the cave. The 

limited distribution of the species 

makes it vulnerable to isolated events 

that would only have a minimal effect 

on more wide-ranging insects. Events 

such as toxic chemical spills, discharges 

of large amounts of polluted water or 

indirect impacts from off-site 

construction activities, closure of 

entrances, alteration of entrances, or the 

creation of new entrances could have 

serious adverse impacts on this species. 

The likelihood of one of the events 

eventually occurring combined with the 

narrow range of the species makes the 

magnitude of threats high. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

because there are no known projects 

planned that would affect the species in 

the next 1 to 2 years; we therefore have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Clifton cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus caecus)—The 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Clifton cave beetle is a small, eyeless, 

reddish-brown predatory insect that 

feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It 

is cave dependent and is not found 

outside the cave environment. Clifton 

cave beetle is only known from two 

privately owned Kentucky caves. Soon 

after the species was first collected in 

1963 the entrance to the cave was sealed 

due to road construction. Other caves in 

the vicinity of this cave were surveyed 

for the species during a 1995 to 1996. 

Only one additional site was found to 

support the Clifton Cave beetle. It can 

not be determined at this time if the 

species still occurs at the original 

location or if the species has been 

extirpated from the site by the closure 

of the cave entrance. The limestone 

caves in which this species are found 

provide a unique and fragile 

environment that supports a variety of 

species that have evolved to survive and 

reproduce under the demanding 

conditions found in cave ecosystems. 

The limited distribution of the species 

makes it vulnerable to isolated events 

that would only have a minimal effect 

on the more wide-ranging insects. 

Events such as toxic chemical spills, 

discharges of large amounts of polluted 

water or indirect impacts from off-site 

construction activities, closure of 

entrances, alteration of entrances, or the 

creation of new entrances could have 

serious adverse impacts on this species. 

The likelihood of one of the events 

eventually occurring combined with the 

narrow range of the species makes the 

magnitude of threats high. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

because there are no known projects 

planned that would affect the species in 

the next 1 to 2 years; we therefore 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Icebox cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus frigidus)—The 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Icebox cave beetle is a small, eyeless, 

reddish-brown predatory insect that 

feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It 

is cave dependent and is not found 

outside the cave environment. Icebox 

cave beetle is only known from one 

privately owned Kentucky cave. The 

limestone cave in which this species is 

found provides a unique and fragile 

environment that supports a variety of 

species that have evolved to survive and 

reproduce under the demanding 

conditions found in cave ecosystems. 

The species has not been observed since 

it was originally collected from the only 

site known to support the species, but 

species experts believe that it may still 

exist there in low numbers. The limited 

distribution of the species makes it 

vulnerable to isolated events that would 

only have a minimal effect on the more 

wide-ranging insects. Events such as 

toxic chemical spills, discharges of large 

amounts of polluted water or indirect 

impacts from off-site construction 

activities, closure of entrances, 

alteration of entrances, or the creation of 

new entrances could have serious 

adverse impacts on this species. The 

likelihood of one of the events 

eventually occurring combined with the 

narrow range of the species makes the 

magnitude of threats high. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

because there are no known projects 

planned that would affect the species in 

the next 1 to 2 years; we therefore have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Inquirer cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus inquisitor)—The 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

inquirer cave beetle is a fairly small, 

eyeless, reddish-brown predatory insect 

that feeds upon small cave 

invertebrates. It is cave dependent and 

is not found outside the cave 

environment. The inquirer cave beetle is 

only known from one privately owned 

Tennessee cave. The limestone cave in 

which this species is found provides a 

unique and fragile environment that 

supports a variety of species that have 

evolved to survive and reproduce under 

the demanding conditions found in cave 

ecosystems. The species was last 

observed in 1997. The limited 

distribution of the species makes it 

vulnerable to isolated events that would 

only have a minimal effect on the more 

wide-ranging insects. The area around 

the only know site for the species is in 

a rapidly expanding urban area and 

indirect impacts, such as chemical or 

other pollution, could significantly 

affect both the cave and the species the 

cave supports. The entrance to the cave 

is protected by the landowner through 

a cooperative management agreement 

with the Service, The Nature 

Conservancy, and Tennessee Wildlife 

Resources Agency; however, a sinkhole 

that drains into the cave system is 

located away from the protected 

entrance and is near a highway. Events 

such as toxic chemical spills, discharges 

of large amounts of polluted water or 

indirect impacts from off-site 

construction activities could adversely 

affect the species. The likelihood of one 

of the events eventually occurring 

combined with the narrow range of the 

species makes the magnitude of threats 

high. The immediacy of threat is 

nonimminent because there are no 

known projects planned that would 

affect the species in the next 1 to 2 years 

and it receives some protection under a 

cooperative management agreement; we 

therefore have assigned a listing priority 

number of 5 to this species. 

Louisville cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus troglodytes)—The 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Louisville cave beetle is a small, eyeless, 

reddish-brown predatory insect that 

feeds upon cave invertebrates. It is cave 

dependent and is not found outside the 

cave environment. Louisville cave 

beetle is only known from two privately 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53797 

owned Kentucky caves. The limestone 

caves in which this species are found 

provide a unique and fragile 

environment that supports a variety of 

species that have evolved to survive and 

reproduce under the demanding 

conditions found in cave ecosystems. 

The limited distribution of the species 

makes it vulnerable to isolated events 

that would only have a minimal effect 

on the more wide-ranging insects. 

Events such as toxic chemical spills, 

discharges of large amounts of polluted 

water or indirect impacts from off-site 

construction activities, closure of 

entrances, alteration of entrances, or the 

creation of new entrances could have 

serious adverse impacts on this species. 

The likelihood of one of the events 

eventually occurring combined with the 

narrow range of the species makes the 

magnitude of threats high. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

because there are no known projects 

planned that would affect the species in 

the next 1 to 2 years; we therefore have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Surprising cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus inexpectatus 

Barr)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cave beetles in the genus 

Pseudanophthalmus are fairly small, 

eyeless, reddish-brown insects. The 

limestone caves in which these cave 

beetles are found provide a unique and 

fragile environment that supports a 

variety of species that have evolved to 

survive and reproduce under the 

demanding conditions found in cave 

ecosystems. The surprising cave beetle 

was described from specimens collected 

in the historic section of Mammoth Cave 

and White Cave, Mammoth Cave 

National Park (MCNP), Edmonston 

County, Kentucky. Subsequent to these 

original discoveries, the species was 

also found in MCNP’s Great Onyx Cave. 

Recently, an additional population was 

discovered in a cave some distance from 

the previously known sites. Its limited 

distribution makes this species 

vulnerable to isolated events that would 

only have a minimal effect on the more 

wide-ranging members of the genus. 

Events such as toxic chemical spills, 

discharges of large amounts of polluted 

water, closure of entrances, alteration of 

entrances, or the creation of new 

entrances can have serious adverse 

impacts on this species and could result 

in its extinction. The magnitude and 

imminence of the threat to the 

surprising cave beetle is reduced 

because of its location on Federal land 

and the implementation of a Candidate 

Conservation Agreement between 

MCNP and the Service to protect the 

species. Therefore we have assigned a 

listing priority of 11 to this species. 

Tatum Cave beetle 

(Pseudanophthalmus parvus)—The 

following summary is based upon 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Tatum Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, 

reddish-brown predatory insect that 

feeds upon cave invertebrates. It is cave 

dependent and is not found outside the 

cave environment. Tatum Cave beetle is 

only known from one privately owned 

Kentucky cave. The limestone cave in 

which this species is found provides a 

unique and fragile environment that 

supports a variety of species that have 

evolved to survive and reproduce under 

the demanding conditions found in cave 

ecosystems. The species has not been 

observed since 1965 but species experts 

believe that it still exists in low 

numbers. The limited distribution of the 

species makes it vulnerable to isolated 

events that would only have a minimal 

effect on the more wide-ranging insects. 

Events such as toxic chemical spills, 

discharges of large amounts of polluted 

water or indirect impacts from off-site 

construction activities, closure of 

entrances, alteration of entrances, or the 

creation of new entrances could have 

serious adverse impacts on this species. 

The likelihood of one of the events 

eventually occurring combined with the 

narrow range of the species makes the 

magnitude of threats high. The 

immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

because there are no known projects 

planned that would affect the species in 

the next 1 to 2 years; we therefore have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Taylor’s (Whulge, Edith’s) 

checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha taylori)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files 

and in the petition received on 

December 11, 2002. Historically, the 

Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly was 

known from 70 locations: 23 in British 

Columbia, 34 in Washington, and 13 in 

Oregon. Following surveys during the 

2005 flight period, only 15 populations 

were confirmed, with a total of about 

2,500 to 3,000 individuals observed. 

Twelve populations are known from 

Washington, two in the Willamette 

Valley of Oregon and the new location 

found in British Columbia, Canada. The 

species was thought to have been 

extirpated in Canada until this new 

population was discovered at a new 

location on Denman Island, British 

Columbia. 

Threats include degradation and 

destruction of native grasslands by 

conversion to agriculture, residential 

development, commercial purposes, 

encroachment by nonnative plants, and 

natural succession from grasslands to 

native shrubs and trees, and fire. The 

application of Bacillus thuringiensis var. 

kurstaki for Asian gypsy moth control 

likely contributed to extirpations of the 

subspecies at three locations in Pierce 

County, Washington. Magnitude of 

threats is high because of the extremely 

small size of remaining populations and 

reduction in distribution from the 

historical range and because the threats 

may occur at all or a major portion of 

the known butterfly locations. The size 

and location of the populations shift 

from year to year. Threats are imminent 

because they are currently occurring. 

The ecosystem on which this subspecies 

depends requires annual management to 

maintain its grassland habitat. We 

assigned the Taylor’s checkerspot 

butterfly a listing priority number of 3. 

Blackline Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion nigrohamatum 

nigrolineatum)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

blackline Hawaiian damselfly is a 

stream-dwelling damselfly species 

endemic to the island of Oahu, Hawaii. 

Once known from throughout Oahu, the 

species is now restricted to 11 

populations within the windward 

Koolau Mountains. This species is 

threatened by predation from alien 

aquatic species such as fish and 

predacious insects and habitat loss 

through dewatering of streams and 

invasive nonnative plants. Nonnative 

fish and insects prey on the naiads of 

the damselfly and loss of water reduces 

the amount of suitable naiad habitat 

available. Invasive plants also 

contribute to loss of habitat by either 

over shading streams or by forming 

dense, monotypic stands that 

completely eliminate any open water 

(e.g. California grass (Brachiaria 

mutica)). These threats are occurring in 

varying degrees range-wide for the 

blackline Hawaiian damselfly. Although 

there are no efforts being done to control 

or eradicate nonnative fish or insects or 

to stop the loss of habitat, the 11 streams 

are widely dispersed on both sides of 

the mountain range and are highly 

unlikely to experience complete loss of 

populations at the same time. Therefore 

the magnitude of the threats is 

moderate. Threats to the blackline 

Hawaiian damselfly from loss of habitat 

and introduced nonnative fish and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53798 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

insects are ongoing and therefore are 

imminent. Therefore, we assigned this 

subspecies a listing priority number of 

9. 

Crimson Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion leptodemas)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Megalagrion leptodemas is a streamdwelling damselfly species endemic to 

the island of Oahu, Hawaii. Once 

known from throughout Oahu, the 

species is now restricted to four 

populations. This species is threatened 

by predation from alien aquatic species 

such as fish and predacious insects and 

habitat loss through dewatering of 

streams and invasive plant species. 

Nonnative fish and insects prey on the 

naiads of the damselfly and loss of 

water reduces the amount of suitable 

naiad habitat available. Invasive plants 

also contribute to loss of habitat by 

either over shading streams or by 

forming dense, monotypic stands that 

completely eliminate any open water 

(e.g. California grass (Brachiaria 

mutica)). There are no conservation 

measures being taken to alleviate these 

threats for this species. Nonnative fish 

and plants are found in all the streams 

the crimson Hawaiian damselfly occurs 

in making these threats ongoing and 

imminent. These threats are of high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

because they are occurring throughout 

its limited range. We have assigned this 

species a listing priority number of 2 

because the threats are of a high 

magnitude and are imminent. 

Flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion nesiotes)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Megalagrion nesiotes is a terrestrial or 

semi-terrestrial damselfly species 

endemic to the islands of Hawaii and 

Maui, Hawaii. Despite surveys to locate 

extant populations, the species is now 

known to be restricted to a single 

population in windward east Maui. This 

species is threatened by predation from 

ants and other nonnative arthropods 

that likely feed on both naiads and 

emerging adults, and habitat loss due to 

disturbance by feral ungulates. While 

foraging, pigs root and trample the forest 

floor, encouraging the establishment of 

nonnative plants in the newly disturbed 

soil. In moist depressions, pigs 

completely remove all vegetation by 

wallowing, leaving nothing but mud 

and water. The complete removal of 

vegetation as well as the establishment 

of nonnative plants destroy the leaf 

litter habitat that is likely used by the 

Flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly 

naiads. These threats are ongoing in the 

only known population of this species 

and no conservation efforts are being 

done to alleviate these serious threats 

for this species. We assigned this 

species a listing priority number of 2 

because the threats are of a high 

magnitude and are imminent. 

Oceanic Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion oceanicum)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Megalagrion oceanicum is a streamdwelling damselfly species endemic to 

the island of Oahu, Hawaii. Once 

known from throughout Oahu, the 

species is now restricted to seven 

populations within the windward 

Koolau Mountains. This species is 

threatened by predation from alien 

aquatic species such as fish and 

predacious insects and habitat loss 

through dewatering of streams and 

invasion by nonnative plants. Nonnative 

fish and insects prey on the naiads of 

the damselfly and loss of water reduces 

the amount of suitable naiad habitat 

available. Invasive plants also 

contribute to loss of habitat by either 

over shading streams or by forming 

dense, monotypic stands that 

completely eliminate any open water 

(e.g. California grass (Brachiaria 

mutica)). There are no conservation 

measures being taken to alleviate these 

threats for this species. Nonnative fish 

and plants are found in all the streams 

the oceanic Hawaiian damselfly occurs 

in making these threats ongoing and 

imminent. These threats are of high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

because they are occurring throughout 

its limited range. Therefore, we have 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 2. 

Orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion xanthomelas)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Megalagrion xanthomelas is a streamdwelling damselfly species endemic to 

the Hawaiian Islands of Kauai, Oahu, 

Molokai, Maui, Lanai, and Hawaii. The 

species is now restricted to 16 

populations on the islands of Oahu, 

Molokai, Lanai, and Hawaii. This 

species is threatened by predation from 

alien aquatic species such as fish and 

predacious insects and habitat loss 

through dewatering of streams and 

invasion by nonnative plants. Nonnative 

fish and insects prey on the naiads of 

the damselfly and loss of water reduces 

the amount of suitable naiad habitat 

available. Invasive plants also 

contribute to loss of habitat by either 

overshading streams or by forming 

dense, monotypic stands that 

completely eliminate any open water 

(e.g. California grass (Brachiaria 

mutica)). Nonnative fish and plants are 

found in all the streams the orangeblack 

damselfly occur in, except the Oahu 

location, where there are no nonnative 

fish, making these threats ongoing and 

imminent. Although no conservation 

efforts are being implemented for this 

species in particular on Molokai, Lanai, 

and the island of Hawaii, the Oahu 

location is located at Tripler Army 

Medical Center. The Army has 

consistently considered the damselfly’s 

needs in all work done near or in the 

stream and maintains a supplemental 

water flow into the stream to maintain 

habitat after disrupting the original 

flow. We assigned this species a listing 

priority number of 8 because though the 

threats are imminent, they are of 

moderate magnitude given the more 

widely dispersed population and the 

conservation efforts at Tripler. 

Pacific Hawaiian damselfly 

(Megalagrion pacificum)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Megalagrion pacificum is a slow-moving 

stream, pool, and pond-dwelling 

damselfly species endemic to the 

Hawaiian Islands of Kauai, Oahu, 

Molokai, Maui, Lanai, and Hawaii. The 

species is now restricted to seven 

populations on the islands of Maui and 

Molokai. This species is threatened by 

predation from alien aquatic species, 

such as fish and predacious insects, and 

habitat loss through dewatering of 

streams and invasion by nonnative 

plants. Nonnative fish and insects prey 

on the naiads of the damselfly and loss 

of water reduces the amount of suitable 

naiad habitat available. Invasive plants 

also contribute to loss of habitat by 

either overshading streams or by 

forming dense, monotypic stands that 

completely eliminate any open water 

(e.g. California grass (Brachiaria 

mutica)). There are no conservation 

measures being taken to alleviate these 

threats for this species. Nonnative fish 

and plants are found in all the streams 

the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly occurs 

in making these threats ongoing and 

imminent. These threats are of high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

because they are occurring throughout 

its limited range. Therefore, we have 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 2. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53799 

Picture wing fly (Drosophila 

attigua)— The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This picture wing fly, a member 

of the fly family Drosophilidae, feeds 

and breeds upon a single host plant, 

Cheirodendron sp. The fly is endemic to 

the Hawaiian Island of Kauai, where it 

is currently known from two 

populations. This species is currently 

threatened by loss and modification of 

its host plant’s habitat by browsing 

ungulates and through the uncontrolled 

growth of nonnative plants. While 

foraging, pigs root and trample the forest 

floor, encouraging the establishment of 

nonnative plants in the newly disturbed 

soil. Pigs also disseminate nonnative 

plant seeds through their feces and on 

their bodies, accelerating the spread of 

nonnative plants through native forest. 

These nonnative plants often displace 

native plants including the host plant 

this species depends on. Feral goats also 

consume native vegetation including 

this species’ host plant, trample roots 

and seedlings, accelerate erosion, and 

promote the invasion of nonnative 

plants. Additionally, nonnative insect 

species prey on and parasitize both the 

larvae and adult phases of the picture 

wing fly. All these threats are ongoing 

which make them imminent and are 

severe throughout the species range 

which makes the threats of high 

magnitude. Therefore, we assigned this 

species a listing priority number of 2. 

Picture wing fly (Drosophila 

digressa)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This picture wing fly, a member 

of the fly family Drosophilidae, feeds 

and breeds upon a single host plant, 

Charpentiera sp. The fly is endemic to 

the island of Hawaii, where it is 

currently known from three 

populations. This species is currently 

threatened by loss and modification of 

its host plant’s habitat by browsing 

ungulates and through the uncontrolled 

growth of nonnative plants. While 

foraging, pigs root and trample the forest 

floor, encouraging the establishment of 

nonnative plants in the newly disturbed 

soil. Pigs also disseminate nonnative 

plant seeds through their feces and on 

their bodies, accelerating the spread of 

nonnative plants through native forest. 

These nonnative plants often displace 

native plants including the host plant 

this species depends on. Feral goats also 

consume native vegetation including 

this species host plant, trample roots 

and seedlings, accelerate erosion, and 

promote the invasion of nonnative 

plants. Additionally, nonnative insect 

species prey on and parasitize both the 

larvae and adult phases of the picture 

wing fly. All these threats are ongoing 

which make them imminent and are 

sever throughout the range of this 

species which makes the threats of high 

magnitude. Therefore, we assigned this 

species a listing priority number of 2. 

Stephan’s riffle beetle (Heterelmis 

stephani)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. The 

Stephan’s riffle beetle is an endemic 

riffle beetle found in limited spring 

environments within the Santa Rita 

Mountains, Pima County, Arizona. The 

beetle is known from Bog Spring and 

Sylvester Spring in Madera Canyon, 

within the Coronado National Forest. 

These springs are typical isolated, midelevation, permanently saturated, 

spring-fed aquatic climax communities 

commonly referred to as ci,negas. 

Threats are largely from habitat 

modification; we consider them to be of 

high magnitude due to the limited range 

of the species. However, because the 

Forest Service has no current plans to 

modify remaining habitat, the threats 

are not imminent. Due to the continued 

high magnitude of nonimminent threats, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

5 for Stephan’s riffle beetle. 

Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files, 

including information from the petition 

received on May 12, 2003. The Dakota 

skipper is a small-to mid-sized butterfly 

that inhabits high-quality tallgrass and 

mixed grass prairie in Minnesota, North 

Dakota, South Dakota, and the provinces 

of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in 

Canada. The species is presumed to be 

extirpated from Iowa and Illinois and 

from many sites within occupied States. 

The species is threatened by 

conversion of its native prairie habitat 

for agricultural purposes, overgrazing, 

invasive species, gravel mining, 

inbreeding, population isolation, and, in 

some cases, prescribed fire. In addition, 

prairie succeeds to shrubland or forest 

without periodic fire, grazing, or 

mowing; thus, the species is also 

threatened at sites where such 

disturbances are not applied. Although 

the species is listed as threatened by the 

State of Minnesota, this designation 

lacks the habitat protections needed for 

long-term conservation. The species is 

also listed as endangered by the 

province of Manitoba. The Service, 

other agencies, and private 

organizations (e.g., The Nature 

Conservancy) protect and manage some 

Dakota skipper sites. Although proper 

management is always necessary to 

ensure its persistence, it is generally 

secure at these sites. The species is also 

secure at some sites where private 

landowners manage native prairie in 

ways that conserve Dakota skipper. The 

threats are such that the species 

warrants listing; the threats are 

moderate in magnitude and, although 

some sites are imminently threatened, 

overall the threats are nonimminent. 

Therefore, we assigned a listing priority 

number of 11 to the species. 

Mardon skipper (Polites mardon)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on December 24, 

2002. The Mardon skipper is a rare 

northwestern butterfly with a 

remarkably disjunct range. Currently 

this species is known from four widely 

separated locations: South Puget Sound 

region, southern Washington Cascades, 

Siskiyou Mountains of southern Oregon, 

and coastal California. The Mardon 

skipper spends its entire life cycle in 

one location, and its dispersal ability is 

probably limited. Threats include 

habitat loss and degradation due to 

development, overgrazing, use of 

herbicides and pesticides, 

encroachment of nonnative and native 

vegetation, succession from grassland to 

forest, and fire suppression; and direct 

loss of individuals due to fire, 

recreational activities, insect collecting, 

and random, naturally occurring events. 

Limited dispersal ability restricts the 

likelihood of recolonization once a 

population is lost. The magnitude of 

threats is high because of the small 

population sizes and disjunct 

distribution of the species that limits its 

ability to disperse; just 10 of the known 

locations for Mardon Skipper have more 

than 50 individuals. Loss of any of the 

populations could threaten the 

continued existence of the species 

within each of its known separate 

locales. However, the number of 

documented locations for the species 

has increased from less than 10 in 1998 

to as many as 65 rangewide in 2005 and 

it would be unlikely to have threats that 

would affect all known locales 

simultaneously. Overall, we consider 

the threats to be nonimminent because 

the threats are not currently occurring at 

all known population sites. We have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to the Mardon skipper. 

Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle 

(Cicindela limbata albissima)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files, 

including information from the petition 

received on April 21, 1994. The Coral 

Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle occurs 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53800 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

only at the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, 

approximately seven miles west of 

Kanab, Kane County, in south-central 

Utah. It is restricted to a small part of 

the dune field, situated at an elevation 

of about 1,820 m (6,000 ft). The beetle’s 

habitat is being adversely affected by 

ongoing recreational off-road vehicle 

use that is destroying and degrading the 

beetle’s habitat, especially the 

interdunal swales used by the larvae. 

The continued survival of the beetle 

depends on the preservation of its 

habitat. The two agencies that manage 

the dunes field, the Utah Department of 

Parks and Recreation and the Bureau of 

Land Management, have restricted 

recreational off-road vehicle use in some 

areas, which reduces impacts. The 

beetle’s population is also vulnerable to 

over collecting by professional and 

hobby tiger-beetle collectors. 

Quantification of this threat is difficult 

without continuous population 

monitoring. Climatic factors, most 

recently drought conditions, have 

reduced the population, but it has 

shown some recent improvement. Based 

on imminent threats of a low to 

moderate magnitude, we retained a 

listing priority of 9. 

Highlands tiger beetle (Cicindela 

highlandensis)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. The Highlands tiger beetle is 

narrowly distributed and restricted to 

areas of bare sand within upland oak 

scrub and longleaf pine vegetation on 

the ancient sand dunes of the Lake 

Wales Ridge in Polk and Highlands 

Counties, Florida. This tiger beetle has 

been found at 40 sites from near Haines 

City south to Josephine Creek. In the 

most recent survey, biologists found a 

total of 1,574 adults at 40 sites 

compared with 643 adults at 31 sites in 

1996, 928 adults at 31 sites in 1995, and 

742 adults at 21 sites in 1993. Of the 40 

sites in the 2004–2005 surveys with one 

or more adults: Three sites were found 

to have large populations of over 100 

adults [Catfish Creek Preserve (493), 

Snell Creek South (193), and Flaming 

Arrow Scout Camp (175)]; three sites 

had populations of 50–99 adults; eight 

sites had 20–49 adults, 13 sites had 10–

19 adults, and 13 sites had < 10 adults. 

Results from a limited removal study at 

four sites suggest that the actual 

population size at the various survey 

sites is likely to be as much as two times 

as high as indicated by the visual index 

counts. Lack of fire to create open sand, 

pesticide use, small population sizes at 

some sites, and over-collecting pose 

serious threats to this species. Because 

this species is narrowly distributed with 

specific habitat requirements and small 

populations, the magnitude of threats is 

high. Although the majority of its 

historic range has been lost, degraded, 

and fragmented, numerous sites are now 

protected, and land managers are 

implementing prescribed fire, which 

should restore habitat and help reduce 

threats. Overall, the threats are 

nonimminent. Therefore, the Highlands 

tiger beetle is assigned a listing priority 

number of 5. 

Arachnids 

Warton’s cave meshweaver (Cicurina 

wartoni)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004, or 

has been received since the last 

Candidate Notice of Review published 

on May 11, 2005. Warton’s Cave 

meshweaver is an eyeless, cavedwelling, unpigmented, 0.25 inch long 

invertebrate known only from female 

specimens. This meshweaver is known 

to occur in only one cave (Pickle Pit) in 

Travis County, Texas. Primary threats to 

the species and its habitat are predation 

and competition from fire ants and 

surface and subsurface effects from 

runoff from an adjacent subdivision. 

The magnitude of threats is high 

because the single location for this 

species makes it highly vulnerable to 

extinction. The threats are imminent 

because fire ants are known to occur in 

the vicinity of the cave, and impacts to 

the cave from runoff and human 

activities are an imminent threat. Thus, 

we assign a listing priority number of 2 

to this species. 

Crustaceans 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Metabetaeus 

lohena)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Anchialine pool shrimp 

(Palaemonella burnsi)—See above in 

‘‘Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris 

hawaiana)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Anchialine pool shrimp (Vetericaris 

chaceorum)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Troglobitic groundwater shrimp 

(Typhlatya monae)—The following 

summary is based on information from 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Typhlatya monae is a 

subterranean small shrimp known from 

Puerto Rico, Barbuda, and Dominican 

Republic. It is classified as a troglobite, 

or obligatory cave organism, of which its 

most extraordinary feature is the 

reduction or loss of vision and 

pigmentation. They feed on organic 

waste material and debris, such as bat 

guano. Little is known concerning the 

status of T. monae in either Barbuda or 

Dominican Republic. Although in 

Puerto Rico this species was previously 

found at Mona Island, currently T. 

monae is known from only three caves 

within the Gurca Commonwealth Forest 

in the municipalities of Gurca, Yauco, 

and Guayanilla. However, the species 

may still be found in the reef deposit 

aquifers in Mona Island that have not 

yet been surveyed. In 1995, the 

population in Puerto Rico was estimated 

to be close to 2,000 individuals; over 

95% of these were observed in only one 

cave. Changes in groundwater quality, 

collection of rare animals, predation, 

limited distribution of the species, 

limited availability of appropriate 

habitat (i.e., underground aquifers 

within cave formations), potential 

reduction of food sources (e.g., mortality 

or reduction in bat populations), and 

low population numbers, threaten 

populations of T. monae. These threats 

are not imminent because the known 

range of T. monae is within protected 

lands and there are no known projects 

or management activities planned 

within the Gurca Commonwealth Forest 

or Mona Island that would result in 

mortality of this species. The magnitude 

of threat to T. monae is high due to its 

restricted distribution, low population 

numbers, and aggregation of most 

individuals at only one location. 

Therefore, we assign a listing priority 

number of 5 to this species. 

Flowering Plants 

Abronia alpina (Ramshaw Meadows 

sand-verbena)—See above in ‘‘Summary 

of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. 

Arabis georgiana (Georgia 

rockcress)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53801 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett’s 

silverbush)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Blodgett’s silverbush has been found in 

open, sunny areas in pine rockland, 

edges of rockland hammock, edges of 

coastal berm, and sometimes disturbed 

areas at the edges of natural areas. 

Plants can be found growing from 

crevices on limestone, or on sand. The 

pine rockland habitat where it occurs in 

Miami-Dade County and the Florida 

Keys requires periodic fires to maintain 

habitat with a minimum amount of 

hardwoods. Approximately 10,000 

plants may exist at 18 sites, with most 

of the plants on the large pinelands of 

Long Pine Key in Everglades National 

Park and Big Pine Key (in part on 

National Key Deer Refuge), as well as 

other smaller pinelands on conservation 

lands. If this plant’s distribution were 

limited to the mainland, we would 

consider the magnitude of threat to be 

high due to exotic pest plant problems 

in the Miami-Dade urban and 

agricultural area, and the likely arrival 

of a serious new pest, Old World 

climbing fern. Because the Keys are 

drier and perhaps less fertile, managing 

vegetation is slightly easier. Fire return 

intervals are longer and Old World 

Climbing fern may prove to be less of a 

threat. As a result, we consider the 

magnitude of threats to be moderate to 

low. We are maintaining the immediacy 

of threat as nonimminent to reflect the 

intensive management and biological 

control efforts already aimed at Old 

World climbing fern, as well as the 

quality of management on conservation 

lands. Thus, we assigned a listing 

priority number of 11 to this species. 

Artemisia campestris var. 

wormskioldii (Northern wormwood)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Historically known from eight sites, 

northern wormwood is currently known 

from only two populations in Klickitat 

and Grant Counties, Washington. This 

plant is restricted to exposed basalt, 

cobbly-sandy terraces, and sand habitat 

along the shore and on islands in the 

Columbia River. The two sites are 

separated by 200 miles (322 kilometers) 

of the Columbia River and three large 

hydroelectric dams. The Klickitat 

County population is declining; it is 

unclear whether the Grant County 

population is stable or declining, but it 

is vulnerable to environmental 

variability. Surveys of apparently 

suitable habitat along the Hanford Reach 

have not detected any additional plants. 

Threats to northern wormwood 

include direct loss of suitable habitat 

through regulation of water levels in the 

Columbia River and placement of riprap 

along the river bank; trampling of plants 

as a result of recreational use; 

competition with nonnative invasive 

species; a small population size that 

makes both sites susceptible to genetic 

drift and inbreeding; and the potential 

for hybridization with two other species 

of Artemisia. Ongoing conservation 

actions have reduced trampling, but 

have not eliminated or reduced the 

other threats at the Grant County site. 

The magnitude of threat is high for this 

variety because the only two remaining 

populations are widely separated and 

distributed such that one or both 

populations could be eliminated by a 

single disturbance. The threats are 

imminent because recreational use is 

ongoing, invasive nonnative species 

occur at both sites, erosion of the 

substrate is ongoing at the Klickitat 

County site, and high water flows are 

random, naturally occurring events that 

may occur unpredictably in any year. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 3 for this plant variety. 

Astelia waialealae (Paa`iniu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Paia`niu is a perennial herb found in 

Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) 

dominated mixed montane bog on 

Kauai, Hawaii. Astelia waialealae is 

known from three populations in three 

bogs within the Alakai swamp region of 

Kauai. The total numbers have declined 

from 35 clumps, representing 10 to 15 

genetically distinct individuals, in 2004 

to 21 clumps in 2005, representing 7 

genetically distinct individuals. No 

regeneration has been observed from 

1995 to the present. The major threats 

to this species currently are the lack of 

regeneration and the low numbers of 

individuals. The species is also 

threatened by pigs that eat and trample 

this plant and its seedlings, degrade 

and/or destroy habitat, and spread the 

nonnative plant species Juncus 

planifolius and Andropogon virginicus 

that compete with A. waialealae. Pigs 

have been fenced out of the three bogs 

where A. waialealae currently occurs 

and nonnative plant control is 

underway; however, this species is not 

recovering and continues to decline, 

even though the known threats of feral 

pigs and nonnative plants have been 

controlled over the past nine years. The 

threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude because of small population 

size and range make it extremely 

vulnerable, and efforts to address the 

threats have not halted the decline. In 

addition, the threats are imminent 

because they are ongoing as evidenced 

by the continuing decline of the species. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Astragalus tortipes (Sleeping Ute 

milkvetch)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Bidens amplectens (Kookooalu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is an erect perennial or 

facultatively annual herb found in 

mixed lowland dry shrubland/grassland 

on Oahu, Hawaii. Known from one 

population of 500 to 1,000 individuals 

in the Waianae Mountains, the threats to 

this species are nonnative plants that 

increase the fuel load and fire threat, 

and compete for habitat. The magnitude 

of threats continues to be high because 

no conservation measures have been 

taken to address them and because of 

the potential for the elimination of the 

only known population by a single 

stochastic or naturally occurring event. 

Threats continue to be imminent 

because they are ongoing. We retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Bidens campylotheca ssp. pentamera 

(Kookooalu) ‘‘ The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. This subspecies is an 

erect, perennial herb found in 

Cheirodendron-Metrosideros 

polymorpha (olapa-ohia) montane wet 

forest on Maui, Hawaii. This subspecies 

is known from 11 populations with a 

total of approximately 500 individuals. 

Bidens campylotheca ssp. pentamera is 

threatened by feral pigs that degrade 

and destroy habitat, and by nonnative 

plants that compete for habitat. Feral 

pigs have been fenced out of three of the 

11 populations of B. campylotheca ssp. 

pentamera and nonnative plants have 

been greatly reduced in the three fenced 

areas. This subspecies is represented in 

an ex-situ collection and reintroduction 

or augmentation efforts have been 

attempted this year. However, these ongoing conservation efforts benefit only 

three of the 11 known populations and 

therefore threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude to this subspecies. In 

addition, threats to B. campylotheca 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53802 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

ssp. pentamera are imminent because 

they are ongoing in eight of the 11 

populations. Therefore, we retained a 

listing priority number of 3 for this 

subspecies. 

Bidens campylotheca ssp. waihoiensis 

(Kookooalu)—See above in ‘‘Summary 

of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. 

Bidens conjuncta (Kookooalu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Bidens conjuncta is an erect, perennial 

herb found in MetrosiderosDicranopteris (ohia-uluhe) lowland to 

montane wet forest and shrubland on 

Maui, Hawaii. Seven populations are 

known, and the number of individuals 

totals approximately 2,200 scattered 

throughout upper elevation drainages of 

west Maui. Although the overall range 

of the species has not changed, the 

number of individuals has declined over 

the last decade or so. This species is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat, and eat vegetative parts 

and fruit of B. conjuncta, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Feral pigs have been fenced 

out of about half of the populations of 

B. conjuncta, and nonnative plants have 

been greatly reduced in the fenced 

areas. The threats from feral pigs and 

nonnative plants are, therefore, of a 

moderate magnitude to this species 

because they impact only about half of 

its populations. In addition, these 

threats are imminent because they are 

ongoing in half of the populations. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 8 for this species. 

Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla 

(Kookooalu) ‘‘ The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. This subspecies is an 

erect, perennial herb found in open 

mixed shrubland to dry Metrosideros 

(ohia) forest on the island of Hawaii, 

Hawaii. This subspecies is endemic to 

the island of Hawaii, where it is 

restricted to an area of less than 10 

square miles (26 square kilometers). 

Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla is 

known from four populations totaling 

approximately 3,000 individuals, the 

majority of which occur in only two 

populations. This subspecies is 

threatened by fire and nonnative plants, 

such as Pennisetum setaceum (fountain 

grass) and Leucaena leucocephala (koa 

haole), and two populations are 

threatened by residential and 

commercial development. The threats to 

B. micrantha ssp. ctenophylla from fire 

and nonnative plants are of a high 

magnitude and imminent because they 

are occurring range-wide and no efforts 

for their control have been undertaken. 

In addition, two populations are also 

threatened by development. Therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

3 for this subspecies. 

Brickellia mosieri (Florida brickellbush)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

This species is restricted to pine 

rocklands of Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. This habitat requires periodic 

prescribed fires to maintain the low 

understory and prevent encroachment 

by native tropical hardwoods and some 

exotic pest plants, such as Brazilian 

pepper. Only one large population (up 

to 10,000 individuals) is known to exist, 

plus 16 other populations that do not 

each exceed 100 individuals. There is 

little likelihood of finding additional 

populations because less than one 

percent of the original pineland habitat 

still exists and this habitat has been 

mapped and surveyed for rare plants 

over the past two years. Throughout its 

range, this species is threatened by 

exotic pest plants and conversion of 

pinelands to other uses. New exotic pest 

plants are expected to invade pine 

rocklands, even as effective control 

methods are found for existing pests. 

However, 15 of the 17 sites are on 

conservation lands where control of 

invasive species is being implemented 

and controlled burns are being 

conducted. In the limited area of 

protected conservation lands it is 

difficult to conduct prescribed fires in 

urban areas. Nonnative plant species 

also pose a threat and are difficult to 

control. Thus, the overall magnitude of 

threat is moderate. The threats are 

ongoing and thus imminent. We 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 8. 

Calamagrostis expansa (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is a robust, shortrhizomatous perennial found in wet 

forest, open bogs, and bog margins on 

the islands of Maui and Hawaii, Hawaii. 

Historically rare, C. expansa was 

restricted to wet forest and bogs on 

Maui. It is unknown what the historical 

status was on Hawaii. Currently, this 

species is known from 100 populations 

totaling approximately 400 individuals 

on Maui, and was recently discovered in 

five populations totaling approximately 

300 individuals on the island of Hawaii. 

Calamagrostis expansa is threatened by 

pigs that degrade and destroy habitat 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs 

have been fenced out of most of the west 

Maui populations where C. expansa 

currently occurs and nonnative plants 

have been reduced in the fenced areas. 

However, the threats are not controlled 

and are ongoing in the remaining 

unfenced populations on Maui and in 

all of the populations on the island of 

Hawaii. Therefore, the threats from feral 

pigs and nonnative plants are of a high 

magnitude and imminent for C. 

expansa, and we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Calamagrostis hillebrandii (no 

common name)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Calamagrostis hillebrandii is a slender, 

short-rhizomatous perennial found in 

Metrosideros-Machaerina montane wet 

bog or Metrosideros-RhynchosporaOreobolus mixed bog on Maui, Hawaii. 

This species is known from two 

populations of about 2,000 individuals, 

restricted to the bogs of west Maui, 

although it was formerly found on the 

island of Molokai as well. This species 

is currently threatened by pigs that 

degrade and destroy habitat and 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. An ungulate exclosure fence 

has been constructed and another one is 

under construction to protect both 

populations of this species, and 

nonnative plants are being reduced in 

the fenced area. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species 

because the threats are ongoing in one 

of the two known populations and so 

are imminent and of a high magnitude. 

Calliandra locoensis (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Calliandra locoensis is a spiny, 

leguminous shrub currently known from 

only two localities within the Susu ́ a 

Commonwealth Forest in the 

municipalities of Yauco and Sabana 

Grande, in southwestern Puerto Rico. 

Twenty-five native species of Calliandra 

have been reported for the Antilles; 

three are native to Puerto Rico, 

including C. locoensis. This species is 

endemic to Puerto Rico, and was 

discovered in 1991 during a study of the 

flora of the Susu ́ a Commonwealth 

Forest. It was described by Garca and 

Kolterman in 1992. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53803 

Calliandra locoensis is found at two 

locations along one creek in semievergreen to deciduous forests on 

shallow, serpentine soils with low 

nutrients, high drainage, and low 

fertility. Much of the vegetation in the 

forest was cut for wood, cultivation, 

livestock grazing, and charcoal 

production, prior to its designation as a 

public forest. Calliandra locoensis 

exhibits low degree of self-compatibility 

in pollination tests. Seeds have short 

viability period, do not appear to have 

a biotic dispersal agent (dispersed by 

dehiscence), and require mesic 

conditions for germination, which may 

be factors in the species’ limited 

distribution. The small number of 

individuals, restricted distribution (two 

localities), forest management practices 

(accidental trampling, brush clearing, 

trail maintenance), forest fires (natural 

or manmade), and catastrophic natural 

events (hurricanes, floods, mudslides), 

threaten this species. We assign a listing 

priority number of 5 to this species 

because the magnitude of threat to C. 

locoensis is high, due to its restricted 

distribution, apparent low dispersal 

capability, and population number (only 

two small populations relatively close to 

one another). The threats are 

nonimminent given that the populations 

are found within protected lands and 

there are no known projects or 

management activities planned that 

would destroy the known populations 

of C. locoensis. 

Calochortus persistens (Siskiyou 

mariposa lily)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files and the petition received on 

September 10, 2001. The Siskiyou 

mariposa lily is a narrow endemic that 

is restricted to two disjunct ridge tops 

in the Klamath-Siskiyou Range on the 

California-Oregon border. In California, 

this species is currently found at nine 

separate sites on approximately 10 

hectares (ha) (24.7 acres (ac)) of Klamath 

National Forest and privately owned 

lands that stretch for 6 kilometers (km) 

(3.7 miles (mi)) along the GunsightHumbug Ridge. In 1998, five Siskiyou 

mariposa lily plants were discovered on 

Bald Mountain, west of Ashland, 

Jackson County, Oregon. 

Major threats include competition and 

shading by native and nonnative species 

fostered by suppression of wild fire; 

increased fuel loading and subsequent 

risk of wild fire; fragmentation by roads, 

fire breaks, tree plantations, and radiotower facilities; maintenance and 

construction around radio towers and 

telephone relay stations located on 

Gunsight Peak and Mahogany Point; and 

soil disturbance and exotic weed and 

grass species introduction as a result of 

heavy recreational use and construction 

of fire breaks. Dyer’s woad (Isatis 

tinctoria), an invasive, nonnative plant 

that may prevent germination of 

Siskiyou mariposa lily seedlings, is now 

found throughout the California 

population, affecting 90 percent of the 

known lily habitat. Forest Service staff 

and the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands 

Center cite competition with dyer’s 

woad as a significant and chronic threat 

to the survival of Siskiyou mariposa lily. 

The combination of restricted range, 

extremely low numbers (five plants) in 

one of two disjunct populations, poor 

competitive ability, short seed dispersal 

distance, slow growth rates, low seed 

production, apparently poor survival 

rates in some years, and competition 

from exotic plants threaten the 

continued existence of this species. 

Because of the restricted range and low 

numbers, the magnitude of threats is 

high. While some of the threats are 

ongoing, others are not and overall, the 

threats are nonimminent. We assigned a 

listing priority number of 5 to this 

species. 

Calyptranthes estremerae (no 

common name)—The following 

summary is based on information from 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Calyptranthes estremerae 

is a small tree from the subtropical 

moist forest of northwestern Puerto 

Rico, in the municipalities of Camuy, 

Utuado, and Arecibo. Calyptranthes 

estremerae was only known from 

several individuals found near the 

recreation area adjacent to the Camuy 

Caves, but specimens were later found 

within the Rı ́o Abajo Commonwealth 

Forest. Within the Rı ́o Abajo Forest area, 

C. estremerae was known to be located 

within the protected area of the Rı ́o 

Abajo Commonwealth Forest and at a 

site that was impacted by the 

construction of state road PR–10. In 

1999, four small specimens of C. 

estremerae were affected by the road 

construction, and an additional 

specimen was transplanted to the Puerto 

Rico Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources nursery in the 

Rı ́o Abajo Forest. Additional specimens 

of C. estremerae, later found during 

plant surveys that were part of the 

mitigation for the construction of PR– 

10, were successfully transplanted 

within the forest boundaries, to prevent 

their destruction during construction of 

the road. A minimum of 100 specimens 

of C. estremerae are estimated for the 

Rı ́o Abajo Commonwealth Forest. The 

magnitude of threat to C. estremerae is 

high, due to the small number of 

individuals in the two populations, the 

species’ limited distribution, the species 

vulnerability to catastrophic natural 

events, and the potential destruction of 

specimens from expansion of 

recreational facilities. However, these 

threats are not imminent because the 

largest known population of C. 

estremerae is found within protected 

lands, there are no known projects 

planned that would destroy the sites, 

and the species can be transplanted 

successfully. Therefore, we assign a 

listing priority number of 5 to this 

species. 

Canavalia napaliensis (Awikiwiki)— 

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is a perennial climber found in 

open dry sites and coastal strand, 

diverse lowland dryland/mesic forest to 

mixed mesophytic forest on Kauai, 

Hawaii. Canavalia napaliensis is known 

from three populations totaling several 

hundred individuals in a small section 

of the Na Pali coast. This species is 

threatened by goats that degrade and 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. There 

are no conservation measures underway 

to alleviate these ongoing, or imminent, 

threats to C. napaliensis. These threats 

are of a high magnitude because they are 

occurring throughout its limited range. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species because the 

threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude and are imminent in all three 

populations. 

Canavalia pubescens (Awikiwiki)— 

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Awikiwiki is a perennial climber found 

in lowland dryland forest on Maui, 

Lanai, Kauai, and is possibly on the 

island of Niihau, Hawaii. This species is 

known from at least 10 populations 

totaling less than 200 individuals. This 

species is threatened by development 

(Maui), goats that degrade and destroy 

habitat (Kauai and Maui), and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace native plants (all islands). Feral 

goats have been fenced out of three of 

the ten populations where C. pubescens 

currently occurs and nonnative plants 

have been reduced in two of the 

populations that are fenced. This 

species is represented in an ex situ 

collection. Because the threats are 

ongoing in more than half of the known 

populations they are of a high 

magnitude and imminent. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Castilleja christii (Christ’s 

paintbrush)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53804 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on January 2, 2001. 

Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis 

(Big Pine partridge pea)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This pea is endemic to the lower 

Florida Keys. Historically, it was known 

from Big Pine, No Name, Ramrod, and 

Cudjoe Keys (Monroe County, Florida). 

In recent decades, its known 

distribution was restricted to Big Pine 

Key, until a population was found on 

Lower Sugarloaf Key in 2005. Roughly 

90 percent of its current range is within 

the Service’s National Key Deer Refuge. 

The Big Pine partridge pea is well 

distributed on Big Pine Key, with a 

population estimate of roughly 10,000 

individuals. It is restricted to pine 

rockland communities and hardwood 

hammock edges. Pine rocklands 

encompass approximately 582 hectares 

(1,438 acres) of Big Pine Key. Pine 

rockland communities are maintained 

by relatively frequent fires. The most 

vigorous populations of this species are 

located in areas that have burned within 

a decade. In the absence of fire, woody 

encroachment ensues, and the pea is 

shaded out. Lack of fire poses the 

greatest threat to the pea. The Refuge 

has an active prescribed fire program, 

though with many constraints. We do 

not have new information on 

populations, and relevant recent 

research is pending publication. We are 

maintaining the previous assessment 

that a very narrow distribution, 

combined with sea level rise as well as 

fire management and exotic pest plant 

threats, makes for an overall high 

magnitude of threat. We maintain that 

the immediacy of threats is 

nonimminent, because a significant 

portion of the range is in conservation 

lands wherein threats are substantially 

controlled. Sea level rise remains 

uncontrolled, but is nonimminent 

regarding most of the habitat area or 

population on an annual basis. 

Accordingly, we assigned the Big Pine 

partridge pea a listing priority number 

of 6. 

Chamaesyce deltoidea pinetorum 

(Pineland sandmat)—See above in 

‘‘Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 

Candidates.’’ The above summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. 

Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum 

(Wedge spurge)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Wedge spurge is a small prostrate 

herb, forming patches among limestone 

rocks. It has always been restricted to 

Big Pine Key in Monroe County, 

Florida. Roughly 90 percent of the range 

falls within the National Key Deer 

Refuge. It is not widely and evenly 

distributed, occurring within 22 percent 

of 145 sample plots in pine rockland. 

The total population is on the order of 

1,001 to 10,000 plants. It is restricted to 

pinelands on limestone rock (pine 

rockland), at sites with extensive 

exposed rock at the surface, low total 

understory cover and low hardwood 

density. Pine rocklands encompass 

approximately 582 hectares (1,438 

acres) on Big Pine Key. These 

communities are maintained by 

relatively frequent fires, without fire 

tropical shrubs and trees encroach and 

the spurge is eventually shaded out. Fire 

restrictions pose the greatest short-term 

threat, although sea level rise is 

ultimately a threat of equal or greater 

magnitude. The National Key Deer 

Refuge has an active prescribed fire 

program, though with many constraints. 

We do not have new information on 

populations, although an abundance 

and distribution survey is under way. 

We maintain the previous assessment 

that a very narrow distribution 

composed of small sub-populations 

results in a high magnitude of threat. 

Specific threats include fire 

suppression, invasive exotic plants, sea 

level rise, and stochastic threats related 

to small population size, including 

hurricanes. The immediacy of threats is 

nonimminent because a significant 

portion of the range is on conservation 

lands wherein threats are substantially 

controlled. Sea level rise remains 

uncontrolled, but is nonimminent 

regarding most of the habitat area or 

population on an annual basis. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 6 for wedge spurge. 

Chamaesyce eleanoriae (Akoko)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is a small shrub found in steep 

slopes and cliffs, in MetrosiderosDiospyros lowland mesic forest, and 

Eragrostis variabilis coastal dry cliffs on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species has 

declined from 10 populations totaling 

500 individuals in 1996 to three 

populations totaling less than 50 

individuals, found only in and around 

Kalalau Valley rim, along the Na Pali 

Coast on the island of Kauai. 

Chamaesyce eleanoriae is threatened by 

goats that eat it, degrade and destroy 

habitat, by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it, and by 

stochastic extinction due to naturally 

occurring events. Chamaesyce 

eleanoriae is also potentially threatened 

by rats that eat it. All of the threats 

occur range-wide and no efforts to 

control goats, rats, and nonnative plants 

have been undertaken. The threats are of 

a high magnitude because of their 

severity and because they occur rangewide. The threats are ongoing and 

therefore imminent. We retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Chamaesyce remyi var. kauaiensis 

(Akoko)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This variety is a shrub found in 

wind-swept shrubland and adjacent 

forest patches dominated by 

Metrosideros (ohia) and Syzygium on 

Kauai, Hawaii. Chamaesyce remyi var. 

kauaiensis is known from 5 populations 

totaling 800 to 1,000 individuals. This 

variety is found only in the Blue Hole, 

Lumahai Valley, Wainiha, and Iliiliula 

areas on the island of Kauai. Threats to 

C. remyi var. kauaiensis include goats 

and pigs that degrade and destroy 

habitat, the two-spotted leafhopper that 

damages leaves and may spread plant 

viruses, and nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. There are 

no conservation measures being taken to 

alleviate these threats to C. remyi var. 

kauaiensis. The threats are of a high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

because goats and pigs, the two-spotted 

leafhopper, and nonnative plants are 

found throughout the shrubland and 

forest areas C. remyi var. kauaiensis 

occurs in. The threats are ongoing and 

therefore imminent. We retained a 

listing priority number of 3 for this 

variety. 

Chamaesyce remyi var. remyi 

(Akoko)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This variety is a perennial shrub 

found in wet Metrosideros polymorphaDicranopteris linearis montane mesic 

forest on Kauai, Hawaii. Chamaesyce 

remyi var. remyi is known from at least 

10 populations totaling 500 to 1,000 

individuals. Hybrids of C. remyi and C. 

sparsiflora have been found near the 

margins of Wahiawa Bog, Kauai. This 

variety is threatened by goats and pigs 

that degrade and destroy habitat and 

potentially eat this plant, by the twospotted leafhopper that causes leaf 

damage and may spread viruses, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Feral pigs and goats have 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53805 

been fenced out of two of the ten 

populations of C. remyi var. remyi, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the two fenced areas. Although two of 

the ten populations of this variety have 

been fenced and are undergoing weed 

control, there are no efforts to control 

the ongoing threats to the other eight 

populations. The threats are of a high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

are imminent because they are ongoing 

in eight of the ten known populations. 

We retained a listing priority number of 

3 for this variety. 

Charpentiera densiflora (Papala)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is a tree found in Diospyros 

sandwicensis dominated lowland mesic 

forest extending into diverse mesic 

forest on Kauai, Hawaii. Charpentiera 

densiflora is known from 10 

populations totaling approximately 200 

individuals, restricted to an area of less 

than 10 square miles (26 square 

kilometers) in the Na Pali coast area on 

the island of Kauai. This species is 

threatened by goats that degrade and 

destroy habitat, flooding, and nonnative 

plants. Feral goats have been fenced out 

of one of the 10 populations where C. 

densiflora currently occurs, and 

nonnative plants are being controlled in 

the fenced area. This species is 

represented in an ex situ collection. The 

threat from flooding is of high 

magnitude and imminent because no 

flood control measures have been 

undertaken for any of the populations. 

The threats from goats and nonnative 

plants occur in nine of the ten known 

populations and are, therefore, 

imminent. The threats are also of a high 

magnitude because of their severity in 

the nine populations. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina 

(San Fernando Valley spineflower)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on December 14, 

1999. Chorizanthe parryi var. 

fernandina is a low growing herbaceous 

annual plant in the buckwheat family. 

Germination occurs following the onset 

of late-fall and winter rains and 

typically represents different cohorts 

from the seed bank. Flowering occurs in 

the spring, generally between April and 

June. Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina 

grows up to 30 centimeters in height 

and 5 to 40 centimeters across. 

The plant currently is known from 

two disjunct localities: The first is in the 

southeastern portion of Ventura County 

on a site formerly known as Ahmanson 

Ranch, and the second is in an area of 

southwestern Los Angeles County 

known as Newhall Ranch. Investigations 

of historical locations and seemingly 

suitable habitat within the range of the 

species have not revealed any other 

occurrences. 

The threats currently facing San 

Fernando Valley spineflower include 

threatened destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range, and 

other natural or manmade factors. The 

threats to C. parryi var. fernandina from 

habitat destruction or modification are 

less than they were two years ago. One 

of the two populations (Ahmanson 

Ranch) is in permanent, public 

ownership and is being managed by an 

agency that is working to conserve the 

plant. The other population (Newhall 

Ranch) is under threat of development; 

however, a Candidate Conservation 

Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) is 

being developed with the landowner, 

and it is possible that the remaining 

plants can also be conserved. Until such 

an agreement is finalized, the threat of 

development and the potential damage 

to the Newhall Ranch population still 

exists. 

Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina is 

particularly vulnerable to extinction due 

to its concentration in two isolated 

areas. The existence of only two areas of 

occurrence, and a relatively small range, 

makes the variety highly susceptible to 

extinction or extirpation from a 

significant portion of its range due to 

random events such as fire, drought, 

erosion, or other events. We retained a 

listing priority number of 6 for C. parryi 

var. fernandina due to high magnitude 

of nonimminent threats. 

Chromolaena frustrata (Cape Sable 

thoroughwort)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Chromolaena frustrata is 

found most commonly in open sun to 

partial shade at the edges of rockland 

tropical hammock and in coastal rock 

barrens along the northern edges of 

Florida Bay in Everglades National Park, 

Monroe County, Florida. It is known 

from coastal berms along the northern 

edges of Florida Bay in Everglades 

National Park. It has not been observed 

in artificially disturbed areas, but is 

abundant in a tropical hammock that 

lost some of its tree canopy in a 

hurricane. Coastal rock barrens are 

composed of exposed Key Largo 

Limestone with a diverse assemblage of 

salt tolerant herbs. Due to extensive 

development, remaining areas of natural 

vegetation are limited. Land acquisition 

by the State has benefited this species, 

as has private land management. 

However, only one large population of 

this species is known and its history 

suggests that it will decline as the forest 

canopy recovers. With so few 

populations in existence (seven), it is 

not likely that the species will persist. 

These factors, combined with the threat 

from invasive exotic pest plants, 

constitute a high magnitude of threat. 

We anticipate that land managers will 

address exotic pest plant threats as 

funding is available. The conservation 

situation on the privately-owned site 

with the largest known population is 

encouraging. Local extirpations of this 

species, due to exotics or other reasons, 

can possibly be reversed by 

reintroductions. However, we consider 

the threats to this narrowly endemic 

plant with no really large populations to 

be imminent because exotic pest plants 

are currently present. As a result, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 2 

to this species. 

Consolea corallicola (Florida 

semaphore cactus)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. The Florida semaphore cactus is 

endemic to the Florida Keys and was 

discovered on Big Pine Key in 1919 but 

has since been extirpated there as a 

result of road building and poaching. 

This cactus grows close to salt water on 

bare rock with a minimum of humussoil cover in or along the edges of 

hammocks near sea level. The species is 

known to naturally occur only in two 

areas, Little Torch Key and Biscayne 

National Park. Outplanting has resulted 

in the reestablishment of a population 

in Dagny Johnson Key Largo Hammock 

Botanical State Park in North Key Largo 

as well as in some of the lower keys. 

Outplanting success has been low and 

more research is needed to determine 

the requirements of this cacti. Only 5 of 

the original 14 mature plants (as well as 

new recruits from fallen pads) remain in 

the population at The Nature 

Conservancy’s Torchwood Hammock 

Preserve on Little Torch Key. Two 

sexual morphs (males and weak 

hermaphrodites) comprise the extant 

population on Little Torch Key. The 

female sex morph is absent from the 

population and sexual reproduction at 

this site is not possible without human 

intervention. Regeneration in this 

population is restricted to clonal 

propagation. At least 629 plants were 

discovered on a key in Biscayne 

National Park in November of 2001. A 

recent study found no genetic diversity 

within the two wild populations. The 

results were consistent with previous 

reproductive biology studies that 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53806 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

suggested that the cactus does not 

propagate sexually and that asexual 

reproduction is the main life-history 

strategy of this species. The causes for 

the population decline of this species 

include destruction or modification of 

habitat, predation from Cactoblastis 

cactorum moths, poaching, and 

hurricanes and other natural disasters. 

According to scientists, intervention 

will be required if the species is to 

survive the next 10 years. Because of 

low population numbers, reproductive 

problems, and numerous ongoing 

threats, we assigned this species a 

listing priority number of 2. 

Cordia rupicola (no common name)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cordia rupicola is a small shrub that is 

found in the municipalities of Pen ̃uelas 

and Gua ́nica in southern Puerto Rico, 

Vieques Island, and Anegada in the 

British Virgin Islands. The status of the 

Anegada population is not known. 

Cordia rupicola is known only from dry 

forest communities on limestone 

substrates at low elevation. The 

currently known largest concentration 

of C. rupicola in Puerto Rico is found on 

privately-owned lands in Pen ̃uelas 

where extensive land clearing for 

residential lots continues to take place. 

We assigned a listing priority number of 

2 to C. rupicola because the magnitude 

of threat to this species is high due to 

its restricted distribution, low 

population number (not more than 25 

known specimens), urban expansion, 

maintenance of electrical facilities, and 

catastrophic natural events that threaten 

the Puerto Rico population, and the 

threats to C. rupicola are imminent, 

since only a small fraction of the 

species’ known population falls within 

protected lands, and the largest 

concentration is found in privatelyowned land subjected to urban 

expansion. 

Cyanea asplenifolia (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea asplenifolia is a shrub found in 

Acacia-Metrosideros forest on Maui, 

Hawaii. Currently, this species is known 

from 4 populations totaling less than 

200 individuals. Cyanea asplenifolia is 

threatened by pigs and goats that 

degrade and destroy habitat and by 

nonnative plants, such as Australian 

tree fern, that outcompete and displace 

it. Potential threats to this species 

include rats and slugs that may directly 

prey upon and defoliate individuals. Pig 

and goat exclusion fences protect two of 

the four known populations of this 

species and nonnative plants have been 

reduced in the fenced areas. This 

species is represented in an ex-situ 

collection. The threats continue to be of 

a high magnitude and imminent because 

no conservation efforts are being taken 

to address them and they are ongoing in 

two of the four known populations. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species because the 

threats are of a high magnitude and are 

imminent since they are ongoing. 

Cyanea calycina (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is an unbranched shrub found in 

Metrosideros-Dicranopteris montane 

wet forest and wet gulches and 

streambanks on Oahu, Hawaii. Cyanea 

calycina is known from about 20 

populations with a combined total of 

200 or more individuals. This species is 

threatened by pigs and goats that 

degrade and destroy habitat, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Potential threats to this 

species include rats and slugs that may 

directly prey upon and defoliate 

individuals. There are no conservation 

measures underway to alleviate these 

ongoing, or imminent, threats to C. 

calycina. These threats are of a high 

magnitude because they are occurring 

throughout its limited range. Therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species because the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude and 

are imminent in all populations. 

Cyanea eleeleensis (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea eleeleensis is a shrub found in 

wet forest on Kauai, Hawaii. This 

species was discovered in 1977, and 

only ever known from one population 

totaling less than ten individuals in 

Wainiha Valley on Kauai. In 2005, we 

received information that there are no 

extant wild individuals and there is no 

material in genetic storage. This species 

was likely highly threatened by pigs that 

degrade and destroy habitat, by rats and 

slugs that may have consumed it, and by 

nonnative plants that likely 

outcompeted and displaced it. We are 

considering removing this species from 

candidate status since it appears to be 

extinct. However, we are seeking any 

new information that indicates this 

species is still extant and will reevaluate the status of this species in the 

coming year. 

Cyanea kuhihewa (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea kuhihewa is a shrub found in 

Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris 

linearis (ohia-uluhe) lowland wet forest 

on Kauai, Hawaii. This species was only 

ever known from one population 

totaling six individuals in Limahuli 

Valley on Kauai. In 2003, the last known 

individual in the wild died, but prior to 

that time, seeds were collected for 

genetic storage and the species is still 

found in cultivation. Currently, C. 

kuhihewa is represented only in an exsitu collection. This species is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat, by rats and slugs that 

that may directly prey upon and 

defoliate it, and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. The only 

known location for this species has been 

protected by fences and nonnative 

plants have been reduced in the fenced 

area. Currently, no individuals have 

been reintroduced into this site. In 

addition, no control measures have been 

implemented in this site to address the 

threats from rats and slugs. Because of 

these factors, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Cyanea kunthiana (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea kunthiana is a shrub found in 

closed Metrosideros polymorpha 

montane wet forest on Maui, Hawaii. 

The historic range of C. kunthiana was 

wet forest on the island of Maui. 

Currently, C. kunthiana is declining 

throughout its range and is known from 

approximately 20 populations with a 

combined total of several hundred 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by pigs that directly prey upon the 

plants and degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Potential 

threats to this species include rats and 

slugs that may directly prey upon and 

defoliate individuals. Feral pigs have 

been fenced out of three of the 20 

populations of C. kunthiana and 

removal of feral pigs from fenced areas 

is on-going. Control of nonnative plants 

in the three fenced areas is underway. 

Although three of the 20 populations of 

C. kunthiana have been fenced and are 

undergoing weed control, there are no 

efforts to control the ongoing and 

imminent threats to the other 17 

populations. Therefore, the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude to 

C. kunthiana. Because the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude and 

are imminent for 17 of the 20 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53807 

populations, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Cyanea lanceolata (Haha)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea lanceolata is a shrub found in 

Acacia koa-Metrosideros polymorpha 

(koa-ohia) lowland mesic forest on 

Oahu, Hawaii. This species is known 

from 20 populations totaling less than 

300 individuals. Cyanea lanceolata is 

threatened by pigs, that eat plants and 

degrade and destroy habitat, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Potential threats to this 

species include rats and slugs that may 

directly prey upon and defoliate 

individuals. There are no conservation 

measures underway to alleviate these 

ongoing, or imminent, threats to C. 

lanceolata. These threats are of a high 

magnitude because they are occurring 

throughout its limited range and are 

imminent in all populations. Therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Cyanea obtusa (Haha)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea obtusa is a shrub found in 

Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) mixed 

mesic forest on Maui, Hawaii. This 

species is known from six populations 

with a combined total of approximately 

30 individuals. Cyanea obtusa is 

threatened by feral goats, pigs, and 

cattle that degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Potential 

threats include rats and slugs that may 

directly prey upon and defoliate 

individuals of C. obtusa. Feral ungulates 

have been fenced out of one of the six 

populations of this species, and another 

fence is under construction to protect a 

second population. Nonnative plant 

control is underway in the fenced 

population and will be initiated in the 

second fenced population once the 

fence is completed. Although one of the 

six populations of C. obtusa has been 

fenced and is undergoing weed control, 

and fencing of a second population is 

underway, there are no efforts to control 

the ongoing and imminent threats to the 

other four populations. Therefore, the 

threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude for C. obtusa. Because the 

threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude and are imminent for four of 

the six known populations, we retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Cyanea tritomantha (Aku)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyanea tritomantha is a palm-like tree 

found in closed Metrosideros-Cibotium 

montane wet forest on the island of 

Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is known 

from four to five populations with a 

total of 100 to 500 individuals in Olaa 

and Kau on the island of Hawaii. 

Cyanea tritomantha is threatened by 

pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, 

and nonnative plants that outcompete 

and displace it. Potential threats to this 

species include rats and slugs that may 

directly prey upon and defoliate 

individuals, and human trampling of 

individuals located near trails. Feral 

pigs have been fenced out of two 

populations of C. tritomantha and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced areas. Although two 

populations of C. tritomantha have been 

fenced and weeds are being controlled 

in these fenced areas, there are no 

efforts to control the ongoing and 

imminent threats to the other 

populations. Therefore, the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude to 

C. tritomantha. Because the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude and 

are imminent for the unmanaged 

populations, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Cyrtandra filipes (Haiwale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Haiwale is a shrub found in lowland 

wet and mesic forest on Maui and 

Molokai, Hawaii. Historically rare, C. 

filipes was found in southeastern 

Molokai and west Maui. Currently, this 

species is known from three 

populations, one on Molokai and two on 

Maui, totaling approximately 2,200 

individuals. There is some question as 

to the true identity of the Maui 

populations, which do not fit the 

description of the species precisely. If, 

upon further taxonomic study, the Maui 

populations are determined not to be 

this species, then it is even rarer, with 

only the Molokai population of a few 

individuals remaining. Cyrtandra filipes 

is threatened by pigs and deer that 

degrade and destroy habitat, by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it and potentially by rats that 

directly prey on it. Feral pigs have been 

fenced out of one of the three 

populations of C. filipes but deer are 

able to jump over most pig exclusion 

fences so they are still considered a 

threat. Nonnative plants are being 

reduced in the population that is fenced 

but all populations are potentially 

threatened by rats. The threat from deer 

is of a high magnitude and imminent 

because no deer control measures have 

been undertaken for any of the 

populations. The threats from pigs and 

nonnative plants occur in two of the 

three known populations and are, 

therefore, of a high magnitude because 

of their severity. In addition, these 

threats are imminent because they are 

ongoing. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Cyrtandra kaulantha (Haiwale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyrtandra kaulantha is a shrub found in 

moist wooded gulches in dense shade 

on Oahu, Hawaii. This species is known 

from seven populations with a total of 

23 individuals along the Waiahole Ditch 

Trail. Cyrtandra kaulantha is threatened 

by pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, 

by nonnative plants that outcompete 

and displace it, genetic bottlenecks, 

random demographic fluctuations, and 

stochastic environmental events such as 

tree falls and hurricanes. Direct 

predation by slugs is a potential threat. 

None of the populations are protected 

by fences. Nonnative plants have been 

reduced in only one of the seven known 

populations. There are no other 

conservation measures being taken to 

alleviate these ongoing and imminent 

threats to C. kaulantha. These threats 

are of a high magnitude because of their 

severity and they are occurring 

throughout its limited range. Therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species because the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude and 

are imminent in all populations. 

Cyrtandra oenobarba (Haiwale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyrtandra oenobarba is a low, 

decumbent, fleshy, subshrub found in 

Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris 

linearis (ohia-uluhe) lowland wet forest 

on Kauai, Hawaii. The historic range of 

this species was throughout the island 

of Kauai. Recent surveys show that the 

species is now limited to 10 or more 

populations totaling 200 to 500 

individuals in only three small areas on 

the island of Kauai. Cyrtandra 

oenobarba is threatened by pigs that 

degrade and destroy habitat, and by and 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. There are no conservation 

measures being taken to alleviate these 

threats to C. oenobarba. Pigs and 

nonnative plants are found throughout 

the lowland wet forest habitat of this 

species, and, therefore, are ongoing and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53808 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

imminent. In addition, the threats are of 

a high magnitude because of their 

severity and because they occur 

throughout the limited range of this 

species. Because the threats are of a high 

magnitude and are imminent in all 

known populations, we retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Cyrtandra oxybapha (Haiwale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyrtandra oxybapha is a shrub found in 

Metrosideros polymorphaCheirodendron trigynum (ohia-olapa) 

montane wet forest to mesic AcaciaMetrosideros (koa-ohia) forest on Maui, 

Hawaii. Currently, this species is known 

only from one population totaling 250 to 

300 individuals in the Kahikinui area of 

east Maui and one additional 

population of 25 individuals on west 

Maui. This species is threatened by pigs 

that degrade and destroy habitat, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. Feral pigs have been fenced 

out of the smaller of the two 

populations of C. oxybapha, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced population. However, the 

threats are not controlled and are 

ongoing in the remaining, larger 

unfenced population. Therefore, the 

threats from pigs and nonnative plants 

are of a high magnitude and imminent 

for C. oxybapha and we retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Cyrtandra sessilis (Haiwale)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Cyrtandra sessilis is a shrub found in 

wet gulch bottoms and slopes of mesic 

valleys and wet forests on Oahu, 

Hawaii. This species is known from two 

populations totaling approximately 50 

individuals in the Waikane area of the 

Koolau Mountains. Cyrtrandra sessilis is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and or 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. No onthe-ground conservation efforts have 

been initiated but this species is 

represented in an ex-situ collection. Pigs 

and nonnative plants are found 

throughout the mesic and wet forest 

habitat in which C. sessilis occurs 

making these threats ongoing and 

imminent. These threats are of high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

because they are occurring throughout 

its limited range. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Dalea carthagenensis floridana 

(Florida prairie-clover)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

plant has recently been found in Big 

Cypress National Preserve in Monroe 

and Collier Counties, Florida. It is also 

known from five small populations in 

Miami-Dade County, two on small tracts 

of conservation lands. The populations 

in Miami-Dade County are vulnerable to 

invasion by exotic pest plants and to 

lack of prescribed fire. The populations 

in Big Cypress National Preserve do not 

appear to be large, and thus may be 

vulnerable to random events, as well as 

exotic pest plant invasions, with Old 

World climbing fern being the chief 

threat. The threats from invasive species 

are being controlled to some extent. 

Prescribed burns are being conducted 

on Miami-Dade conservation lands and 

biological control agents are being 

developed for Old World climbing fern, 

so the overall magnitude of threats is 

moderate. Threats to the three of the five 

Florida prairie-clover populations in 

Miami-Dade County are imminent. 

Threats from lack of fire and invasive 

species are ongoing, and conducting 

prescribed fires in urban areas is 

difficult, as is controlling exotic pest 

plants. The urban conservation lands 

where this plant occurs require regular 

maintenance. Threats from exotic pest 

plants to the two populations in Big 

Cypress National Preserve may be 

nonimminent because Old World 

climbing fern has not yet arrived. 

Overall, we consider threats to be 

imminent, so assigned a listing priority 

number of 9 to this subspecies. 

Dichanthelium hirstii (Hirsts’ panic 

grass)—The following summary is based 

on information from our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Dichanthelium hirstii, a perennial grass, 

produces erect leafy flowering stems 

from May to October. Dichanthelium 

hirstii occurs in coastal plain 

intermittent ponds, usually in wet 

savanna or pine barren habitats and is 

found at only two sites in New Jersey, 

one site in Delaware, and two sites in 

North Carolina. While all five extant D. 

hirstii populations are located on public 

land or privately owned conservation 

lands, natural threats to the species from 

encroaching vegetation and fluctuations 

in climatic conditions remain of 

concern and may be exacerbated by 

anthropomorphic factors occurring 

adjacent to the species’ wetland habitat. 

Given the low numbers of plants found 

at each site, even minor changes in the 

species’ habitat could result in local 

extirpation. Loss of any known sites 

could result in a serious contraction of 

the species range. However, the most 

immediate and severe of the threats to 

this species (i.e., ditching of the 

Labounsky Pond site, and encroachment 

of aggressive vegetative competitors) 

have been curtailed or are being actively 

managed by The Nature Conservancy at 

the one New Jersey site, the Delaware 

Division of Fish and Wildlife, and 

Delaware Natural Heritage Program at 

the Assawoman Pond site, and the 

Marine Corps at the Camp Lejeune site 

in North Carolina. Based on continued 

threats of a high magnitude but low 

imminence, we retained a listing 

priority number of 5 for this species. 

Digitaria pauciflora (Florida pineland 

crabgrass)—The following summary is 

based on information in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

grass occurs at the edges of marl prairies 

within pine rocklands of the Long Pine 

Key area of Everglades National Park, an 

area of about 8,000 hectares (31 square 

miles). Because this plant has a narrow 

distribution and habitat requirements 

and only occurs within the Long Pine 

Key area, threats from exotic pest plants 

or other habitat management problems 

are significant. The National Park 

Service has controlled exotic pest plants 

and maintains an appropriate fire 

regime, but threats remain, particularly 

from Old World climbing fern, which is 

rapidly spreading into southern Florida 

and cannot easily be controlled. 

Therefore the magnitude of threats is 

high. Because the Old World climbing 

fern and perhaps other new exotic pest 

plants are not in the immediate vicinity 

of D. pauciflora but are expected to 

arrive within the next decade, the 

threats are nonimminent and the listing 

priority number is 5. 

Dubautia imbricata ssp. imbricata 

(Naenae)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This subspecies is a shrub found 

in wet forest and bogs on Kauai, Hawaii. 

Dubautia imbricata ssp. imbricata is 

known from three populations totaling 

1,000 or more individuals in the 

Wahiawa Mountains. This subspecies is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. 

Nonnative plants have been reduced in 

a portion of the species’ range. No other 

conservation measures for D. imbricata 

ssp. imbricata have been undertaken. 

Pigs are found throughout the wet forest 

and bog habitat of this subspecies. 

Therefore, the threat from pigs is 

ongoing and imminent. In addition, the 

threat from feral pigs is of a high 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53809 

magnitude because the severity of this 

threat and because pigs occur 

throughout the limited range of this 

subspecies. Nonnative plants also 

remain a high magnitude threat to D. 

imbricata ssp. imbricata because of the 

severity of the threat and because they 

occur throughout its limited range. 

Competition by nonnative plants is an 

ongoing and imminent threat to most of 

the individuals of D. imbricata ssp. 

imbricata, although weed control has 

been undertaken in a portion of its 

range. We retained a listing priority 

number of 3 for this subspecies. 

Dubautia plantaginea ssp. magnifolia 

(Naenae)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Dubautia plantaginea ssp. 

magnifolia is a shrub found in bogs and 

wet forest on Kauai, Hawaii. This 

subspecies is known from two 

populations totaling 100 individuals 

near the summit of Waialeale on the 

island of Kauai. Dubautia plantaginea 

ssp. magnifolia is threatened by pigs 

that degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it, and by stochastic extinction 

due to naturally occurring events. Feral 

pigs have been fenced out of one of the 

two populations of D. plantaginea ssp. 

magnifolia, and nonnative plants have 

been reduced in the fenced population. 

Because of the severity of the threats 

and because they are ongoing in one of 

the two known populations they are of 

a high magnitude and imminent. We 

retained a listing priority number of 3 

for this subspecies. 

Dubautia waialealae (Naenae)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Dubautia waialealae is a shrub found in 

bogs and diverse mesic to wet forest on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from one population totaling less than 

800 individuals near the summit of 

Waialeale and one individual at the 

opposite end of the Alakai Plateau. 

Dubautia waialealae is threatened by 

pigs that prey on it and degrade and 

destroy habitat, by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it, and by 

stochastic extinction due to naturally 

occurring events. Pigs have been fenced 

out of the bog where the one individual 

of D. waialealae currently occurs. In 

addition, fences protect half of the larger 

population, and nonnative plants are 

being controlled around these 

individuals. However, the threats are 

not controlled and are ongoing in half 

of the larger population. The threats 

from pigs and nonnative plants are of a 

high magnitude and imminent for D. 

waialealae, thus, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Echinomastus erectocentrus var. 

acunensis (Acuna cactus)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on October 30, 

2002. The Acuna cactus is known from 

six sites on well-drained gravel ridges 

and knolls on granite soils in Sonoran 

Desert scrub association at 1300–2000 

feet elevation. Habitat destruction has 

been a threat in the past and is a 

potential future threat to this species. 

New roads and illegal activities have not 

yet directly affected the cactus 

populations at Organ Pipe Cactus 

National Monument, but areas in close 

proximity to these known populations 

have been altered. Cactus populations 

located in the Florence area have not 

been monitored and these populations 

may be in danger of habitat loss due to 

recent urban growth in the area. Urban 

development near Ajo, Arizona, as well 

as that near Sonoyta, Mexico, is a 

significant threat to the Acuna cactus. 

Populations of the Acuna cactus within 

the Organ Pipe Cactus National 

Monument have shown a 50 percent 

mortality rate in recent years. The 

reason(s) for the mortality are not 

known, but continuing drought 

conditions are thought to play a role. 

The Arizona Plant Law and the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora provide some protection for the 

Acuna cactus. However, illegal 

collection is a primary threat to this 

cactus variety and has been documented 

on the Organ Pipe Cactus National 

Monument in the past. While the threats 

continue to be of a high magnitude, they 

are currently nonimminent. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 6 

for this cactus variety. 

Erigeron lemmonii (Lemmon 

fleabane)—See above in ‘‘Summary of 

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received in July 1975. 

Erigeron basalticus (Basalt daisy)—

Erigeron basalticus is a perennial, 

herbaceous plant with a taproot and one 

to several sprawling stems 10 to 15 

centimeters (cm) (4 to 6 inches (in)) 

long. Erigeron basalticus grows in 

crevices in basalt cliffs on canyon walls, 

at elevations from 380 to 460 meters 

(1,250 to 1,500 feet), along the Yakima 

River Canyon and Selah Creek, a 

tributary of the Yakima River. It is found 

in microsites that are largely devoid of 

other vegetation and undergoing 

primary succession. As of the most 

recent survey in 2000, an estimated over 

12,000 E. basalticus plants exist, with 

the population distributed among the 

same eight, potentially interbreeding 

subpopulations that occupy about 67 

hectares (ha) (165 acres (ac)) within the 

known distribution of approximately 52 

km2 (20 mi2). The overall population 

size, both in number of individuals and 

total area occupied, remained relatively 

stable between 1988 and 1998. 

However, the numbers of individuals in 

the four smallest subpopulations 

decreased substantially between those 

survey periods. The cause of the decline 

is unknown, yet the threats facing this 

species include habitat modification, 

overutilization from recreational use in 

the areas, and randomly occurring 

environmental affects. Surveys 

undertaken in 2000 by Washington 

Department of Natural Resources staff 

report the numbers for all eight subpopulations returning to similar levels 

as those reported in 1988. Monitoring by 

the University of Washington in 2006 

will provide data on the species current 

status which will be available for our 

next CNOR. Based on nonimminent 

threats of moderate magnitude, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 11 

to this species. 

Eriogonum codium (Umtanum Desert 

buckwheat)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

is a long-lived woody perennial plant in 

the Polygonaceae (buckwheat) family 

that forms low mats. Individual plants 

may exceed 100 years of age. The only 

known population of the species occurs 

exclusively on exposed basalt from the 

Lolo Flow of the Wanapum Basalt 

Formation in Benton County, 

Washington. The population has a 

discontinuous distribution along a 

narrow, 1.0 mi (1.6 km) long mountain 

ridge top. It is unknown if the historical 

distribution of Umtanum desert 

buckwheat was different from the 

species’ current distribution. There are 

a number of ongoing threats to 

Umtanum desert buckwheat. The 

species is not well adapted to fire, and 

negative impacts to the species from 

past fires have been significant. In 

addition, Umtanum desert buckwheat 

plants are easily damaged by trampling 

or crushing by off-road vehicles. Digging 

activities and soil disturbance as a result 

of prospecting and collecting of 

petrified rock may also threaten 

Umtanum desert buckwheat as a result 

of. Finally, the species appears to have 

a very low reproductive rate. The factors 

responsible for the lower-than-expected 

number of seedlings in the population 

are unknown buy may include low seed 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53810 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

production, low seed or pollen viability, 

low seedling vigor and survival, impacts 

to plant pollinators or dispersal 

mechanisms, and insect predation of 

seeds. The only known population of 

Umtanum desert buckwheat is small 

and limited to a single site. Based on the 

available information, the magnitude of 

threat to Umtanum desert buckwheat is 

high and the identified threats are 

imminent. Thus, we retained a listing 

priority of 2 for Umtanum desert 

buckwheat. 

Eriogonum kelloggii (Red Mountain 

buckwheat)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Red Mountain buckwheat is a 

perennial herb endemic to serpentine 

habitat of lower montane forests found 

between 1,900 and 4,100 feet. Its 

distribution is limited to the Red 

Mountain and Little Red Mountain areas 

of Mendocino County, California, where 

it occupies 50 acres and 900 square feet, 

respectively. Occupied habitat at Red 

Mountain is scattered over 4 square 

miles. The total population size is 

estimated at between 20,000 and 30,000 

plants, which occur in 44 polygons. 

Intensive monitoring of permanent plots 

on three study sites in Red Mountain 

suggests considerable annual variation 

in plant density and reproduction, but 

no discernable population trend was 

evident in two of three study sites. One 

study site showed a 65 percent decline 

in plant density over 11 years. 

The primary threat to this species is 

the potential for surface mining for 

chromium and nickel. Virtually the 

entire distribution of Red Mountain 

buckwheat is either owned by mining 

interests, or is covered by existing 

mining claims, none of which are 

currently active. Surface mining would 

destroy habitat suitability for this 

species. The species is also believed 

threatened by tree and shrub 

encroachment into its habitat, in 

absence of fire. Given the magnitude 

(high) and immediacy (nonimminent) of 

the threat to the small, scattered 

populations, and its taxonomy (species), 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

5 to this species. 

Festuca hawaiiensis (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is a cespitose 

(growing in dense, low tufts) annual 

found in dry forest on the islands of 

Hawaii and Maui, Hawaii. Festuca 

hawaiiensis is known from more than 

20 populations totaling approximately 

1,000 individuals in and around the 

Pohakuloa Training Area on the island 

of Hawaii. Historically, this species was 

also found on Hualalai and Puu 

Huluhulu on Hawaii and possibly 

Ulupalakua on Maui, but it no longer 

occurs at these sites. Festuca 

hawaiiensis is threatened by pigs, goats, 

and sheep that degrade and destroy 

habitat, by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it, and by fire. 

Feral pigs, goats, and sheep have been 

fenced out of a portion of the 

populations of F. hawaiiensis, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced areas. However, these threats 

are not controlled and are ongoing in 

the remaining, unfenced populations. In 

addition, the threat from fire is of a high 

magnitude and imminent because of the 

severity of this threat, it occurs 

throughout the range of the species, and 

no fire control measures have been 

undertaken for any of the populations of 

F. hawaiiensis. Since the threats are of 

a high magnitude and are imminent for 

F. hawaiiensis, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Festuca ligulata (Guadalupe fescue)—

The following summary is based on 

information from our files and in the 

petition received in 1975. Guadalupe 

fescue is a member of the Poaceae (Grass 

family). This species is currently only 

known from higher elevations in the 

Chisos Mountains area in the Big Bend 

Area of Texas and adjacent Coahuila, 

Mexico. The population in Big Bend 

National Park is bisected by a trail and 

subject to occasional trampling by 

horses and hikers. The magnitude of 

threats for Guadalupe fescue is 

moderate to low because of population 

monitoring, fire management, and trail 

operation by the National Park Service. 

Threats to the overall population are 

nonimminent because of monitoring 

and other conservation actions that 

address threats to the species. Thus, we 

assign a listing priority number of 11 to 

this species. 

Gardenia remyi (Nanu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Nanu is a tree found in mesic to wet 

forest on islands of Kauai, Molokai, 

Maui, and Hawaii, Hawaii. Gardenia 

remyi is known from several 

populations totaling a few hundred 

individuals throughout its range. This 

species is threatened by pigs and goats 

that eat this plant and degrade and 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. This 

species is represented in an ex situ 

collection. Feral pigs have been fenced 

out of the west Maui populations of G. 

remyi, and nonnative plants have been 

reduced in those areas. However, these 

threats are not controlled and are 

ongoing in the remaining, unfenced 

populations, and are, therefore, of a high 

magnitude and imminent. In addition, 

the threat from goats is of a high 

magnitude, and ongoing and imminent, 

because no goat control measures have 

been undertaken for any of the 

populations of G. remyi. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Geranium hanaense (Nohoanu)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of Listing Priority 

Changes in Candidates.’’ The above 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Geranium hillebrandii (Nohoanu)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Geranium hillebrandii is a decumbent 

subshrub found in bogs on Maui, 

Hawaii. Previously known from two 

populations totaling approximately 500 

individuals, it is currently known, as a 

result of more thorough surveys, from 

over 2,000 individuals. Geranium 

hillebrandii is moderately threatened by 

pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs 

have been fenced out of some of the 

populations of G. hillebrandii, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

those areas. The threats from feral pigs 

and nonnative plants are, therefore, of a 

moderate magnitude to this species 

because they affect only about half of its 

populations. In addition, these threats 

are imminent because they are ongoing 

in half of the populations. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 8 

for this species. 

Geranium kauaiense (Nohoanu)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of Listing Priority 

Changes in Candidates.’’ No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Gonocalyx concolor (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Gonocalyx concolor is a small evergreen 

epiphytic shrub found within the dwarf 

or elfin forest type near Cerro La Santa 

in the Carite Commonwealth Forest on 

the border of the municipalities of 

Cayey and San Lorenzo of southeastern 

Puerto Rico. The population previously 

reported from the Caribbean national 

Forest in Luquillo is apparently no 

longer extant. Approximately 172 plants 

have been located at the Carite site. 

Gonocalyx concolor appears to be 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53811 

predominantly outcrossed, and 

pollinated by hummingbirds. Successful 

propagation at the University of Turabo, 

Turabo, Puerto Rico has been achieved. 

We assign a listing priority number of 5 

to G. concolor, because the magnitude of 

threat is high, due to its limited 

distribution and population numbers, 

prior habitat destruction from 

construction of roads and 

telecommunication towers, certain 

forest management practices, 

availability of specific pollinators, and 

potential for catastrophic natural events; 

the threats to G. concolor are 

nonimminent, because the known 

population is found within protected 

lands, initial efforts at propagation have 

been successful, and there are no known 

projects or management activities 

planned that would destroy the known 

population. 

Hazardia orcuttii (Orcutt’s 

hazardia)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on March 

8, 2001. Hazarida orcuttii is an 

evergreen shrubby species in the 

Asteraceae (sunflower family). The 

resinous shrubs are 50–100 centimeters 

(20–40 inches (in)) high and the 

relatively few branches are erect. This 

species flowers between August and 

October. The only known extant native 

occurrence of this species in the U.S. is 

in coastal San Diego County, California 

at the Manchester Conservation Area, 

previously known as the Manchester 

Mitigation Bank, now managed by The 

Center for Natural Lands Management 

(CNLM). The area is about 50 hectares 

(ha) (123 acres (ac)) and includes Diegan 

coastal sage scrub, southern maritime 

chaparral, and willow scrub. Within the 

conservation area, the natural 

population of H. orcuttii occupies only 

2 ha (5 ac). The Manchester 

Conservation Area also supports 

populations of federally listed California 

gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica 

californica), Arctostaphylos glandulosa 

ssp. crassifolia (Del Mar manzanita), 

and Acanthomintha ilicifolia (San Diego 

thornmint). The general substrate for the 

H. orcuttii is sandstone. 

The majority of the native occurrence 

has experienced more or less 

continuous impacts from people in the 

adjacent housing area who use the open 

space as a recreation area. Impacts can 

include pedestrian trampling and 

creation of bicycle trails near H. orcuttii 

plants. There are several other existing 

and potential threats to this species in 

the U.S. Introduced invasive exotic 

plants may pose a threat to the 

reproductive potential of this species. 

Translocations can pose a threat by 

removal of plants from viable habitat. 

Removed plants would no longer be a 

portion of the extant in-situ population, 

thereby affecting the plants genetic and 

demographic potential. The loss of 

about 147 of the 200 plants translocated 

to the Manchester site from an adjacent 

native unprotected site represents a loss 

of about 29 percent of the known native 

plants in the area. This likely represents 

a depletion of the genetic diversity of 

the species. This species is likely 

threatened by low numbers, possibly 

low seed set, and seed viability. We are 

aware of no reports of seedlings at the 

native occurrence. This could be of 

considerable consequence and represent 

lack of pollinator services and/or 

limitations on genetic diversity of an 

already small population. We retained a 

listing priority number of 5 for H. 

orcuttii due to overall nonimminent 

threats of high magnitude. 

Hedyotis fluviatilis (Kamapuaa)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Kamapuaa is a scandent shrub found in 

mesic to wet forest on Oahu and Kauai, 

Hawaii. This species is known from six 

populations totaling 500 to 1,000 

individuals throughout its range. 

Hedyotis fluviatilis is threatened by pigs 

that degrade and destroy habitat, and by 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it. All of the threats occur 

range-wide and no efforts for their 

control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 because the 

severity of the threats is high and are 

ongoing so are imminent. 

Helianthus verticillatus (Whorled 

sunflower)—The following information 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. The whorled sunflower is 

found in moist, prairie-like openings in 

woodlands and along adjacent creeks. 

Despite extensive surveys throughout its 

range, only six sites are known for this 

species. There are two sites documented 

for Cherokee County, Alabama; three in 

Floyd County, Georgia; and a single site 

in Madison County, Tennessee. This 

species appears to have restricted 

ecological requirements and is 

dependent upon the maintenance of 

prairie-like openings for its survival. 

Active management of habitat is needed 

to keep competition and shading under 

control. Much of its habitat has been 

degraded or destroyed for agricultural, 

silvicultural, and residential purposes. 

The majority of the Georgia populations 

are protected as they are located within 

a conservation easement area donated to 

The Nature Conservancy by TempleInland Corporation. We assigned a 

listing priority number of 11 to this 

species as the magnitude of threats is 

moderate since the largest site is under 

permanent protection and the threats 

are nonimminent since the whorled 

sunflower appears to withstand some 

disturbance and there are no known 

immediate threats to the sites. 

Hibiscus dasycalyx (Neches River 

rose-mallow)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Neches River rose-mallow is a perennial 

woody herb growing 3–7 feet tall with 

one or more stems per clump and white 

flowers 3–6 inches wide, consisting of 

five 2–4 inch long white petals with 

deep red or purple at the base. The 

Neches River rose-mallow appears to be 

restricted to wetlands, or those portions 

of wetlands that are exposed to open 

sun and normally hold standing water 

early in the growing season, with water 

levels dropping during late summer and 

fall. This species appears to have 

community dominance within that 

narrow band between high and low 

water levels in wetlands exposed to 

open sun. However, historical habitat 

has been affected by drainage or filling 

of floodplain depressions and oxbows, 

stream channelization, road 

construction, timber harvesting, 

agricultural activities (primarily 

mowing and grazing), and herbicide use. 

Threats that continue to potentially 

affect the species include wetland 

alteration, herbicide use, grazing, and 

mowing during the species’ growing and 

flowering period. 

A 1995 status survey of 10 counties 

resulted in confirmation or discovery of 

the species in only three sites, but in 

three separate counties and three 

different watersheds, suggesting a 

relatively wide historical range. These 

three populations, Ponta site in 

Cherokee County; Lovelady in Houston 

County; and Highway 94 in Trinity 

County, are within highway rights-ofway and are somewhat protected by a 

management agreement between Texas 

Parks and Wildlife Department and 

Texas Department of Transportation. 

Because these sites are still vulnerable 

to herbicides and adjacent agricultural 

activities, they support relatively low 

population numbers: Ponta (Highway 

204) has ranged from 5 to 0 plants this 

year; Lovelady (Highway 230), 3–14 

plants; and Highway 94, 15–49 plants. 

Continued surveys for H. dasycalyx 

have resulted in new populations. 

About 300 plants were found on land 

owned by the Temple-Inland 

Corporation in east Trinity County. A 

Candidate Conservation Agreement now 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53812 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

covers this site, but smaller numbers 

have been seen in recent years, possibly 

due to changes in the wetland’s 

hydrology. Another site discovered on 

land previously owned by Champion 

International Corporation (near White 

Rock Creek in west Trinity County) once 

supported 300–400 plants. However, the 

status of this population is currently 

unknown due to a recent change in 

ownership. 

In west Houston County, a population 

of 300 to 400 plants discovered on 

private land has been purchased by the 

Natural Area Preservation Association, a 

land trust organization, in order to 

protect this land in perpetuity. In east 

Houston County, a population was 

discovered in Compartment 55 in Davy 

Crockett National Forest at the south 

end of Forest Road 503. This population 

is large (at least 400), but has not yet 

been fully surveyed. Davy Crockett 

National Forest represents the only 

public land within the range of H. 

dasycalyx. In 2000, nearly 800 plants 

were introduced into Compartments 16 

and 20 of the forest as part of a 

reintroduction effort. One population 

has retained high numbers (about 200), 

but the second has been affected by a 

change in hydrology. In 2004, another 

200 plants were placed in a third 

location, in Compartment 11 of Davy 

Crockett National Forest. This site will 

be monitored for success in 2006. Two 

more sites in Davy Crockett National 

Forest have been identified as potential 

sites for reintroduction efforts and will 

be investigated. 

Some populations of this species are 

at risk of genetic swamping by other 

Hibiscus species. Hybridization has 

occurred at both the Ponta and Highway 

94 sites. Stephen F. Austin State 

University has completed a genetic 

analysis of H. dasycalyx, confirming it 

as a separate species. Stephen F. Austin 

State University is continuing a habitat 

study of H. dasycalyx and is developing 

a high number of plants for 

reintroduction purposes. The threats to 

the species continue to be of a high 

magnitude because of their severity, but 

overall are nonimminent. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 5 

for the Neches River rose-mallow. 

Indigofera mucronata keyensis 

(Florida indigo)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

is a rare plant, inherently vulnerable to 

extinction because of its limited 

numbers. Of the eight populations that 

exist, the largest known population is 

on private land and comprises up to 

1,000 individuals. Seven much smaller 

populations are on conservation lands 

in the Florida Keys, Monroe County. 

The species’ habitat of coastal rock 

barrens, coastal berms, and edges of 

tropical hammocks is being invaded by 

exotic pest plants. On public 

conservation lands, invasive exotic 

species are being controlled in some 

areas and populations of this species, 

although small, have appeared stable in 

recent years. Populations on both 

private and public lands are subject to 

hurricanes, with their subsequent storm 

surges. Overall, the threats to this plant 

are moderate in magnitude. Because 

exotic pest plants, particularly Brazilian 

pepper and latherleaf are a chronic 

problem, with Brazilian pepper 

occupying coastal areas that are not 

regularly managed and latherleaf 

possibly still increasing, and because 

existing populations of this plant are 

small, especially on conservation lands, 

this species is highly vulnerable to 

lapses in habitat management. 

Therefore, threats are imminent and the 

listing priority number is 9. 

Ivesia webberi (Webber ivesia)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Ivesia webberi is a low, spreading, 

perennial herb that occurs very 

infrequently in Lassen, Plumas, and 

Sierra counties in California, and in 

Douglas and Washoe counties, Nevada. 

The species is restricted to sites with 

sparse vegetation and shallow, rocky 

soils composed of volcanic ash or 

derived from andesitic rock. Occupied 

sites generally occur on mid-elevation 

flats, benches, or terraces on mountain 

slopes above large valleys along the 

transition zone between the eastern edge 

of the northern Sierra Nevada and the 

northwestern edge of the Great Basin 

Desert. Currently, the global population 

is estimated at approximately 4.8 

million individuals at 15 known sites. 

The Nevada sites support nearly 98 

percent of the total number of 

individuals (4.7 million) on about 30 

acres of occupied habitat. The California 

sites are larger in area, totaling about 

156 acres, but support fewer individuals 

(approximately 115,000). 

The primary threats to Webber ivesia 

include urban development, authorized 

and unauthorized roads, off-road 

vehicle activities and other dispersed 

recreation, livestock grazing and 

trampling, fire and fire suppression 

activities including fuels reduction and 

prescribed fires, and displacement by 

noxious weeds. Despite the high 

numbers of individuals, observations in 

2002 and 2004 confirmed that direct 

and indirect impacts to the species and 

its habitat, specifically from urban 

development and off-highway vehicle 

activity remain high and are likely to 

increase. However, the U.S. Forest 

Service has committed to develop a 

conservation strategy and monitoring 

program to protect this species on 

National Forest lands, and the State of 

Nevada has listed the species as 

critically endangered, which provides a 

mechanism to track future impacts on 

private lands. In addition, both the 

Forest Service and State of Nevada have 

agreed to coordinate closely on all 

activities that may affect this species. 

For these reasons, we have determined 

that the threats to Webber ivesia are 

nonimminent and maintained a LPN of 

5. 

Joinvillea ascendens ssp. ascendens 

(Ohe)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Ohe is an erect herb found in wet 

Metrosideros polymorpha forest on the 

islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, 

and Hawaii, Hawaii. Joinvillea 

ascendens ssp. ascendens is known 

from 50 to 100 populations totaling 100 

to 200 individuals throughout its range. 

Plants are typically found as only one or 

two individuals, with miles between 

populations. This subspecies is 

threatened by pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat, by an unknown fungus, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace native plants. 

Feral pigs have been fenced out of some 

of the populations of J. ascendens ssp. 

ascendens, and nonnative plants have 

been reduced in a few populations that 

are fenced. However, these threats are 

not controlled and are ongoing in the 

remaining, unfenced populations. In 

addition, an unknown fungus attacks 

the seedlings of this subspecies, limiting 

regeneration. Most known plants do not 

appear healthy. There is no effectively 

known control method for this fungus 

and no efforts to alleviate its effects are 

being implemented for any of the 

populations of J. ascendens ssp. 

ascendens. The threats to this species 

are of high magnitude and are on-going, 

and thus are imminent. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 3 

for this subspecies. 

Keysseria erici (no common name)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species is a short, rhizomatous 

perennial herb found in montane bogs 

on Kauai, Hawaii. Keysseria erici is 

known from several populations in bogs 

within the Alakai swamp region of 

Kauai, totaling approximately 1,000 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53813 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs 

have been fenced out of three of the 

bogs where K. erici currently occurs and 

nonnative plants have been greatly 

reduced in all three fenced bogs. 

However, these on-going conservation 

efforts benefit only a few of the 

populations of K. erici. The majority of 

the populations of K. erici are in 

unfenced areas and have no protection 

from the impacts of pigs and nonnative 

plants. Even the three fenced 

populations are not secure, due to 

funding limitations to support fence 

maintenance and weeding that is 

needed to prevent incursions of pigs 

and nonnative plants. Thus the threats 

to this species occur throughout its 

range and are particularly significant in 

the unfenced areas where a majority of 

the populations are located, and are 

expected to continue or increase 

without control or eradication. Because 

the threats are of high magnitude and 

ongoing, and therefore imminent, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Keysseria helenae (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is a rhizomatous 

perennial herb found in montane bogs 

on Kauai, Hawaii. Keysseria helenae is 

known from three or four populations in 

bogs within the Alakai swamp region of 

Kauai, totaling approximately 300 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that 

outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs 

have been fenced out of three of the four 

bogs where K. helenae currently occurs, 

and nonnative plants have been greatly 

reduced in all three fenced bogs. 

However, without continued monitoring 

and maintenance of the fences, pigs 

from surrounding areas can easily 

access fenced areas. Funding limitations 

restrict the extent of such monitoring 

and maintenance, and as a result the 

fenced populations continue to face 

threats. In addition, the threats from 

feral pigs and nonnative plants are 

ongoing in the unfenced bog. In light of 

the low number of individuals of this 

species, the threats are of high 

magnitude. The threats also are ongoing, 

and therefore imminent. For these 

reasons, we have retained a listing 

number of 2 for this species. 

Korthalsella degeneri (Hulumoa)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Hulumoa is a parasitic subshrub found 

on two species of native trees, Sapindus 

oahuensis and Nestegis sandwicensis, 

only in diverse mesic forests on Oahu, 

Hawaii. Recent surveys indicate that the 

species is known only from one 

population of 1,000 individuals in 

Makua Valley. Korthalsella degeneri is 

threatened by goats that eat this plant 

and degrade and destroy habitat, fire, 

and nonnative plants that outcompete 

and displace native plants. Goats have 

been partially fenced out of the area in 

Makua Valley where K. degeneri 

currently occurs but some goats are still 

present. Fires resulting from military 

activities have been minimized but not 

completely eliminated. Threats continue 

to be of a high magnitude and imminent 

because they are ongoing and because of 

the potential for the elimination of the 

only known population by a single fire 

event. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Labordia helleri (Kamakahala)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Labordia helleri is a shrub found in 

diverse mesic forest and mesic valleys 

on Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from eight or more populations totaling 

500 individuals from Makaha to 

Honopu. Labordia helleri is threatened 

by goats and deer that eat it and degrade 

and destroy habitat, and by nonnative 

plants that outcompete and displace it. 

No efforts have been taken to control the 

threats to L. helleri from goats, deer, and 

nonnative plants. The threats are of a 

high magnitude and imminent, and 

therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Labordia pumila (Kamakahala)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Labordia pumila is a sparingly branched 

shrub found in hummocks in bogs and 

in bog margins on Kauai, Hawaii. This 

species is known from three populations 

totaling 500 to 700 individuals in the 

Alakai and Waialeale areas. Labordia 

pumila is threatened by pigs that eat it 

and degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that outcompete and 

displace it, and by stochastic extinction 

due to naturally occurring events such 

as hurricanes. Feral pigs have been 

fenced out of two of the three bogs 

where L. pumila occurs. Nonnative 

plants have been greatly reduced in the 

two fenced bogs, and are not found in 

the immediate vicinity of any L. pumila 

individuals in the fenced areas. 

Reproduction has not been observed 

over nine years of monitoring, even 

within the fenced areas. Also, with only 

three known populations, reduced 

reproductive vigor and threats from 

hurricanes and other stochastic events, 

the threats to this species are of a high 

magnitude, and are ongoing and 

therefore imminent. Consequently, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Leavenworthia crassa (Gladecress)—

The following information is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

species of gladecress is a component of 

glade flora, occurring in association 

with limestone outcroppings. 

Leavenworthia crassa is endemic to a 

13-mile radius area in north central 

Alabama in Lawrence and Morgan 

Counties, Alabama where only six 

populations of this species are 

documented. Glade habitats today have 

been reduced to remnants fragmented 

by agriculture and development. 

Populations of this species are now 

located in glade-like areas exhibiting 

various degrees of disturbance including 

pastureland, roadside rights-of-way, and 

cultivated or plowed fields. The most 

vigorous populations of this species are 

located in areas which receive full, or 

near full sunlight with limited 

herbaceous competition. The magnitude 

of threat is high for this species, with 

the limited number of populations, and 

the immediacy of threat is nonimminent 

since there are no known projects 

planned that would destroy any sites 

and the species is able to withstand 

some disturbance. Thus, we assigned a 

listing priority number of 5 to this 

species. 

Leavenworthia texana (Texas golden 

gladecress)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Texas golden gladecress is a small 

annual member of the mustard family, 

with deep, yellow petals only 7–10 

millimeters long; flowering is February 

through March. The gladecress occurs 

only on the Weches outcrops of east 

Texas in San Augustine and Sabine 

counties. The Weches geologic 

formation consists of a layer of 

calcareous sediment that sits above a 

layer of glauconite clay. These layers 

were deposited up to 50 million years 

ago and erosion of the fossil-rich 

complex has produced a rugged 

topography of steep, flat-topped hills 

and escarpments along Highway 21 

through north San Augustine and 

Sabine Counties. It has also created the 

unique ecology of Weches glades: 

Islands of thin, loamy, seepy, alkaline 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53814 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

soils that support open-sun, herbaceous, 

and highly diverse and specialized plant 

communities. 

More than 100 species representing at 

least 39 plant families, including the 

federally endangered white bladderpod 

(Lesquerella pallida), have been 

documented on Weches glades. One of 

those species is the Texas golden 

gladecress which was historically 

recorded at eight sites, all in a narrow 

line along north San Augustine and 

Sabine counties, following the Weches 

formation. All sites are on private land. 

Habitat of the species at two of these 

locations has since been eliminated due 

to glauconite mining. Two more sites 

are currently closed to visitors, and the 

status of the gladecress at these sites is 

unknown. However, a large glauconite 

mine was created adjacent to these sites 

6 years ago, and may have altered the 

area’s hydrology. One historic site in 

Sabine County was rediscovered in 1998 

and found to support over 300 plants. 

Only two known populations remain in 

San Augustine County. The Tiger Creek 

(Chapel Hill) site is less than 0.1 

hectares (less than 0.25 acres) in size 

and supports population numbers of 

40–100. The Kardell site is less than 9 

square meters (100 square feet) in size 

and supports 96–490 plants. An 

introduced population in Nacogdoches 

County has numbered about 300 within 

an area of about 18 square meters (200 

square feet). 

Historic gladecress habitat has been 

affected by highway construction, 

residential development, conversion to 

pasture and cropland, widespread use of 

herbicide, overgrazing, and glauconite 

mining. However, the primary threat to 

existing gladecress populations is the 

invasion of nonnative and weedy shrubs 

and vines (primarily Macartney rose 

(Rosa bracteata) and Japanese 

honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). All 

known sites are undergoing severe 

degradation by the incursion of 

nonnative shrubs and vines, which 

restrict both growth and reproduction of 

the gladecress. Special funding allowed 

brush clearing to be carried out in 1995 

at several white bladderpod sites (where 

gladecress is also located). The project 

resulted in large increases in white 

bladderpod numbers, and also resulted 

in the reappearance of gladecress after a 

10-year absence at one historic site, and 

a possible discovery at a second site. 

However, nonnative shrubs have again 

invaded these areas. More effective 

control measures, such as burning and 

selective herbicide use, need to be 

tested and monitored. 

The small number of known sites also 

makes the gladecress vulnerable to 

extreme natural disturbance events. A 

severe drought in 1999 and 2000 had a 

pronounced adverse effect on gladecress 

reproduction. Prelisting efforts for the 

gladecress include: The collection of 

seeds and placement in three State 

horticultural labs for possible 

reintroduction efforts, a Cooperative 

Agreement (now final and in effect) 

with The Nature Conservancy of Texas, 

and development of a ‘‘Conservation 

Area Plan for the San Augustine 

Glades,’’ which identifies the size and 

configuration of conservation units that 

will restore and maintain longterm 

viability of Weches communities. The 

next step is to secure adequate funding 

to initiate protection measures. 

Landowners of the Tiger Creek and 

Kardell sites are aware of the gladecress 

and are maintaining current land-use 

conditions. Efforts to find additional 

sites, and management of known sites, 

should be the focus for this species. Due 

to the continuing overall high 

magnitude and immediacy of the 

threats, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for the Texas golden 

gladecress. 

Lesquerella globosa (Desvaux) Watson 

(Short’s bladderpod)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Lesquerella globosa is a perennial 

member of the mustard family that 

occurs in Indiana (1 location), Kentucky 

(6 locations), and Tennessee (18 

locations). It grows on steep, rocky, 

wooded slopes, talus areas, along cliff 

tops and bases, and on cliff ledges. It is 

usually associated with south to west 

facing calcareous outcrops adjacent to 

rivers or streams. Road construction and 

road maintenance have played a 

significant role in the decline of L. 

globosa. Specific activities that have 

impacted the species in the past and 

continue to threaten it include bank 

stabilization, herbicide use, mowing 

during the growing season, grading of 

road shoulders, and road widening or 

repaving. Sediment deposition during 

road maintenance or from other 

activities also potentially threatens the 

species. Interruption of natural 

processes that maintained habitat 

suitability and competition from 

invasive nonnative vegetation 

necessitates active habitat management 

at many locations. Because the threats 

would be fatal for populations of this 

species, the magnitude of threats is 

high. However, based upon the number 

of populations and the anticipation that 

most of these threats will not be realized 

in the several years, the threats are 

nonimminent and, therefore, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Linum arenicola (Sand flax)—The 

following summary is based on 

information in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

herb inhabits seven pine rockland sites 

on limestone in Miami-Dade County 

and two in the lower Florida Keys (at 

National Key Deer Refuge and a Nature 

Conservancy preserve on Big Pine Key). 

During the twentieth century, most of 

this plant’s geographic range was 

converted to farmland or was urbanized. 

As a result, remaining populations have 

suffered from fragmentation and small 

population size; only small populations 

of this plant remain. Those on relatively 

small tracts of conservation land in 

urban Miami-Dade County are 

vulnerable to invasion by exotic pest 

plants and lack of prescribed fire and 

such threats could severely affect those 

populations. A further problem in 

Miami-Dade is that one population is 

located in an artificial environment, 

which makes its management difficult. 

Therefore, the magnitude of threats is 

high. The two sites in the Keys seem 

less vulnerable to rapid invasions by 

exotic pest plants and may require less 

frequent prescribed fire because 

vegetation grows more slowly there. 

Therefore, the threats to the 4 very small 

populations are of slightly lesser 

magnitude, but they are present. Threats 

to four of the seven sand flax 

populations in Miami-Dade County are 

imminent because they are ongoing. For 

the remaining populations, the threats 

are less imminent. Overall, the threats 

are imminent, and we assigned a listing 

priority number of 2 to this species. 

Linum carteri var. carteri (Carter’s 

small-flowered flax)—The following 

summary is based on information in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This plant occupies open, sunny 

sites in pinelands of Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. Populations with 

probably fewer than 100 total 

individuals are located on three Countyowned preserves. A population with 

more than 100 plants is on a nonconservation site owned by the U.S. 

government. The existing populations 

are small and vulnerable to exotic pest 

plant invasions, hot wildfires, and in 

some cases, to development. This 

species exists in such small numbers at 

so few sites, that it may be difficult to 

develop viable populations on the 

available conservation lands. Although 

no population viability analysis has 

been conducted for this plant, 

indications are that existing populations 

are at best marginal, and none are truly 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53815 

viable. As a result, the magnitude of 

threats is high. Because no viable 

populations of this plant exist, the 

imminence of threats is imminent, so 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

3 to this plant variety. 

Lysimachia daphnoides (Lehua 

makanoe)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is known from nine 

populations totaling 180 to 300 

individuals in the Alakai area. 

Lysimachia daphnoides is threatened by 

feral pigs that degrade and destroy 

habitat, by hikers that may trample 

individuals, and by nonnative plants 

that outcompete and displace it. In 

addition, regeneration is not occurring 

due to an unknown invertebrate that 

eats most, if not all, of the seeds in the 

fruit and for which no control is 

currently known. Feral pigs have been 

fenced out of three of the nine 

populations of L. daphnoides and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the three populations that are fenced. 

However, these on-going conservation 

efforts benefit only three of the nine 

known populations. In addition, no 

viable seeds have been observed in 

recent years due to damage to fruits 

from a boring insect. This insect has not 

yet been identified, In monitoring of 

populations of L. daphnoides in the 

three fenced bogs over the last four 

years, no recruitment has been 

observed. The threats continue to be of 

a high magnitude to the species as a 

whole and they are on-going, and 

therefore imminent. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Melicope christophersenii (Alani)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope christophersenii is a long-lived 

perennial shrub or tree found in wet 

forest in the Waianae Mountains on 

Oahu, Hawaii. Currently, this species is 

known from several populations totaling 

less than 300 individuals. Melicope 

christophersenii is threatened by feral 

pigs and goats that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. The 

black twig borer may pose a threat to M. 

christophersenii because it is known to 

infest other species of Melicope on Oahu 

and it occurs throughout the Waianae 

Mountains. The threats to M. 

christophersenii from feral pigs, goats, 

nonnative plants, and the black twig 

borer are imminent and of a high 

magnitude because of their severity, 

they occur range-wide, they are ongoing, 

and no efforts for their control have 

been undertaken. Therefore, we retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Melicope degeneri (Alani)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope degeneri is a small, long-lived 

perennial shrub found in mesic to wet 

forest on Kauai, Hawaii. Currently this 

species is known from three populations 

with a total of 15 individuals. Melicope 

degeneri is threatened by feral goats that 

directly prey upon it and degrade and 

destroy habitat, nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients, reduced 

reproductive vigor, and stochastic 

extinction due to naturally occurring 

events. The black twig borer may pose 

a threat to M. degeneri because it is 

known to infest other species of 

Melicope and it occurs on the island of 

Kauai. No known conservation 

measures have been taken to date to 

address these threats. These threats are 

of a high magnitude because of their 

severity and are occurring throughout 

the limited range of this species.The 

threats are imminent because they are 

ongoing in all three populations. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for M. degeneri. 

Melicope hiiakae (Alani)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope hiiakae is a small tree found 

in mesic to wet forest and shrubland on 

Oahu, Hawaii. Currently, M. hiiakae is 

known from four or five populations of 

about 20 individuals in the Koolau 

Mountains. This species is threatened 

by feral pigs that directly prey upon it 

and degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients, and stochastic extinction 

due to naturally occurring events. The 

black twig borer may pose a threat to M. 

hiiakae because it is known to infest 

other species of Melicope on Oahu and 

it occurs throughout the Koolau 

Mountains. The threats are high in 

magnitude and imminent because of 

their severity, they all occurring rangewide, and no efforts for their control or 

eradication are being undertaken. We 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Melicope makahae (Alani)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope makahae is a shrub or shrubby 

tree found in mesic forest in the 

Waianae Mountains on Oahu, Hawaii. 

Currently M. makahae is known from 

three populations on three discrete 

ridges, totaling approximately 200 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by goats that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. The 

black twig borer may pose a threat to M. 

makahae because it is known to infest 

other species of Melicope on Oahu and 

it occurs throughout the Waianae 

Mountains. The threats to M. makahae 

from goats, nonnative plants, and the 

black twig borer are of a high magnitude 

because of their severity, they are 

occurring range-wide, and no efforts for 

their control have been undertaken. The 

threats are imminent since they are 

ongoing. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Melicope paniculata (Alani)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope paniculata is a small tree 

found in wet forest dominated by 

Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) on 

Kauai, Hawaii. Melicope paniculata is 

currently known from four populations 

totaling 110 individuals. This species is 

threatened by feral pigs that directly 

prey upon it, degrade and/or destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. The 

black twig borer may pose a threat to M. 

paniculata because it is known to infest 

other species of Melicope and it occurs 

on Kauai. All of the threats are 

occurring range-wide and no efforts for 

their control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 due to imminent 

threats of a high magnitude. 

Melicope puberula (Alani)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Melicope puberula is a shrub or small 

tree found in mesic and wet forest on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from 1,000 individuals in the Kalalau 

area to Wainiha Pali on the island of 

Kauai. Melicope puberula is threatened 

by feral pigs and goats that degrade and/ 

or destroy habitat, nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients, and 

stochastic extinction due to naturally 

occurring events such as hurricanes. 

The black twig borer may pose a threat 

to M. puberula because it is known to 

infest other species of Melicope and it 

occurs on Kauai. These threats are of a 

high magnitude because of their severity 

and they are occurring throughout its 

limited range. The threats are imminent 

because they are ongoing. Therefore, we 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53816 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Myrsine fosbergii (Kolea)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Myrsine fosbergii is a branched shrub or 

small tree found in cloud swept ridges 

and wet forest on Kauai and Oahu, 

Hawaii. This species is known from at 

least five populations totaling 150 to 

175 individuals from Kauai and the 

southeastern end of Castle Trail on 

Oahu. Myrsine fosbergii is threatened by 

feral pigs that directly prey upon it and 

degrade and destroy habitat, and 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients. There are no conservation 

measures being taken to alleviate these 

threats for this species. Feral pigs are 

found throughout the known range of M. 

fosbergii making this threat ongoing and 

imminent. The threats from feral pigs 

and nonnative plants are of high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

they are occurring throughout its 

limited range. The threats are on-going 

and therefore are imminent. We retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Myrsine mezii (Kolea)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Myrsine mezii is a small many-branched 

tree found in mesic forest on Kauai, 

Hawaii. This species is known from two 

populations of only five individuals in 

Koaie Canyon. Myrsine mezii is 

threatened by feral pigs that degrade 

and destroy habitat, reduced 

reproductive vigor, and stochastic 

extinction due to naturally occurring 

events. No known conservation 

measures have been taken to date for 

these threats. The threats are of a high 

magnitude and imminent because of 

their severity, they are occurring 

throughout the limited range of M. 

mezii, and are ongoing. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Myrsine vaccinioides (Kolea)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Myrsine vaccinioides is a small 

branched shrub found in shrubby bogs 

on Maui, Hawaii. This species is found 

scattered throughout the bogs of west 

Maui, totaling approximately 500 

individuals. Myrsine vaccinioides is 

threatened by feral pigs that degrade 

and destroy habitat, and nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients. Pig exclusion fences protect 

some individuals of this species, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced 

around some individuals that are 

fenced. However, these on-going 

conservation efforts benefit only a small 

number of the known individuals. 

Further, nonnative plants will probably 

never be completely eradicated because 

new propagules are constantly being 

dispersed into the fenced areas from 

surrounding, unmanaged lands. The 

species as a whole is impacted by 

threats of high magnitude that are 

ongoing, and thus imminent. Therefore, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Narthecium americanum (Bog 

asphodel)—The following summary is 

based on information from our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. Bog 

asphodel is a perennial herb that is 

found in savannah areas, usually with 

water moving through the substrate, as 

well as in sandy bogs along streams and 

rivers. The historic range of bog 

asphodel included New York, New 

Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina, and 

South Carolina, but is now only found 

within the Pine Barrens region of New 

Jersey. 

As an obligate wetland species, N. 

americanum is threatened by changes in 

hydrology, loss of habitat due to filling 

or draining of wetlands, flooding as a 

result of reservoir construction, and 

conversion of natural wetlands to 

commercial cranberry bogs. This species 

occurs in the Pine Barrens region, and 

the Pinelands Commission issues the 

State-assumed Clean Water Act Section 

404 permits. The Pinelands Commission 

grants wetland exemptions to cranberry 

production and other agricultural uses. 

In some instances, illegal wetland filling 

is occurring. For example, a cranberry 

producer recently expanded its 

operation without a State permit. In 

addition, activities not needing State or 

federal permits are occurring in uplands 

that are indirectly affecting the 

wetlands. Natural succession of 

vegetation in wetlands that support bog 

asphodel from emergent (herbaceous) to 

forested wetlands may also be 

contributing to the species’ decline. 

Suppression of natural wildfires that 

would retard succession or create open 

wetland savannahs may be a factor in 

the decline of the species. 

Other factors adversely affecting N. 

americanum include trampling, erosion, 

and siltation caused by recreationists on 

foot or using off-road vehicles. 

Approximately 70 percent of known 

extant populations occur on Stateowned lands. We are working with the 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection to abate 

known threats at these sites from 

recreational use and erosion, thus the 

severity of these threats has been 

reduced on State-owned land. 

Approximately 30 percent of the known 

extant sites are on privately owned 

lands, many of which are threatened by 

habitat degradation from on-site or 

adjacent residential or commercial 

development. Overall, based on these 

imminent, moderate threats, we retained 

a listing priority number of 8 for this 

species. 

Nothocestrum latifolium (Aiea)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. Aiea 

is a small tree found in dry to mesic 

forest and diverse mesic forests on 

Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Lanai, 

Hawaii. Nothocestrum latifolium is 

known from approximately a dozen 

populations totaling less than 300 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by feral pigs, goats and cattle that may 

eat it and degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients, and the loss of pollinators 

that negatively affect the reproductive 

viability of the species. Ungulates have 

been fenced out of some areas where N. 

latifolium currently occurs, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

some populations that are fenced. 

However, these on-going conservation 

efforts for this species benefit only a few 

of the known populations. The threats 

are not controlled and are ongoing in 

the remaining unfenced populations. In 

addition, little regeneration is observed 

in this species. Therefore, the threats are 

of a high magnitude and imminent and 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Ochrosia haleakalae (Holei)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Holei is a tree found often on lava in dry 

to mesic forest on the islands of Hawaii 

and Maui, Hawaii. This species is 

currently known from three populations 

totaling 500 individuals on east Maui 

and the island of Hawaii. Ochrosia 

haleakalae is threatened by feral pigs 

and goats that may directly prey upon 

it and degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients, and fire. Feral pigs and 

goats have been fenced out of the Maui 

population of O. haleakalae, and fences 

protect the reintroduction site in Hawaii 

Volcanoes National Park on the island 

of Hawaii. Nonnative plants have been 

reduced in the fenced area on Maui. No 

known conservation measures have 

been taken to date for the other 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53817 

populations on the island of Hawaii. 

The threat from fire is of a high 

magnitude and imminent because no 

control measures have been undertaken 

to address this threat to all of the 

populations. The threats from feral pigs 

and goats are of a high magnitude and 

ongoing to the unfenced populations of 

O. haleakalae. The threat from 

nonnative plants is ongoing and 

imminent, and of a high magnitude to 

the wild populations on the island of 

Hawaii. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Pediocactus peeblesianus var. 

fickeiseniae (Fickeisen plains cactus)—

See above in ‘‘Summary of Listing 

Priority Changes in Candidates.’’ The 

above summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Penstemon debilis (Parachute 

beardtongue)—The following summary 

is based on information contained in 

our files. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Parachute beardtongue is 

an extremely rare plant endemic to oil 

shale outcrops on the Roan Plateau 

escarpment in Garfield County, 

Colorado. The estimated number of 

plants is 1130 to 1730. Approximately 

53 to 69 percent of the plants are on 

private land owned by an oil and gas 

company. Most of the remaining 31 to 

47 percent occur in one population on 

Bureau of Land Management land that 

will soon be open to leasing under a 

new Resource Management Plan. 

Pressure to develop energy reserves in 

this area is intense. Threats include 

habitat destruction caused by heavy 

equipment as it traverses access roads 

through plant populations. These 

threats are high magnitude because of 

the high number of populations affected 

by these threats and the severity of the 

impact. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species 

based on the high magnitude of the 

threats and the increase in the intensity 

of energy exploration and development 

in the last three years along the Roan 

Plateau escarpment. 

Penstemon scariosus var. albifluvis 

(White River beardtongue)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files and 

the petition received on October 27, 

1983. The White River beardtongue is 

restricted to calcareous soils derived 

from oil shale barrens of the Green River 

Formation in the Uinta Basin of 

northeastern Utah and adjacent 

Colorado. There are 14 occurrences 

known in Utah and one in Colorado. 

Most of the occupied habitat of the 

White River beardtongue is within 

developed and expanding oil and gas 

fields. The location of the species’

habitat exposes it to destruction from 

road, pipeline, and well-site 

construction in connection with oil and 

gas development. Recreational off-road 

vehicle use, heavy grazing by livestock 

and wildlife and livestock trampling are 

additional threats. Current information 

indicates that threats are nonimminent 

since that are not ongoing at this time 

but of a high magnitude because of their 

potential to affect the majority of the 

populations. Therefore, we retained a 

listing priority number of 6 for this 

plant variety. 

Peperomia subpetiolata (Ala ala wai 

nui)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Ala ala wai nui is a short-lived 

perennial herb found in mesic forest on 

Maui, Hawaii. This species is known 

from a few scattered, declining, 

populations on windward east Maui, 

totaling 100 individuals. Further study 

of the population indicates that the 100 

individuals may actually represent 

clones of only 6 genetically distinct 

individuals. Peperomia subpetiolata is 

threatened by feral pigs that may eat this 

plant and degrade and destroy habitat, 

and by nonnative plants that compete 

for light and nutrients. All of the threats 

occur range-wide and no efforts for their 

control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 because the threats 

are of a high magnitude and are ongoing 

so are imminent. 

Phacelia submutica (DeBeque 

phacelia)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. DeBeque phacelia is an annual 

flowering plant endemic to clay soils 

derived from the Atwell Gulch and 

Shire members of the Wasatch 

Formation in Mesa and Garfield 

Counties, Colorado. There are 

approximately 40 populations, all less 

than five acres. The number of plants 

varies from none to thousands each 

year, depending on precipitation. The 

habitat coincides with high quality oil 

and gas reserves of the Piceance Basin, 

mostly on federal lands. The primary 

threats are gas field development and 

associated construction and 

transportation activities, as well as 

increased access for all-terrain vehicles. 

Substantial surface disturbance alters 

the unique soil structure that supports 

this plant, and also destroys seed banks 

that are critical to the survival of this 

species. The threats are of a high 

magnitude because they have the 

potential to affect the majority of the 

populations and because the 

populations cover such small areas of 

land. The threats are nonimminent since 

they are not expected to affect this 

species in the next few years. Based on 

nonimminent threats of a high 

magnitude, we retained a listing priority 

number of 8 for this species. 

Phyllostegia bracteata (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Phyllostegia bracteata is a 

scandent perennial herb. Currently this 

species is known from three populations 

totaling no more than 100 individuals in 

wet forest habitat of east Maui. 

Phyllostegia bracteata is threatened by 

feral pigs that may directly prey upon it 

and degrade and destroy habitat, and 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients. The threats to P. 

bracteata from pigs and nonnative 

plants are of a high magnitude and 

imminent because of their severity, they 

are occurring range-wide, are ongoing, 

and no efforts for their control have 

been undertaken. Therefore, we retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Phyllostegia floribunda (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is an erect subshrub 

found in mesic to wet forest on the 

island of Hawaii, Hawaii. This species 

is known from 13 locations totaling 

fewer than 100 individuals on State, 

private, and Federal lands (Hawaii 

Volcanoes National Park). Only one 

individual is reported at each of 

approximately half of the locations. 

Phyllostegia floribunda is threatened by 

feral pigs that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. Fences 

protect approximately five populations 

on private and Park Service lands. 

Nonnative plants have been reduced in 

these fenced areas. However, no 

conservation efforts have been 

implemented for the unfenced 

populations. For the species as a whole, 

the threats are ongoing and imminent, 

and of a high magnitude. Consequently, 

we retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Phyllostegia hispida (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is a loosely spreading 

many-branched vine found in wet forest 

on Molokai, Hawaii. The historic range 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53818 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

of this species was eastern Molokai. 

Currently, P. hispida is known from 

only one plant in the State of Hawaii’s 

Puu Alii Natural Area Reserve. This 

species is threatened by the lack of 

regeneration, feral pigs that eat this 

plant and degrade and/or destroy 

habitat, erosion, reduced reproductive 

vigor and stochastic extinction due to 

naturally occurring events. No efforts for 

the control of feral pigs have been 

undertaken in the habitat occupied by 

this species. Phyllostegia hispida is 

represented in an ex-situ collection 

(micropropagation) and it is unknown 

whether the material will transfer to the 

nursery for normal propagation methods 

needed for reintroduction. The threats 

are of a high magnitude and imminent 

because of their severity, and they are 

currently occurring throughout the 

limited range of P. hispida. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Physaria tuplashensis, (White Bluffs 

bladder-pod)—See above in ‘‘Other 

Taxonomic Changes in Candidates.’’

The above summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pittosporum napaliense (Hoawa)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Hoawa species is a small tree found in 

Pandanus forest and mesic valleys on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from about six populations totaling 

several hundred individuals on the 

eastern portion of the Na Pali coast. 

Pittosporum napaliense is threatened by 

feral pigs that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. The 

threats to P. napaliense from pigs and 

nonnative plants are of a high 

magnitude and imminent because of 

their severity, they currently occur 

range-wide, and no efforts for their 

control have been undertaken. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Platanthera integrilabia (Correll) Leur 

(White fringeless orchid) ‘‘ The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Platanthera integrilabia is a perennial 

herb that grows in partially, but not 

fully, shaded, wet, boggy areas at the 

head of streams and on seepage slopes 

in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky and 

Tennessee. Historically, there were at 

least 90 populations of P. integrilabia. 

Currently there are only 53 extant 

sites supporting the species. Several 

populations have been lost to road, 

residential and commercial 

construction, and to projects that altered 

soil and site hydrology, and reduced site 

suitability for the species. Several of the 

known populations are in or adjacent to 

powerline rights-of-way. Mechanical 

clearing of these areas may benefit the 

species by maintaining adequate light 

levels; however, the use of herbicides 

could pose a significant threat to the 

species. All-terrain vehicles have 

damaged several sites and pose a threat 

to most sites. Most of the known sites 

for the species occur in areas that are 

managed specifically for timber 

production. Timber management is not 

necessarily incompatible with the 

protection and management of the 

species. However, care must be taken 

during timber management to ensure 

that the hydrology of the bogs that 

support the species is not altered. 

Natural succession can result in 

decreased light levels. Because of the 

species dependence upon moderate to 

high light levels, some type of active 

management to prevent complete 

canopy closure is required at most 

locations. Collecting for commercial and 

other purposes is a threat. Herbivory 

(primarily deer) threatens the species at 

several sites. Protection and recovery of 

this species is dependent upon active 

management rather than just 

preservation of its habitat. Invasive, 

nonnative plants such as Japanese 

honeysuckle and kudzu threaten several 

sites. Given the current threats to this 

species, the magnitude of threat is high. 

Based upon the number of populations 

and the anticipation that most of these 

threats will not be realized in the next 

several years, the threats are 

nonimminent and, therefore, we have 

assigned a listing priority number of 5 

to this species. 

Platydesma cornuta var. cornuta (no 

common name)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

variety is an erect palmoid shrub found 

in mesic forest on Oahu, Hawaii. This 

variety is known from three to four 

populations with a combined total of 

approximately 100 individuals in the 

Koolau Mountains on the island of 

Oahu. Limited monitoring has shown 

that this population is declining. The 

threats to P. cornuta var. cornuta 

include feral pigs that directly prey 

upon it and degrade and destroy habitat, 

and nonnative plants that compete for 

light and nutrients. All of the threats 

occur range-wide and no efforts for their 

control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 3 for this variety 

because of the high magnitude of threats 

and because they are ongoing, so are 

imminent. 

Platydesma cornuta var. decurrens 

(no common name)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. This 

variety is an erect palmoid shrub found 

in mesic forest on Oahu, Hawaii. This 

variety is known from a few populations 

totaling a few hundred individuals in 

the Waianae Mountains. Platydesma 

cornuta var. decurrens is threatened by 

feral pigs and goats that directly prey 

upon it and degrade and destroy habitat, 

and nonnative plants that compete for 

light and nutrients. All of the threats 

occur range-wide and no efforts for their 

control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 3 for this variety 

because the threats are high in 

magnitude and are ongoing, so are 

imminent. 

Platydesma remyi (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Platydesma remyi is a shrub or 

shrubby tree found scattered in wet, low 

stature forest on the island of Hawaii, 

Hawaii. This species is known from two 

populations (one each in the Kohala 

Mountains and Hamakua) totaling less 

than 100 individuals. Platydesma remyi 

is threatened by feral pigs and cattle that 

degrade and destroy habitat, nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients, reduced reproductive vigor, 

and stochastic extinction due to 

naturally occurring events. There are no 

conservation efforts being implemented 

to alleviate the threats to P. remyi. These 

threats are ongoing and therefore, 

imminent, and of a high magnitude 

because of their severity and because 

they are occurring throughout its 

limited range. Therefore, we retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Platydesma rostrata (Pilo kea lau 

lii)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pilo kea lau lii is an erect palmoid shrub 

found in diverse mesic forest and 

valleys on Kauai, Hawaii. This species 

is known from about 20 populations 

totaling several hundred individuals in 

Kokee and Kuia. Platydesma rostrata is 

threatened by feral goats that degrade 

and destroy habitat, and nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53819 

nutrients. Feral goats have been fenced 

out of 1 of the 20 populations of P. 

rostrata, and nonnative plants have 

been reduced in the population that is 

fenced. However, these on-going 

conservation efforts benefit only 1 of the 

20 known populations and, therefore, 

continue to be of a high magnitude to 

this species. In addition, threats to P. 

rostrata are imminent because they are 

ongoing in 19 of the 20 populations. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Pleomele forbesii (Hala pepe)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pleomele forbesii is a tree found in 

diverse mesic and dry forests on Oahu, 

Hawaii. This species is currently known 

from 16 populations totaling 500 

individuals. Pleomele forbesii is 

threatened by predation by rats, habitat 

degradation and destruction by feral 

pigs and goats, fire, and nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients. There are no conservation 

efforts being implemented to alleviate 

these threats to P. forbesii. The threats 

are of a high magnitude because of their 

severity and they are occurring 

throughout the range of this plant in all 

16 populations. The threats are ongoing 

and therefore, imminent. Thus, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Potentilla basaltica (Soldier Meadow 

cinquefoil or basalt cinquefoil)—See 

above in ‘‘Summary of Listing Priority 

Changes in Candidates.’’ No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pritchardia hardyi (Loulu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Pritchardia hardyi is a medium-sized 

palm tree found in open wet forest on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from three populations with a combined 

total of 300 individuals in the Power 

Line Road area. Pritchardia hardyi is 

threatened by feral pigs that degrade 

and destroy habitat, and nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients. Other potential threats 

include direct predation of fruit by rats, 

and human collection and vandalism. 

No conservation efforts have been 

initiated to date to alleviate these threats 

to P. hardyi. The threats are of a high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

they are occurring throughout the range 

of this plant in all three populations. 

The threats are ongoing and therefore, 

imminent. Thus, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Pseudognaphalium (Gnaphalium) 

sandwicensium var. molokaiense 

(Enaena)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Pseudognaphalium 

sandwicensium var. molokaiense is a 

perennial herb found in strand 

vegetation in dry consolidated dunes on 

Molokai, Hawaii. This variety is known 

from two populations totaling a few 

hundred individuals in the Moomomi 

area and 25 individuals at Puu 

Kahulianapa on west Maui. 

Pseudognaphalium sandwicensium var. 

molokaiense is threatened by axis deer 

(Maui and Molokai) and feral cattle 

(Molokai) that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. 

Potential threats include collection for 

lei and off-road vehicles that directly 

damage plants and degrade habitat. 

While ungulate exclusion fences protect 

one population of P. sandwicensium 

var. molokaiense on Molokai and 

nonnative plant control has been 

implemented in this population, no 

conservation efforts have been initiated 

to date for the other individuals on 

Molokai and Maui. The threats from 

axis deer, goats, nonnative plants, 

collection, and off-road vehicles are of 

a high magnitude, ongoing and 

imminent, because no control measures 

have been undertaken for four of the 

five Molokai populations or for the two 

Maui populations. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 3 

for this variety. 

Psychotria grandiflora (Kopiko)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Psychotria grandiflora is a small tree or 

shrub found in mesic to sometimes wet 

forest on Kauai, Hawaii. This species is 

found only in the Kokee area on the 

island of Kauai. Recent surveys 

determined that the species is now 

limited to four populations with a total 

of 18 individuals. Psychotria grandiflora 

is threatened by feral pigs and goats that 

directly prey upon it and degrade and 

destroy habitat, nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients, reduced 

reproductive vigor, and stochastic 

extinction due to naturally occurring 

events. The threats to P. grandiflora are 

of a high magnitude because of their 

severity, they are occurring throughout 

the plant’s limited range in all four 

populations, and there are no 

conservation efforts being implemented 

to alleviate the threats. The threats are 

also ongoing and therefore, imminent. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Psychotria hexandra ssp. oahuensis 

var. oahuensis (Kopiko)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Psychotria hexandra ssp. oahuensis var. 

oahuensis is a tree or shrub found in 

mesic and wet forests on Oahu, Hawaii. 

This variety is known from three 

populations of less than 20 individuals. 

The other varieties of this subspecies, 

hosakana and rockii, are extinct. 

Psychotria hexandra ssp. oahuensis var. 

oahuensis is threatened by feral pigs 

and rats that consume this plant and 

degrade and destroy habitat, rats that 

consume its fruit, and nonnative plants 

that compete for light and nutrients. All 

of the threats occur range-wide, and no 

efforts for their control or eradication 

are being undertaken. We retained a 

listing priority number of 3 because the 

threats are of a high magnitude and are 

ongoing, so are imminent. 

Psychotria hobdyi (Kopiko)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Psychotria hobdyi is a tree found in 

mesic forest habitat on Kauai, Hawaii. 

This species is known from three 

populations totaling approximately 85 

individuals. Psychotria hobdyi is 

threatened by feral goats that degrade 

and destroy habitat, nonnative plants 

that compete for light and nutrients, and 

reduced reproductive vigor and 

stochastic extinction due to naturally 

occurring events. There are no 

conservation measures being taken to 

alleviate these threats to this species. 

The threats to P. hobdyi from goats and 

nonnative plants are of a high 

magnitude because of their severity and 

they are occurring range-wide. The 

threats are imminent because they are 

ongoing. Therefore, we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Pteralyxia macrocarpa (Kaulu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Kaulu is a tree found in valleys and 

slopes in diverse mesic forest on Oahu, 

Hawaii. This species is known from 20 

populations totaling less than 500 

individuals. Pteralyxia macrocarpa is 

threatened by feral pigs, rats, and the 

two-spotted leafhopper that consume 

this plant; by feral pigs that degrade and 

destroy habitat; and, nonnative plants 

that compete for light and nutrients. 

These threats are of a high magnitude 

because of their severity, they are 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53820 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

occurring throughout its limited range, 

and no efforts for their control or 

eradication have been implemented. 

The threats are also imminent because 

they are ongoing. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Ranunculus hawaiensis (Makou)—

The following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Ranunculus hawaiiensis is an erect or 

ascending perennial herb found in 

mesic to wet forest dominated by 

Metrosideros polymorpha and Acacia 

koa with scree substrate on Maui and 

the island of Hawaii, Hawaii. 

Populations formerly within Haleakala 

National Park have been extirpated. 

This species is known from less than 

300 individuals in five populations. 

However, the majority of these 

individuals are seedlings, less than 1 

inch (2.5 centimeters) tall, and the rate 

of survival is expected to be very low. 

Ranunculus hawaiiensis is threatened 

by direct predation by slugs, by feral 

pigs, goats, cattle, and sheep that 

consume this plant and degrade and 

destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants 

that compete for light and nutrients. 

Feral ungulates have been fenced out of 

some of the populations of R. 

hawaiiensis, and nonnative plants have 

been reduced in some of the fenced 

areas. However, feral ungulates and 

nonnative plants are not controlled in 

the remaining, unfenced populations. In 

addition, the threat from slugs is of a 

high magnitude because slugs occur 

throughout the limited range of this 

species and no effective measures have 

been undertaken for their control. 

Therefore, the threats from pigs, goats, 

cattle, sheep, slugs, and nonnative 

plants are of a high magnitude and 

ongoing and imminent for R. 

hawaiiensis. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Ranunculus mauiensis (Makou)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Ranunculus mauiensis is an erect to 

weakly ascending perennial herb found 

in open sites in mesic to wet forest and 

along streams on Maui and Kauai, 

Hawaii. This species is currently known 

from less than 30 individuals on Maui 

and 30 individuals on Kauai. 

Ranunculus mauiensis is threatened by 

feral pigs and slugs that consume it, by 

habitat degradation and destruction by 

feral pigs, and by nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. Feral 

pigs have been fenced out of the Maui 

populations of R. mauiensis, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced areas. However, these ongoing conservation efforts benefit only 

the Maui individuals and, therefore, the 

threats continue to be of a high 

magnitude to this species on Kauai. 

Threats to the species overall are also of 

a high magnitude since half of the 

individuals are found on Kauai and this 

represents a significant portion of the 

range of R. mauiensis. In addition, 

threats to R. mauiensis are imminent 

because they are ongoing in the Kauai 

populations. Therefore, we retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Rorippa subumbellata (Tahoe yellow 

cress)—The following summary is based 

on information contained in our files 

and the petition received on December 

27, 2000. Tahoe yellow cress is a small 

perennial herb known only from the 

shores of Lake Tahoe in California and 

Nevada. Data collected over the last 25 

years suggest a relationship between 

lake level and site occupancy by Tahoe 

yellow cress. The data generally 

indicate that species occurrence 

fluctuates yearly as a function of both 

lake level and the amount of exposed 

habitat. Records kept since 1900 

indicate preponderance of years with 

high lake levels that would isolate and 

reduce Tahoe yellow cress occurrences 

at higher beach elevations. From the 

standpoint of the species, less favorable 

peak years have occurred almost twice 

as often as more favorable low-level 

years. In addition, there has been 

widespread and intensive use of the 

shorezone since European settlement. 

Today, shorezone conditions are 

influenced by heavy recreational use, 

boating, construction of piers and boat 

launches, and dam operations that 

control lake elevation. Annual surveys 

are conducted to determine population 

numbers, site occupancy, and general 

disturbance regime. During the 2003 

and 2004 annual survey period, the lake 

level was approximately 6,224 feet 

(1,898 meters). 2003 was the third 

consecutive year of low water. The 

survey located Tahoe yellow cress at 45 

of the 72 sites surveyed (65 percent 

occupied), up from 15 sites (19 percent 

occupied) in 2000 when the lake level 

was high at 6,228 feet. Approximately 

25,200 stems were counted or estimated 

in 2003, whereas during the 2000 

annual survey, the estimated number of 

stems was 4,590. A methodology change 

in 2004 resulted in fewer numbers; the 

new methodology proved unworkable 

and was abandoned in 2005. Lake levels 

were higher in 2005, and less habitat 

was available; a summary of survey 

results is not yet available, but total 

numbers of sites and individuals are 

expected to be lower than in the period 

2001–2003. 

Many Tahoe yellow cress sites are 

intensively used for commercial and 

public purposes, and are subject to 

various activities such as erosion 

control, marina developments, pier 

construction, and recreation. The U.S. 

Forest Service, California Tahoe 

Conservancy, and California Department 

of Parks and Recreation protect Tahoe 

yellow cress with management 

programs that include monitoring, 

fenced enclosures, and transplanting 

efforts when funds and staff are 

available. Public agencies (including the 

Service), private landowners, and 

environmental groups collaborated to 

develop a conservation strategy coupled 

with a Memorandum of Understanding/ 

Conservation Agreement. The 

conservation strategy, which was 

completed in 2003 and contains goals 

and objectives for recovery and survival, 

a research and monitoring agenda, and 

will serve as the foundation for an 

adaptive management program. Because 

of the continued commitments to 

conservation demonstrated by 

regulatory and land management 

agencies participating in the 

conservation strategy, we have 

determined the threats to Tahoe yellow 

cress from various land uses have been 

reduced to a moderate magnitude. In 

high lake level years such as 2005, 

however, recreational use is 

concentrated within Tahoe yellow cress 

habitat, and we consider this threat in 

particular to be ongoing and imminent. 

Therefore, we are maintaining an LPN of 

8 for this species. 

Schiedea attenuata (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Schiedea attenuata is an erect, 

sparingly branched shrub found on 

cliffs in diverse mesic forest habitat on 

Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 

from one population of less than 20 

individuals on the cliffs of Kalalau 

Valley. Schiedea attenuata is threatened 

by feral goats that directly prey upon it 

and degrade and destroy habitat, and 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients. These threats are of a 

high magnitude because they are 

occurring throughout its limited range. 

Threats continue to be imminent 

because they are ongoing and because of 

the potential for the elimination of the 

only known population by a single 

stochastic or naturally occurring event. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Schiedea pubescens (Maolioli)—The 

following summary is based on 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53821 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Schiedea pubescens is a reclining or 

weakly climbing vine found in diverse 

mesic to wet forest on Maui and 

Molokai, Hawaii. Currently, this species 

is known from six populations totaling 

approximately 100 individuals on Maui 

and Molokai. Schiedea pubescens is 

threatened by feral goats that consume 

it and degrade and destroy habitat, and 

by nonnative plants that compete for 

light and nutrients. Feral ungulates have 

been fenced out of the population of S. 

pubescens on Hawaii and feral goats 

have been fenced out of a few of the 

west Maui populations of S. pubescens. 

Nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the populations that are fenced on Maui. 

However, the threats are not controlled 

and are ongoing in the remaining 

unfenced populations on Maui and the 

three populations on Molokai. In light of 

the extremely low number of 

individuals of this species, the threats 

from goats and nonnative plants are of 

a high magnitude and imminent for S. 

pubescens and we retained a listing 

priority number of 2 for this species. 

Schiedea salicaria (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Schiedea salicaria is an erect 

subshrub or shrub found on ridges and 

steep slopes in dry shrubland on Maui, 

Hawaii. Currently, this species is 

declining throughout its range, and is 

known from several populations totaling 

100 to 300 individuals, typically of 25 

individuals per population. This species 

is threatened by cattle that may directly 

prey upon it and degrade and destroy 

habitat, fire, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. This 

species is represented in an ex-situ 

collection. All of the threats occur 

range-wide, and no efforts for their 

control or eradication are being 

undertaken. We retained a listing 

priority number of 2 because the threats 

are of a high magnitude because of their 

severity and are ongoing, so are 

imminent. 

Sedum eastwoodiae (Red Mountain 

stonecrop)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and information provided by the 

California Department of Fish and 

Game. No new information was 

provided in the petition received on 

May 11, 2004. Red Mountain stonecrop 

is a perennial succulent which occupies 

relatively barren, rocky openings and 

cliffs in lower montane coniferous 

forests, between 1,900 and 4,000 feet 

elevation. Its distribution is limited to 

Red Mountain, Mendocino County, 

California, where it occupies 30 acres 

scattered over 4 square miles. Total 

population size is estimated at between 

5,300 and 23,000 plants, contained 

within 27 habitat polygons. Intensive 

monitoring suggests considerable 

annual variation in plant seedling 

success and inflorescence production; 

stonecrop density varied from year-toyear. 

The primary threat to the species is 

the potential for surface mining for 

chromium and nickel. The entire 

distribution Red Mountain stonecrop is 

either owned by mining interests, or is 

covered by mining claims, none of 

which are currently active. Surface 

mining would destroy habitat suitability 

for this species. The species is also 

believed to be threatened by tree and 

shrub encroachment into its habitat, in 

absence of fire. Given the magnitude 

(high) and immediacy (nonimminent) of 

the threat to the small, scattered 

populations, and its taxonomy (species), 

we assigned a listing priority number of 

5 to this species. 

Sicyos macrophyllus (Anunu)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Sicyos macrophyllus is a perennial vine 

found in wet Metrosideros polymorpha 

(ohia) forest and subalpine Sophora 

chrysophylla-Myoporum sandwicense 

(mamane-naio) on the island of Hawaii, 

Hawaii. This species is known from 

several populations with a combined 

total of a few hundred individuals in the 

Kohala and Mauna Kea areas and in 

Hawaii Volcanoes National Park (Puna 

area) on the island of Hawaii. It appears 

that a naturally occurring population at 

Kipuka Ki in Hawaii Volcanoes National 

Park is reproducing on its own by seeds, 

but seeds have not been successfully 

germinated under nursery conditions. 

This species is threatened by feral pigs 

and sheep that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. Feral 

pigs have been fenced out of some of the 

areas where S. macrophyllus currently 

occurs, but the fences do not exclude 

sheep. Nonnative plants have been 

reduced in the populations that are 

fenced. However, the threats are not 

controlled and are ongoing in the 

remaining, unfenced populations, and 

are, therefore, of a high magnitude and 

are imminent. In addition, the threat 

from sheep is of a high magnitude, and 

ongoing and imminent, in all 

populations because the current fences 

do not exclude sheep. Therefore, we 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

for this species. 

Solanum nelsonii (Popolo)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Solanum nelsonii is a sprawling or 

trailing shrub found in coral rubble or 

sand in coastal sites on the islands of 

Hawaii, Molokai, Maui, Niihau, Nihoa, 

and Pearl and Hermes, Hawaii. This 

species is known from ten populations 

totaling fewer than 300 individuals, and 

is declining rapidly on all islands. On 

Maui and the island of Hawaii, S. 

nelsonii is threatened by development, 

off-road vehicles, and trampling that 

degrades and/or destroys habitat, and 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients. On Molokai, the major 

threats to S. nelsonii are wild cattle and 

axis deer that adversely modify habitat, 

and nonnative plants. On Nihoa, and 

Pearl and Hermes Atoll this species is 

threatened by nonnative plants. Threats 

to this species on Niihau are unknown. 

There are no conservation measures 

being taken to alleviate the threats to S. 

nelsonii on Maui and the island of 

Hawaii. On Molokai, conservation 

measures for this species include 

ungulate exclusion fences and weed 

control. On the island of Nihoa, and 

Pearl and Hermes Atoll, there is no 

public or recreational use allowed as 

these islands are within the Hawaiian 

Islands National Wildlife Refuge 

(Refuge). Limited nonnative plant 

control is conducted in the refuge. 

Solanum nelsonii is represented in exsitu collections and in seed storage. 

Currently, conservation measures have 

been implemented to the benefit of the 

individuals on Molokai and within the 

Refuge. However, there are no efforts to 

control the ongoing threats to this 

species on the islands of Hawaii and 

Maui. Therefore, the threats continue to 

be of a high magnitude to S. nelsonii, 

and we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species because the 

threats are of a high magnitude and are 

imminent. 

Stenogyne cranwelliae (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Stenogyne cranwelliae is a 

creeping vine found in wet forest 

dominated by Metrosideros polymorpha 

on the island of Hawaii, Hawaii. 

Stenogyne cranwelliae is known from 

six populations with a total of 100 

individuals. This species is threatened 

by feral pigs that degrade and destroy 

habitat, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light and nutrients. In 

addition, this species is potentially 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53822 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

threatened by rats that may directly prey 

upon it. All of the threats occur rangewide and no efforts for their control or 

eradication are being undertaken. We 

retained a listing priority number of 2 

because the threats are of a high 

magnitude and are ongoing, so are 

imminent. 

Stenogyne kealiae (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Stenogyne kealiae is a trailing or 

scandent vine found in wet forest 

habitat on Kauai, Hawaii. This species 

is known from five populations totaling 

100 to 200 individuals in the 

northwestern section of the island of 

Kauai. Stenogyne kealiae is threatened 

by feral pigs and goats, and deer that 

degrade and destroy habitat and may 

directly prey upon it, and by nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients. The threats to S. kealiae from 

pigs, goats, deer, and nonnative plants 

are of a high magnitude because of their 

severity, they are occurring range-wide, 

and no efforts for their control have 

been undertaken. The threats are also 

imminent because they are ongoing. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Symphyotrichum georgianum 

(Georgia aster)—The following summary 

is based on information from our files. 

No new information was provided in 

the petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Historically, 97 populations of Georgia 

aster were known to exist; 34 of these 

have apparently been destroyed. The 

species appears to have been eliminated 

from one of the five states in which it 

originally occurred. In most cases the 

exact cause of extirpation was not 

documented, but herbicides, highway 

construction, fire suppression, and 

residential and industrial development 

have all altered the historic landscape in 

which Georgia aster once flourished. 

Georgia aster has apparently been 

eliminated from 4 counties in Alabama, 

1 county in Florida, 11 counties in 

Georgia, 1 county in North Carolina, and 

5 counties in South Carolina; it remains 

in 31 counties in 4 states (NC, SC, AL, 

& GA). Most remaining populations of 

this species survive adjacent to roads, 

railroads, utility rights-of-way and other 

openings where land management 

occasionally mimics natural disturbance 

regimes, but where they are vulnerable 

to accidental destruction from herbicide 

application, road shoulder grading, and 

other maintenance activities. Many 

populations are now threatened also by 

development (several are within 

planned residential subdivisions), 

highway expansion/improvement, and 

by woody succession due to fire 

suppression. The severity of threats 

faced by this species is high and the 

threats are operating throughout its 

range. We are not aware of ongoing 

efforts to abate these threats or 

otherwise protect existing populations. 

Therefore, the magnitude of threats is 

assessed to be high, but because the 

species appears to tolerate some level of 

disturbance, we regard the threats as 

nonimminent and thus, we retained a 

listing priority of 5 for this species. 

Zanthoxylum oahuense (Ae)—The 

following summary is based on 

information contained in our files. No 

new information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Zanthoxylum oahuense is small tree 

found in mesic to wet forest habitat on 

Oahu, Hawaii. Currently this species is 

known from several populations totaling 

approximately 500 individuals on Oahu. 

Zanthoxylum oahuense is threatened by 

feral pigs that directly prey upon it and 

degrade and destroy habitat, nonnative 

plants that compete for light and 

nutrients, and the black twig borer. All 

of the threats occur range-wide and no 

efforts for their control or eradication 

are being undertaken. We retained a 

listing priority number of 2 for this 

species because the threats are 

rangewide and, therefore, of a high 

magnitude and are ongoing, so are 

imminent. 

Ferns and Allies 

Botrychium lineare (Slender 

moonwort)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files and the petition received on July 

28, 1999. See also the 12-month petition 

finding published on June 6, 2002 (67 

FR 39035). Fourteen populations are 

currently known to exist: One in Alaska 

(Wrangell County), two in Colorado (El 

Paso County), four in Montana (Glacier 

County), three in Oregon (Wallowa 

County), one in Washington (Ferry 

County), one in Wyoming (Crook 

County), one in Alberta, Canada, and 

one in the Yukon Territory, Canada. 

Collectively, these 14 sites occur over a 

large area of western North America. 

Three additional populations, two in 

Nevada and one in Idaho, were 

discovered in surveys conducted in 

2001; however, genetic analysis 

indicated that the plants contain B. 

lineare alleles but they are not pure B. 

lineare individuals. No extant 

populations are known east of the Rocky 

Mountains. Most sites occupied by B. 

lineare are generally small, with most 

less than 465 square meters (5,000 

square feet) in area. Botrychium lineare 

populations range in size from 2 to 162 

plants, with 6 populations supporting 

more than 15 individuals. The total 

number of individuals observed at the 

14 extant population sites varies, with 

observations ranging from 2 to 100 

individuals. Eleven of the 12 B. lineare 

populations in the U.S. occur on Federal 

or Tribal land. 

Most B. lineare sites are impacted by 

disturbances including grazing by native 

and nonnative animals, trampling from 

hikers, avalanches, and impacts from 

vehicles. The effects of these various 

disturbances and their relative level of 

impact in maintaining or eliminating 

habitat have not been investigated for 

the species. Six of the Botrychium 

lineare sites, one in Alaska, four in 

Montana, and one in Wyoming, are 

located adjacent to disturbed roadsides 

or all-terrain vehicle trails and may be 

affected by roadside traffic or by road 

maintenance activities, such as 

herbicide spraying or mowing. The 

largest known site of B. lineare located 

along a roadside was sprayed in 2000, 

although impacts on the population are 

unknown. Toadflax, an aggressive, 

difficult-to-control, nonnative plant, 

was introduced from the Pikes Peak 

roadway into two B. lineare sites in 

Colorado. Other nonnative plants are 

associated with B. lineare sites 

throughout the species’ range and 

should be regarded as potential threats 

to the species. Grazing by livestock or 

wildlife is a potential threat if it occurs 

prior to the maturation and release of 

spores thus compromising the capacity 

for sexual reproduction of affected 

plants. Regulatory mechanisms may be 

inadequate to protect this species in 

Forest Service Regions 1 and 4, which 

include sites found in Montana, Nevada, 

Utah, and Idaho, because in those 

Regions B. lineare is not included on 

their regional sensitive species lists. 

Botrychium lineare is not on Canada’s 

list of threatened or vulnerable species, 

so there is no special protection for this 

species in Canada. 

The generally small size of most 

existing B. lineare populations (less 

than 465 square meters (5,000 square 

feet)) makes this species not only 

difficult to locate, but also vulnerable to 

extirpation due to random naturally 

occurring events. A single random 

environmental event could extirpate a 

portion or all of the individuals at a 

given site. Conversely, the disjunct 

nature of existing population sites over 

a wide geographic range covering at 

least six western states and two 

Canadian provinces indicates a high 

likelihood that additional, undetected B. 

lineare population sites exist. This is 

especially true of the more northern 

latitudes where the species was until 

last year, not previously located. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53823 

Because the plant is distributed over 

a wide range and because the species is 

more difficult to locate than most other 

plant species, we expect that more 

populations will continue to be 

discovered in the future. Because the 

species is adapted to some level of 

disturbance and seems to persist in 

disturbed environments, the threats are 

not high in magnitude. In addition, 

since most populations (10 of 14) occur 

on Federal lands and are afforded some 

level of protection, threats are currently 

nonimminent. For these reasons, we 

assigned a listing priority number of 11 

to this species. 

Christella boydiae (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. This species is a small to medium 

sized fern found in mesic to wet forest 

along streambanks on Oahu and Maui, 

Hawaii. Historically, this species was 

also found on the island of Hawaii; 

however, the species has been 

extirpated from that island. Currently, 

this species is known from three 

populations with a combined total of 

362 to 422 individuals. The three 

populations are found in Kipahulu 

Valley and Waihoi Valley on Maui, and 

the Koolau Mountains of Oahu. Current 

populations survive only at the extreme 

upper elevations of streambanks. 

This species is threatened by feral 

pigs and goats that degrade and/or 

destroy habitat and that may eat this 

plant, nonnative plants that compete for 

light and nutrients, man-made stream 

diversion, and erosion. Feral pigs and 

goats have been fenced out of one of the 

three populations of C. boydiae and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced area. Although one of the 

three populations of this species has 

been fenced and weeds are being 

controlled in the fenced area, no 

conservation efforts are underway to 

alleviate these threats to the other two 

populations. In addition, no 

conservation measures have been taken 

to address the threats from stream 

diversions and erosion throughout the 

range of C. boydiae. The threats to C. 

boydiae are imminent and of a high 

magnitude because they are ongoing in 

two of only three known populations. 

Therefore, we retained a listing priority 

number of 2 for this species. 

Doryopteris takeuchii (no common 

name)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Doryopteris takeuchii is a small 

fern found in dry shrubland and 

grassland on Oahu, Hawaii. This newly 

described species is found only on the 

island of Oahu on the slopes of 

Diamond Head Crater in one population 

totaling hundreds of individuals. This 

species is threatened by fire that 

degrades and/or destroys habitat, and 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients. Potential threats to D. 

takeuchii include human trampling and 

erosion of its steep hillside habitat. The 

magnitude of threats continues to be 

high because no conservation measures 

have been taken to address them. 

Threats continue to be imminent 

because they are ongoing and because of 

the potential for the elimination of the 

only known population by a single 

stochastic or naturally occurring event. 

We retained a listing priority number of 

2 for this species. 

Huperzia stemmermanniae (no 

common name)—The following 

summary is based on information 

contained in our files. No new 

information was provided in the 

petition received on May 11, 2004. 

Waewaeiole is found in mesic 

Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa 

(ohia-koa) forests on the islands of Maui 

and Hawaii, Hawaii. Only four 

populations are known, totaling less 

than 20 individuals on Hawaii and 

Maui. Huperzia stemmermanniae is 

threatened by feral pigs, goats, and 

cattle that degrade and/or destroy 

habitat, fire, and nonnative plants that 

compete for light, space, and nutrients. 

The threats to H. stemmermanniae from 

pigs, goats, cattle, fire, and nonnative 

plants are of a high magnitude and 

imminent because of their severity, they 

are occurring range-wide, no efforts for 

their control have been undertaken, and 

they are ongoing. Therefore, we retained 

a listing priority number of 2 for this 

species. 

Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis 

(Palapalai)—The following summary is 

based on information contained in our 

files. No new information was provided 

in the petition received on May 11, 

2004. Palapalai is a fern found in mesic 

to wet forests. It is currently found only 

on the island of Maui, where it is known 

from three populations totaling 100 to 

200 individuals. Microlepia strigosa var. 

mauiensis is threatened by feral pigs 

that degrade and destroy habitat, 

nonnative plants that compete for light 

and nutrients, reduced reproductive 

vigor, and stochastic extinction due to 

naturally occurring events. Feral pigs 

have been fenced out of at least one area 

on Maui where M. strigosa var. 

mauiensis currently occurs, and 

nonnative plants have been reduced in 

the fenced area. However, the threats are 

not controlled and are ongoing in the 

remaining unfenced populations on 

Maui and all three of the populations on 

the island of Hawaii. Therefore, the 

threats from feral pigs and nonnative 

plants are of a high magnitude and 

imminent and we retained a listing 

priority number of 3 for M. strigosa var. 

mauiensis. 

Petitions To Reclassify Species Already 

Listed 

We previously made warranted-butprecluded findings on five petitions 

seeking to reclassify threatened species 

to endangered status. Because these 

species are already listed, they are not 

technically candidates for listing and 

are not included in Table 1. However, 

this notice and associated species 

assessment forms also constitute the 

resubmitted petition findings for these 

species. We find that reclassification to 

endangered status for the five species 

(which are listed below) is currently 

warranted but precluded by work 

identified above (see ‘‘Petition Findings 

for Candidate Species’’ above). One of 

the primary reasons that the work 

identified above is higher priority is that 

these species are currently listed as 

threatened under the Act, and therefore 

they already receive certain protections 

under the Act. The Service promulgated 

regulations extending take prohibitions 

for endangered species under section 9 

to threatened species (50 CFR 17.31). 

Prohibited actions under section 9 

include, but are not limited to, take (i.e., 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or 

attempt to engage in such activity). 

Other protections include those under 

section 7(a)(2) of the Act whereby 

Federal agencies must insure that any 

action they authorize, fund, or carry out 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species. 

(1) North Cascades ecosystem 

population of the grizzly bear (Ursus 

arctos horribilis) (Region 6) (also see 63 

FR 30453, June 4, 1998, and the species 

assessment form (see ADDRESSES) for 

additional information on why 

reclassification to endangered is 

warranted-but-precluded)—Current 

grizzly bear distribution has been 

reduced to 5 areas in the western U.S., 

including the North Cascades in north 

central Washington. Populations are 

estimated to be fewer than 20 animals 

within the 9,500-square-mile (sq-mi) 

(25,000-square-kilometer (sq-km)) North 

Cascades recovery zone. Threats to the 

species in this recovery zone include 

incomplete habitat protection measures 

(motorized access management) and 

small population size and population 

fragmentation that produce genetic 

isolation. We assigned a listing priority 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53824 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

number of 3 for uplisting to this 

population because of very low 

population numbers as evidenced by 

continuing lack of credible sightings 

and little success identifying animals 

through hair snagging and genetic 

analysis. Information indicating 

isolation of the population in British 

Columbia and the U.S. limits the chance 

of natural recovery given the small 

population size. Population 

augmentation may be the only way to 

recover this population. 

(2) Cabinet-Yaak population of the 

grizzly bear (Region 6) (see also 64 FR 

26725, May 17, 1999, and the species 

assessment form (see ADDRESSES) for 

additional information on why 

reclassification to endangered is 

warranted-but-precluded) ‘‘ Current 

grizzly bear distribution has been 

reduced to 5 areas in the western U.S., 

including the Cabinet-Yaak in northern 

Idaho and northwest Montana. 

Populations are estimated to be 30–40 

animals within the 2,600-sq-mi (6,700- 

sq-km) Cabinet-Yaak recovery zone. 

Threats to the species in this recovery 

zone include incomplete habitat 

protection measures in the form of 

motorized access management, 

overutilization by human-caused 

mortality, and small population size and 

population fragmentation that produce 

genetic isolation. We assigned a listing 

priority number of 3 for uplisting to this 

population due to continuing high 

levels of human-caused mortality, new 

threats to habitat in the form of largescale mine development proposals in 

the Cabinet Mountains, and the high 

potential for further fragmentation of 

populations within the recovery zone. 

(3) Selkirk grizzly population of the 

grizzly bear (Region 6) (see also 64 FR 

26725, May 17, 1999, and the species 

assessment form (see ADDRESSES) for 

additional information on why 

reclassification is warranted-butprecluded) ‘‘ Current grizzly bear 

distribution has been reduced to 5 areas 

in the western U.S., including the 

Selkirk Mountains in northern Idaho, 

northeast Washington, and Southeast 

British Columbia. Populations are 

estimated to be 40–50 animals within 

the 2,200 square mile (5,700 square 

kilometer) Selkirk Mountains recovery 

zone. Threats to the species in this 

recovery zone include incomplete 

habitat protection measures in the form 

of motorized access management, 

overutilization in the form of humancaused mortality, and small population 

size and population fragmentation that 

produce genetic isolation. We assigned 

a listing priority number of 3 for 

uplisting to this population because of 

continuing high levels of human-caused 

mortality in British Columbia and new 

genetic information indicating the 

population is isolated and has declined 

in genetic diversity relative to both 

adjacent populations. 

(4) Spikedace (Meda fulgida) (Region 

2) (see 59 FR 35303, July 11, 1994, and 

the species assessment form (see 

ADDRESSES) for additional information 

on why reclassification to endangered is 

warranted-but-precluded) ‘‘ The 

spikedace, a small fish species in a 

monotypic genus, is found in moderateto-large perennial waters, where it 

inhabits shallow riffles with sand, 

gravel, and rubble substrates, and 

moderate-to-swift currents and swift 

pools over sand or gravel substrates. 

Specific habitat for this species consists 

of shear zones where rapid flow borders 

slower flow; areas of sheet flow at the 

upper ends of mid-channel sand/gravel 

bars; and eddies at downstream riffle 

edges. Recurrent flooding and a natural 

hydrograph are very important in 

maintaining the habitat of spikedace 

and in helping maintain a competitive 

edge over invading nonnative aquatic 

species. 

The spikedace was once common 

throughout much of the Gila River 

basin, but it is now restricted to 

approximately 466 kilometers (289 

miles) of stream in portions of the upper 

Gila River (Grant, Catron, and Hidalgo 

Counties, New Mexico); middle Gila 

River (Pinal County, Arizona); lower 

San Pedro River (Pinal County, 

Arizona); Aravaipa Creek (Graham and 

Pinal Counties, Arizona); Eagle Creek 

(Graham and Greenlee Counties, 

Arizona); and the Verde River (Yavaipai 

County, Arizona). Its present range is 

only about 10 to 15 percent of the 

historic range, and the status of the 

species within occupied areas ranges 

from common to very rare. The species 

is now common only in Aravaipa Creek 

in Arizona and some parts of the upper 

Gila River in New Mexico. The 

reduction in the historical distribution 

of spikedace is largely attributable to the 

continued modification of its habitat 

and continued interactions with 

nonnative species. These threats occur 

over the majority of their range, to 

varying degrees. Each of the individual 

spikedace complexes may face unique 

threats as well. For example, the San 

Pedro River area is experiencing 

groundwater depletion which is 

affecting surface flows within the river 

channel, whereas Tonto Creek faces 

continued grazing pressure, recreational 

use, and dewatering due to diversions. 

Proposals have been made for water 

exchanges affecting the Verde River in 

order to provide water for growing 

urban areas. Currently, threats are 

exacerbated by the ongoing drought. 

While some areas are subjected to fewer 

disturbances or pressures, there are no 

known habitat areas that are completely 

free of disturbance. Effects from 

nonnative species introductions are 

permanent, unless streams are actively 

renovated and/or barriers installed to 

preclude further recolonization by 

nonnatives. Federal agencies have 

reduced grazing pressures by removing 

cattle from the mainstem of most rivers; 

however, grazing in the uplands 

continues to affect watershed condition. 

Groundwater withdrawals or exchanges 

that affect streamflow are not reversible. 

The threats are high in magnitude 

because effects from nonnative species 

introductions are permanent, unless 

streams are actively renovated and/or 

barriers installed to preclude further 

recolonization by nonnatives and 

groundwater withdrawals or exchanges 

that affect streamflow are not reversible. 

Because these high magnitude threats 

have gone on for many years in the past, 

and are ongoing, the threats are 

imminent. Therefore, we assigned this 

species a listing priority of 1 for 

uplisting to endangered. Note on 

December 20, 2005, we published a 

proposed critical habitat rule (70 FR 

75545) for this species. 

(5) Loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) 

(Region 2) (see 59 FR 35303, July 11, 

1994, and the species assessment form 

(see ADDRESSES) for additional 

information on why reclassification to 

endangered is warranted-butprecluded)—This small fish, the only 

species within the genus, is found in 

small-to-large perennial streams and 

uses shallow, turbulent riffles with 

primarily cobble substrate and swift 

currents. The loach minnow uses the 

spaces between, and in the lee of, larger 

substrate for resting and spawning. It is 

rare or absent from habitats where fine 

sediments fill the interstitial spaces. 

Recurrent flooding and a natural 

hydrograph are very important in 

maintaining the habitat of loach 

minnow and in helping the species 

maintain a competitive edge over 

invading nonnative aquatic species. 

The loach minnow was once locally 

common throughout much of the Gila 

River basin, including the mainstem 

Gila River upstream of Phoenix, and the 

Verde, Salt, San Pedro, and San 

Francisco subbasins. The present range 

is only 15 to 20 percent of its historic 

range, and the status of the species 

within occupied areas ranges from 

common to rare. The species is now 

common only in Aravaipa Creek and the 

Blue River in Arizona, and limited 

portions of the San Francisco, upper 

Gila, and Tularosa rivers in New 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53825 

Mexico. The reduction in the historical 

distribution of loach minnow is largely 

attributable to the continued 

modification of its habitat and 

continued interactions with nonnative 

species. These threats occur over the 

majority of the range, to varying degrees. 

Each of the individual loach minnow 

complexes may face unique threats as 

well. For example, the San Pedro River 

area is experiencing groundwater 

depletion which is affecting surface 

flows within the river channel, whereas 

Tonto Creek faces continued grazing 

pressure, recreational use, and 

dewatering due to diversions. Proposals 

have been made for water exchanges 

affecting the Verde River in order to 

provide water for growing urban areas. 

Currently, threats are exacerbated by the 

ongoing drought. While some areas are 

subjected to fewer disturbances or 

pressures, there are no known habitat 

areas that are completely free of 

disturbance. Effects from nonnative 

species introductions are permanent 

unless streams are actively renovated 

and/or barriers installed to preclude 

further recolonization by nonnatives. 

Federal agencies have reduced grazing 

pressures by removing cattle from the 

mainstem of most rivers; however, 

grazing in the uplands continues to 

affect watershed condition. 

Groundwater withdrawals or exchanges 

that affect streamflow are not reversible. 

Most of these high-magnitude threats to 

the loach minnow are already ongoing, 

in particular grazing, water 

withdrawals, nonnative stocking 

programs, recreational use, and drought. 

Because threats have gone on for many 

years in the past, are associated with 

irreversible commitments (e.g., water 

exchanges), or are not easily reversed 

(e.g., nonnative stocking and impacts 

from grazing), the threats are high in 

magnitude and imminent. Therefore, we 

assigned this species a listing priority 

number of 1 for uplisting to endangered. 

Note on December 20, 2005, we 

published a proposed critical habitat 

rule (70 FR 75545) for this species. 

Current Notice of Review 

We gather data on plants and animals 

native to the U.S. that appear to merit 

consideration for addition to the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants. This notice identifies those 

species that we currently regard as 

candidates for addition to the Lists. 

These candidates include species and 

subspecies of fish, wildlife, or plants 

and DPSs of vertebrate animals. This 

compilation relies on information from 

status surveys conducted for candidate 

assessment and on information from 

State Natural Heritage Programs, other 

State and Federal agencies, 

knowledgeable scientists, public and 

private natural resource interests, and 

comments received in response to 

previous notices of review. 

Tables 1 and 2 list animals arranged 

alphabetically by common names under 

the major group headings and list plants 

alphabetically by names of genera, 

species, and relevant subspecies and 

varieties. Animals are grouped by class 

or order. Plants are subdivided into two 

groups: (1) Flowering plants and (2) 

ferns and their allies. Useful synonyms 

and subgeneric scientific names appear 

in parentheses with the synonyms 

preceded by an ‘‘equals’’ sign. Several 

species that have not yet been formally 

described in the scientific literature are 

included; such species are identified by 

a generic or specific name (in italics), 

followed by ‘‘sp.’’ or ‘‘ssp.’’ We 

incorporate standardized common 

names in these notices as they become 

available. We sorted plants by scientific 

name due to the inconsistencies in 

common names, the inclusion of 

vernacular and composite subspecific 

names, and the fact that many plants 

still lack a standardized common name. 

Table 1 lists all candidate species and 

all species proposed for listing under 

the Act. We emphasize that we are not 

proposing these candidate species for 

listing by this notice, but we anticipate 

developing and publishing proposed 

listing rules for these species in the 

future. We encourage State agencies, 

other Federal agencies, and other parties 

to give consideration to these species in 

environmental planning. 

In Table 1, the ‘‘category’’ column on 

the left side of the table identifies the 

status of each species according to the 

following codes: 

PE—Species proposed for listing as 

endangered. Proposed species are those 

species for which we have published a 

proposed rule to list as endangered or 

threatened in the Federal Register. This 

category does not include species for 

which we have withdrawn or finalized 

the proposed rule. 

PT—Species proposed for listing as 

threatened. 

PSAT—Species proposed for listing as 

threatened due to similarity of 

appearance. 

C—Candidates: Species for which we 

have on file sufficient information on 

biological vulnerability and threats to 

support proposals to list them as 

endangered or threatened. Issuance of 

proposed rules for these species is 

precluded at present by other higherpriority listing actions. This category 

includes species for which we made a 

12-month warranted-but-precluded 

finding on a petition to list. We made 

new findings on all petitions for which 

we previously made ‘‘warranted-butprecluded’’ findings. We identify the 

species for which we made a continued 

warranted-but-precluded finding on a 

resubmitted petition by the code ‘‘C*’’

in the category column (see ‘‘Findings 

on Resubmitted Petitions’’ section for 

additional information). 

The ‘‘Priority’’ column indicates the 

listing priority number (LPN) for each 

candidate species which we use to 

determine the most appropriate use of 

our available resources. The lowest 

numbers have the highest priority. We 

assign LPNs based on the immediacy 

and magnitude of threats as well as on 

taxonomic status. We published a 

complete description of our listing 

priority system in the Federal Register 

(48 FR 43098, September 21, 1983). 

The third column, ‘‘Lead Region,’’

identifies the Regional Office to which 

you should direct comments or 

questions (see addresses at the end of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section). 

Following the scientific name (fourth 

column) and the family designation 

(fifth column) is the common name 

(sixth column). The seventh column 

provides the known historical range for 

the species or vertebrate population (for 

vertebrate populations, this is the 

historical range for the entire species or 

subspecies and not just the historical 

range for the distinct population 

segment), indicated by postal code 

abbreviations for States and U.S. 

territories. Many species no longer 

occur in all of the areas listed. 

Species in Table 2 of this notice are 

species we included either as proposed 

species or as candidates in the previous 

CNOR (published May 11, 2005) that are 

no longer proposed species or 

candidates for listing. Since May 11, 

2005, we added 19 of these species to 

the Lists of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants and removed 14 

species from candidate status for the 

reasons indicated by the codes. The first 

column indicates the present status of 

the species, using the following codes 

(not all of these codes may have been 

used in this CNOR): 

E—Species we listed as endangered. 

T—Species we listed as threatened. 

Rc—Species we removed from the 

candidate list because currently 

available information does not support 

a proposed listing. 

Rp—Species we removed from the 

candidate list because we have 

withdrawn the proposed listing. 

The second column indicates why we 

no longer regard the species as a 

candidate or proposed species using the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53826 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

following codes (not all of these codes 

may have been used in this CNOR): 

A—Species that are more abundant or 

widespread than previously believed 

and species that are not subject to the 

degree of threats sufficient to warrant 

continuing candidate status, or issuing a 

proposed or final listing. 

F—Species whose range no longer 

includes a U.S. territory. 

I—Species for which we have 

insufficient information on biological 

vulnerability and threats to support 

issuance of a proposed rule to list. 

L—Species we added to the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants. 

M—Species we mistakenly included 

as candidates or proposed species in the 

last notice of review. 

N—Species that are not listable 

entities based on the Act’s definition of 

‘‘species’’ and current taxonomic 

understanding. 

U—Species not subject to the degree 

of threats sufficient to warrant issuance 

of a proposed listing or continuance of 

candidate status due, in part or totally, 

to conservation efforts that remove or 

reduce the threats to the species. 

X—Species we believe to be extinct. 

The columns describing lead region, 

scientific name, family, common name, 

and historical range include information 

as previously described for Table 1. 

Request for Information 

We request you submit any further 

information on the species named in 

this notice as soon as possible or 

whenever it becomes available. We are 

particularly interested in any 

information: 

(1) Indicating that we should add a 

species to the list of candidate species; 

(2) indicating that we should remove 

a species from candidate status; 

(3) recommending areas that we 

should designate as critical habitat for a 

species, or indicating that designation of 

critical habitat would not be prudent for 

a species; 

(4) documenting threats to any of the 

included species; 

(5) describing the immediacy or 

magnitude of threats facing candidate 

species; 

(6) pointing out taxonomic or 

nomenclature changes for any of the 

species; 

(7) suggesting appropriate common 

names; and 

(8) noting any mistakes, such as errors 

in the indicated historical ranges. 

Submit your comments regarding a 

particular species to the Regional 

Director of the Region identified as 

having the lead responsibility for that 

species. The regional addresses follow: 

Region 1. Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, 

Washington, American Samoa, Guam, 

and Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands. Regional Director 

(TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE. 

11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 

97232–4181 (503/231–6158). 

California/Nevada Operations Office 

(CNO). California and Nevada. 

Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, 

Suite W2606, Sacramento, California 

95825. 

Region 2. Arizona, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, and Texas. Regional 

Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 500 Gold Avenue SW., Room 

4012, Albuquerque, New Mexico 

87102 (505/248–6920). 

Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin. Regional Director 

(TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Bishop Henry Whipple Federal 

Building, One Federal Drive, Fort 

Snelling, Minnesota 55111–4056 

(612/713–5334). 

Region 4. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, and 

the U.S. Virgin Islands. Regional 

Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, 

Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 

(404/679–4156). 

Region 5. Connecticut, Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maine, 

Maryland, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, 

Virginia, and West Virginia. Regional 

Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, 

Hadley, Massachusetts 01035–9589 

(413/253–8615). 

Region 6. Colorado, Kansas, Montana, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, South 

Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Regional 

Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, P.O. Box 25486, Denver 

Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 

80225–0486 (303/236–7400). 

Region 7. Alaska. Regional Director 

(TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, 

Alaska 99503–6199 (907/786–3505). 

We provided comments received in 

response to the previous CNOR to the 

Region having lead responsibility for 

each candidate species mentioned in the 

comment. We will likewise consider all 

information provided in response to this 

CNOR in deciding whether to propose 

species for listing and when to 

undertake necessary listing actions 

(including whether emergency listing 

pursuant to section 4(b)(7) of the Act is 

appropriate). Comments we receive will 

become part of the administrative record 

for the species, which we maintain at 

the appropriate Regional Office. 

Our practice is to make comments, 

including names and home addresses of 

respondents, available for public review 

during regular business hours. 

Individual respondents may request that 

we withhold their home addresses from 

the rulemaking record, which we will 

honor to the extent allowable by law. 

There also may be circumstances in 

which we would withhold from the 

record a respondent’s identity, as 

allowable by law. If you wish us to 

withhold your name and/or address, 

you must state this prominently at the 

beginning of your comment, but you 

should be aware that the Service may be 

required to disclose your name and 

address pursuant to the Freedom of 

Information Act. However, we will not 

consider anonymous comments. We 

will make all submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, available 

for public inspection in their entirety. 

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the Endangered Species Act 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Dated: August 23, 2006. 

Marshall Jones, 

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53827 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS) 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

MAMMALS 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Emballonura semicaudata 

rotensis.

Emballonuridae ... Bat, Pacific sheath-tailed 

(Mariana Islands subspecies).

U.S.A. (GU, CNMI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Emballonura semicaudata 

semicaudata.

Emballonuridae ... Bat, Pacific sheath-tailed 

(American Samoa DPS).

U.S.A. (AS), Fiji, Independent Samoa, Tonga, 

Vanuatu. 

C* ............. 2 R5 ............ Sylvilagus transitionalis .... Leporidae ............ Cottontail, New England .. U.S.A. (CT, MA, ME, NH, 

NY, RI, VT). 

C* ............. 6 CNO ......... Martes pennanti ............... Mustelidae ........... Fisher (west coast DPS) .. U.S.A. (CA, CT, IA, ID, IL, 

IN, KY, MA, MD, ME, 

MI, MN, MT, ND, NH, 

NJ, NY, OH, OR, PA, 

RI, TN, UT, VA, VT, 

WA, WI, WV, WY), 

Canada. 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

couchi.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Shelton).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

glacialis.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Roy Prairie).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama louiei Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Cathlamet).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

melanops.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Olympic).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

pugetensis.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Olympia).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

tacomensis.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Tacoma).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

tumuli.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Tenino).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Thomomys mazama 

yelmensis.

Geomyidae .......... Pocket gopher, Mazama 

(Yelm).

U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 3 CNO ......... Spermophilus tereticaudus 

chlorus.

Sciuridae ............. Squirrel, Palm Springs (= 

Coachella Valley) 

round-tailed ground.

U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 9 R1 ............ Spermophilus brunneus 

endemicus.

Sciuridae ............. Squirrel, Southern Idaho 

ground.

U.S.A. (ID). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Spermophilus washingtoni Sciuridae ............. Squirrel, Washington 

ground.

U.S.A. (WA, OR). 

BIRDS 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Porzana tabuensis ........... Rallidae ............... Crake, spotless (American 

Samoa DPS).

U.S.A. (AS), Australia, Fiji, 

Independent Samoa, 

Marquesas, Philippines, 

Society Islands, Tonga. 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Oreomystis bairdi ............. Fringillidae ........... Creeper, Kauai ................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 CNO ......... Coccyzus americanus ...... Cuculidae ............ Cuckoo, yellow-billed 

(Western U.S. DPS).

U.S.A. (Lower 48 States), 

Canada, Mexico, Central and South America. 

C* ............. 6 R1 ............ Gallicolumba stairi ............ Columbidae ......... Ground-dove, friendly 

(American Samoa DPS).

U.S.A. (AS), Independent 

Samoa. 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Eremophila alpestris 

strigata.

Alaudidae ............ Horned lark, streaked ...... U.S.A. (OR, WA), Canada 

(BC). 

C* ............. 6 R5 ............ Calidris canutus rufa ........ Scolopacidae ....... Knot, red .......................... U.S.A. (Atlantic coast), 

Canada, South America. 

C* ............. 5 R7 ............ Brachyramphus 

brevirostris.

Alcidae ................. Murrelet, Kittlitz’s .............. U.S.A. (AK), Russia. 

C* ............. 2 CNO ......... Synthliboramphus 

hypoleucus.

Alcidae ................. Murrelet, Xantus’s ............ U.S.A. (CA), Mexico. 

C* ............. 8 R2 ............ Tympanuchus 

pallidicinctus.

Phasianidae ......... Prairie-chicken, lesser ...... U.S.A. (CO, KA, NM, OK, 

TX). 

C* ............. 6 R1 ............ Centrocercus 

urophasianus.

Phasianidae ......... Sage-grouse, greater (Columbia Basin DPS).U.S.A. (AZ, CA, CO, ID, 

MT, ND, NE, NV, OR, 

SD, UT, WA, WY), Canada (AB, BC, SK). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53828 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Oceanodroma castro ....... Hydrobatidae ....... Storm-petrel, bandrumped (Hawaii DPS).U.S.A. (HI), Atlantic 

Ocean, Ecuador (Galapagos Islands), Japan. 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Dendroica angelae ........... Emberizidae ........ Warbler, elfin woods ........ U.S.A. (PR). 

REPTILES 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Sceloporus arenicolus ...... Iguanidae ............. Lizard, sand dune ............ U.S.A. (TX, NM). 

C* ............. 9 R3 ............ Sistrurus catenatus 

catenatus.

Viperidae ............. Massasauga 

(=rattlesnake), eastern.

U.S.A. (IA, IL, IN, MI, MO, 

MN, NY, OH, PA, WI), 

Canada. 

C* ............. 3 R4 ............ Pituophis melanoleucus 

lodingi.

Colubridae ........... Snake, black pine ............ U.S.A. (AL, LA, MS). 

C* ............. 8 R4 ............ Pituophis ruthveni ............ Colubridae ........... Snake, Louisiana pine ..... U.S.A. (LA, TX). 

C* ............. 3 R2 ............ Kinosternon sonoriense 

longifemorale.

Kinosternidae ...... Turtle, Sonoyta mud ........ U.S.A. (AZ), Mexico. 

AMPHIBIANS 

C* ............. 3 CNO ......... Rana luteiventris .............. Ranidae ............... Frog, Columbia spotted 

(Great Basin DPS).

U.S.A. (AK, ID, MT, NV, 

OR, UT, WA, WY), 

Canada (BC). 

C* ............. 3 CNO ......... Rana muscosa ................. Ranidae ............... Frog, mountain yellowlegged (Sierra Nevada 

DPS).

U.S.A. (CA, NV). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Rana pretiosa ................... Ranidae ............... Frog, Oregon spotted ....... U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA), 

Canada (BC). 

C* ............. 11 CNO ......... Rana onca ........................ Ranidae ............... Frog, relict leopard ........... U.S.A. (AZ, NV, UT). 

C* ............. 3 R3 ............ Cryptobranchus 

alleganiensis bishopi.

Crytobranchidae .. Hellbender, Ozark ............ U.S.A. (AR, MO). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Eurycea waterlooensis ..... Plethodontidae .... Salamander, Austin blind U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Eurycea naufragia ............ Plethodontidae .... Salamander, Georgetown U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Eurycea chisholmensis .... Plethodontidae .... Salamander, Salado ........ U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 11 CNO ......... Bufo canorus .................... Bufonidae ............ Toad, Yosemite ................ U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Necturus alabamensis ..... Proteidae ............. Waterdog, black warrior 

(=Sipsey Fork).

U.S.A. (AL). 

FISHES 

PE ............ 3 CNO ......... Gila bicolor vaccaceps ..... Cyprinidae ........... Chub, Cowhead Lake tui U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Gila nigra .......................... Cyprinidae ........... Chub, headwater .............. U.S.A. (AZ, NM). 

C* ............. 11 R6 ............ Etheostoma cragini .......... Percidae .............. Darter, Arkansas .............. U.S.A. (AR, CO, KS, MO, 

OK). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Etheostoma susanae ....... Percidae .............. Darter, Cumberland ......... U.S.A. (KY, TN). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Percina aurora ................. Percidae .............. Darter, Pearl ..................... U.S.A. (LA, MS). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Etheostoma phytophilum Percidae .............. Darter, rush ...................... U.S.A. (AL). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Etheostoma moorei .......... Percidae .............. Darter, yellowcheek ......... U.S.A. (AR). 

C* ............. 3 R6 ............ Thymallus arcticus ........... Salmonidae ......... Grayling, Fluvial arctic 

(upper Missouri River 

DPS).

U.S.A. (MT, WY). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Noturus crypticus ............. Ictaluridae ............ Madtom, chucky ............... U.S.A. (TN). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Moxostoma sp. ................. Catostomidae ...... Redhorse, sicklefin ........... U.S.A. (GA, NC, TN). 

C* ............. 2 R3 ............ Cottus sp. ......................... Cottidae ............... Sculpin, grotto .................. U.S.A. (MO). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Notropis oxyrhynchus ...... Cyprinidae ........... Shiner, sharpnose ............ U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Notropis buccula .............. Cyprinidae ........... Shiner, smalleye .............. U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 3 R2 ............ Catostomus discobolus 

yarrowi.

Catostomidae ...... Sucker, Zuni bluehead ..... U.S.A. (AZ, NM). 

PSAT ........ N/A R1 ............ Salvelinus malma ............. Salmonidae ......... Trout, Dolly Varden .......... U.S.A. (AK, WA), Canada, 

East Asia. 

CLAMS 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Villosa choctawensis ........ Unionidae ............ Bean, Choctaw ................. U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C ............... 2 R3 ............ Villosa fabalis ................... Unionidae ............ Bean, rayed ...................... U.S.A. (IL, IN, KY, MI, NY, 

OH, TN, PA, VA, WV), 

Canada (ON). 

C ............... 2 R4 ............ Fusconaia (=Obovaria) 

rotulata.

Unionidae ............ Ebonyshell, round ............ U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Popenaias popei .............. Unionidae ............ Hornshell, Texas .............. U.S.A. (NM, TX), Mexico. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53829 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Ptychobranchus 

subtentum.

Unionidae ............ Kidneyshell, fluted ............ U.S.A. (AL, KY, TN, VA). 

C ............... 2 R4 ............ Ptychobranchus jonesi ..... Unionidae ............ Kidneyshell, southern ....... U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Lampsilis rafinesqueana .. Unionidae ............ Mucket, Neosho ............... U.S.A. (AR, KS, MO, OK). 

C ............... 2 R3 ............ Plethobasus cyphyus ....... Unionidae ............ Mussel, sheepnose .......... U.S.A. (AL, IA, IL, IN, KY, 

MN, MO, MS, OH, PA, 

TN, VA, WI, WV). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Margaritifera marrianae .... Margaritiferidae ... Pearlshell, Alabama ......... U.S.A. (AL). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Lexingtonia dolabelloides Unionidae ............ Pearlymussel, slabside .... U.S.A. (AL, KY, TN, VA). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Pleurobema strodeanum .. Unionidae ............ Pigtoe, fuzzy .................... U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Pleurobema hanleyanum Unionidae ............ Pigtoe, Georgia ................ U.S.A. (AL, GA, TN). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Fusconaia escambia ........ Unionidae ............ Pigtoe, narrow .................. U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C ............... 11 R4 ............ Quincuncina burkei .......... Unionidae ............ Pigtoe, tapered ................. U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Hamiota (=Lampsilis) 

australis.

Unionidae ............ Sandshell, southern ......... U.S.A. (AL, FL). 

C ............... 4 R3 ............ Cumberlandia monodonta Margaritiferidae ... Spectaclecase .................. U.S.A. (AL, AR, IA, IN, IL, 

KS, KY, MO, MN, NE, 

OH, TN, VA, WI, WV). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Elliptio spinosa ................. Unionidae ............ Spinymussel, Altamaha ... U.S.A. (GA). 

SNAILS 

C ............... 2 R4 ............ Pleurocera foremani ......... Pleuroceridae ...... Hornsnail, rough ............... U.S.A. (AL). 

C ............... 2 R4 ............ Elimia melanoides ............ Pleuroceridae ...... Mudalia, black .................. U.S.A. (AL). 

C* ............. 9 R6 ............ Oreohelix peripherica 

wasatchensis.

Oreohelicidae ...... Mountainsnail, Ogden ...... U.S.A. (UT). 

C* ............. 8 R6 ............ Stagnicola bonnevillensis Lymnaeidae ......... Pondsnail, Bonneville ....... U.S.A. (UT). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Leptoxis foremani 

(=downei).

Pleuroceridae ...... Rocksnail, Interrupted 

(=Georgia).

U.S.A. (GA, AL). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Ostodes strigatus ............. Potaridae ............. Sisi snail ........................... U.S.A. (AS). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Pseudotryonia 

adamantina.

Hydrobiidae ......... Snail, Diamond Y Spring U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Samoana fragilis .............. Partulidae ............ Snail, fragile tree .............. U.S.A. (GU, MP). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Partula radiolata ............... Partulidae ............ Snail, Guam tree .............. U.S.A. (GU). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Partula gibba .................... Partulidae ............ Snail, Humped tree .......... U.S.A. (GU, MP). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Partulina semicarinata ..... Achatinellidae ...... Snail, Lanai tree ............... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Partulina variabilis ............ Achatinellidae ...... Snail, Lanai tree ............... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Partula langfordi ............... Partulidae ............ Snail, Langford’s tree ....... U.S.A. (MP). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Cochliopa texana ............. Hydrobiidae ......... Snail, Phantom cave ........ U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Eua zebrina ...................... Partulidae ............ Snail, Tutuila tree ............. U.S.A. (AS). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis chupaderae .. Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Chupadera ... U.S.A. (NM). 

C* ............. 2 CNO ......... Pyrgulopsis notidicola ...... Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, elongate mud 

meadows.

U.S.A. (NV). 

C* ............. 11 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis gilae .............. Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Gila ............... U.S.A. (NM). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Tryonia circumstriata 

(=stocktonensis).

Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Gonzales ...... U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis thompsoni ..... Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Huachuca ..... U.S.A. (AZ), Mexico. 

C* ............. 11 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis thermalis ....... Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, New Mexico U.S.A. (NM). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis morrisoni ....... Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Page ............. U.S.A. (AZ). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Tryonia cheatumi ............. Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail (=Tryonia), 

Phantom.

U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis trivialis .......... Hydrobiidae ......... Springsnail, Three Forks .. U.S.A. (AZ). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Newcombia cumingi ......... Achatinellidae ...... Tree snail, Newcomb’s .... U.S.A. (HI) 

INSECTS 

C* ............. 11 R6 ............ Zaitzevia thermae ............ Elmidae ............... Beetle, Warm Springs 

Zaitzevian riffle.

U.S.A. (MT). 

C* ............. 8 R1 ............ Nysius wekiuicola ............. Lygaeidae ............ Bug, Wekiu ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 3 R4 ............ Anaea troglodyta floridalis Nymphalidae ....... Butterfly, Florida leafwing U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Hypolimnas octucula 

mariannensis.

Nymphalidae ....... Butterfly, Mariana eightspot.U.S.A. (GU, MP). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Vagrans egestina ............. Nymphalidae ....... Butterfly, Mariana wandering.U.S.A. (GU, MP). 

C* ............. 6 R4 ............ Cyclargus thomasi 

bethunebakeri.

Lycaenidae .......... Butterfly, Miami blue ........ U.S.A. (FL), Bahamas. 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Glyphopsyche sequatchie Limnephilidae ...... Caddisfly, Sequatchie ...... U.S.A. (TN). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

insularis.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Baker Station (=insular).U.S.A. (TN). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53830 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

major.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, beaver ......... U.S.A. (KY). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

caecus.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Clifton ......... U.S.A. (KY). 

C ............... 11 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

colemanensis.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Coleman ..... U.S.A. (TN). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

fowlerae.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Fowler’s ...... U.S.A. (TN). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

frigidus.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, icebox ......... U.S.A. (KY). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

tiresias.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Indian Grave 

Point (=Soothsayer).

U.S.A. (TN). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus inquisitor.Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, inquirer ........ U.S.A. (TN). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus troglodytes.Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Louisville ..... U.S.A. (KY). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus paulus.Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Noblett’s ...... U.S.A. (TN). 

C* ............. 11 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

inexpectatus.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, surprising .... U.S.A. (KY). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

parvus.

Carabidae ............ Cave beetle, Tatum ......... U.S.A. (KY). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Euphydryas editha taylori Nymphalidae ....... Checkerspot, Taylor’s 

(=Whulge).

U.S.A. (OR, WA), Canada 

(BC). 

C* ............. 9 R1 ............ Megalagrion 

nigrohamatum nigrolineatum.

Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, blackline Hawaiian.U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Megalagrion leptodemas .. Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, crimson Hawaiian.U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Megalagrion nesiotes ....... Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, flying earwig 

Hawaiian.

U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Megalagrion oceanicum ... Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, oceanic Hawaiian.U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R1 ............ Megalagrion xanthomelas Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, orangeblack 

Hawaiian.

U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Megalagrion pacificum ..... Coenagrionidae ... Damselfly, Pacific Hawaiian.U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 3 R4 ............ Strymon acis bartrami ...... Lycaenidae .......... Hairstreak, Bartram’s ....... U.S.A. (FL). 

C ............... 5 CNO ......... Ambrysus funebris ........... Naucoridae .......... Naucorid bug (=Furnace 

Creek), Nevares Spring.

U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Drosophila attigua ............ Drosophilidae ...... fly, Picture-wing ................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Drosophila digressa ......... Drosophilidae ...... fly, Picture-wing 

[unnamed].

U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Heterelmis stephani ......... Elmidae ............... Riffle beetle, Stephan’s .... U.S.A. (AZ). 

C* ............. 11 R3 ............ Hesperia dacotae ............. Hesperiidae ......... Skipper, Dakota ............... U.S.A. (MN, IA, SD, ND, 

IL), Canada. 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Polites mardon ................. Hesperiidae ......... Skipper, Mardon ............... U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA). 

C* ............. 9 R6 ............ Cicindela limbata 

albissima.

Cicindelidae ......... Tiger beetle, Coral Pink 

Sand Dunes.

U.S.A. (UT). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Cicindela highlandensis ... Cicindelidae ......... Tiger beetle, highlands .... U.S.A. (FL). 

ARACHNIDS 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Cicurina wartoni ............... Dictynidae ............ Meshweaver, Warton’s 

cave.

U.S.A. (TX). 

CRUSTACEANS 

C ............... 2 R2 ............ Gammarus hyalleloides ... Gammaridae ........ Amphipod, diminutive ....... U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Metabetaeus lohena ........ Alpheidae ............ Shrimp, anchialine pool ... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Palaemonella burnsi ........ Palaemonidae ..... Shrimp, anchialine pool ... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Procaris hawaiana ........... Procarididae ........ Shrimp, anchialine pool ... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 4 R1 ............ Vetericaris chaceorum ..... Procaridae ........... Shrimp, anchialine pool ... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Typhlatya monae ............. Atyidae ................ Shrimp, troglobitic groundwater.U.S.A. (PR), Barbuda, Dominican Republic. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53831 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

FLOWERING PLANTS 

C* ............. 8 CNO ......... Abronia alpina .................. Nyctaginaceae ..... Sand-verbena, Ramshaw 

Meadows.

U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 8 R4 ............ Arabis georgiana .............. Brassicaceae ....... Rockcress, Georgia ......... U.S.A. (AL, GA). 

C* ............. 11 R4 ............ Argythamnia blodgettii ..... Euphorbiaceae .... Silverbush, Blodgett’s ...... U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Artemisia campestris var. 

wormskioldii.

Asteraceae .......... Wormwood, northern ....... U.S.A. (OR, WA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Astelia waialealae ............ Liliaceae .............. Pa1iniu ............................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 11 R6 ............ Astragalus tortipes ........... Fabaceae ............ Milk-vetch, Sleeping Ute .. U.S.A. (CO). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Bidens amplectens ........... Asteraceae .......... Ko1oko1olau ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Bidens campylotheca 

pentamera.

Asteraceae .......... Ko1oko1olau ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 6 R1 ............ Bidens campylotheca 

waihoiensis.

Asteraceae .......... Ko1oko1olau ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R1 ............ Bidens conjuncta .............. Asteraceae .......... Ko1oko1olau ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Bidens micrantha 

ctenophylla.

Asteraceae .......... Ko1oko1olau ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R4 ............ Brickellia mosieri .............. Asteraceae .......... Brickell-bush, Florida ....... U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Calamagrostis expansa ... Poaceae .............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Calamagrostis hillebrandii Poaceae .............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Calliandra locoensis ......... Mimosaceae ........ No common name ........... U.S.A. (PR). 

C* ............. 5 CNO ......... Calochortus persistens .... Liliaceae .............. Mariposa lily, Siskiyou ..... U.S.A. (CA, OR). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Calyptranthes estremerae Myrtaceae ............ No common name ........... U.S.A. (PR). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Canavalia napaliensis ...... Fabaceae ............ 1Awikiwiki .......................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Canavalia pubescens ....... Fabaceae ............ 1Awikiwiki .......................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R1 ............ Castilleja christii ............... Scrophulariaceae Paintbrush, Christ’s .......... U.S.A. (ID). 

C* ............. 6 R4 ............ Chamaecrista lineata var. 

keyensis.

Fabaceae ............ Pea, Big Pine partridge .... U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 12 R4 ............ Chamaesyce deltoidea 

pinetorum.

Euphorbiaceae .... Sandmat, pineland ........... U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 6 R4 ............ Chamaesyce deltoidea 

serpyllum.

Euphorbiaceae .... Spurge, wedge ................. U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Chamaesyce eleanoriae .. Euphorbiaceae .... 1Akoko ............................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Chamaesyce remyi var. 

kauaiensis.

Euphorbiaceae .... 1Akoko .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Chamaesyce remyi var. 

remyi.

Euphorbiaceae .... 1Akoko .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Charpentiera densiflora .... Amaranthaceae ... Papala .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 6 CNO ......... Chorizanthe parryi var. 

fernandina.

Polygonaceae ...... Spineflower, San Fernando Valley.U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Chromolaena frustrata ..... Asteraceae .......... Thoroughwort, Cape 

Sable.

U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Consolea corallicola ......... Cactaceae ........... Cactus, Florida semaphore.U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Cordia rupicola ................. Boraginaceae ...... No common name ........... U.S.A. (PR), Anegada. 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea asplenifolia .......... Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea calycina ............... Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea eleeleensis .......... Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea kuhihewa ............ Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea kunthiana ............ Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea lanceolata ........... Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea obtusa ................. Campanulaceae .. Haha ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyanea tritomantha .......... Campanulaceae .. Aku ................................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyrtandra filipes ............... Gesneriaceae ...... Ha1iwale ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyrtandra kaulantha ......... Gesneriaceae ...... Ha1iwale ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyrtandra oenobarba ....... Gesneriaceae ...... Ha1iwale ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyrtandra oxybapha ......... Gesneriaceae ...... Ha1iwale ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Cyrtandra sessilis ............. Gesneriaceae ...... Ha1iwale ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 9 R4 ............ Dalea carthagenensis 

floridana.

Fabaceae ............ Prairie-clover, Florida ....... U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 5 R5 ............ Dichanthelium hirstii ......... Poaceae .............. Panic grass, Hirsts’ .......... U.S.A. (DE, GA, NC, NJ). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Digitaria pauciflora ........... Poaceae .............. Crabgrass, Florida pineland.U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Dubautia imbricata 

imbricata.

Asteraceae .......... Na1ena1e ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Dubautia plantaginea 

magnifolia.

Asteraceae .......... Na1ena1e ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Dubautia waialealae ......... Asteraceae .......... Na1ena1e ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53832 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

C* ............. 6 R2 ............ Echinomastus 

erectocentrus var. 

acunensis.

Cactaceae ........... Cactus, Acuna .................. U.S.A. (AZ), Mexico. 

C* ............. 8 R2 ............ Erigeron lemmonii ............ Asteraceae .......... Fleabane, Lemmon .......... U.S.A. (AZ). 

C* ............. 11 R1 ............ Erigeron basalticus .......... Asteraceae .......... Daisy, basalt .................... U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Eriogonum codium ........... Polygonaceae ...... Buckwheat, Umtanum 

Desert.

U.S.A. (WA). 

C ............... 2 CNO ......... Eriogonum diatomaceum Polygonaceae ...... Buckwheat, Churchill Narrows.U.S.A (NV). 

C* ............. 5 CNO ......... Eriogonum kelloggii .......... Polygonaceae ...... Buckwheat, Red Mountain U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Festuca hawaiiensis ......... Poaceae .............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 11 R2 ............ Festuca ligulata ................ Poaceae .............. Guadalupe fescue ............ U.S.A. (TX), Mexico. 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Gardenia remyi ................ Rubiaceae ........... Nanu ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Geranium hanaense ........ Geraniaceae ........ Nohoanu ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R1 ............ Geranium hillebrandii ....... Geraniaceae ........ Nohoanu ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Geranium kauaiense ........ Geraniaceae ........ Nohoanu ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Gonocalyx concolor ......... Ericaceae ............ No common name ........... U.S.A. (PR). 

C ............... 5 R4 ............ Harrisia aboriginum .......... Cactaceae ........... Pricklyapple, aboriginal 

(shell mound 

applecactus).

U.S.A. (FL) 

C* ............. 5 CNO ......... Hazardia orcuttii ............... Asteraceae .......... Orcutt’s hazardia .............. U.S.A. (CA), Mexico. 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Hedyotis fluviatilis ............ Rubiaceae ........... Kampua1a ......................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 11 R4 ............ Helianthus verticillatus ..... Asteraceae .......... Sunflower, whorled .......... U.S.A. (AL, GA, TN). 

C* ............. 5 R2 ............ Hibiscus dasycalyx ........... Malvaceae ........... Rose-mallow, Neches 

River.

U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 9 R4 ............ Indigofera mucronata 

keyensis.

Fabaceae ............ Indigo, Florida .................. U.S.A. (FL). 

C ............... 2 R6 ............ Ipomopsis polyantha ........ Polemoniaceae .... Skyrocket, Pagosa ........... U.S.A. (CO). 

C* ............. 5 CNO ......... Ivesia webberi .................. Rosaceae ............ Ivesia, Webber ................. U.S.A. (CA, NV). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Joinvillea ascendens 

ascendens.

Joinvilleaceae ...... 1Ohe .................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Keysseria (=Lagenifera) 

erici.

Asteraceae .......... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Keysseria (=Lagenifera) 

helenae.

Asteraceae .......... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Korthalsella degeneri ....... Viscaceae ............ Hulumoa ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Labordia helleri ................ Loganiaceae ........ Kamakahala ..................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Labordia pumila ............... Loganiaceae ........ Kamakahala ..................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Leavenworthia crassa ...... Brassicaceae ....... Gladecress, unnamed ...... U.S.A. (AL). 

C* ............. 2 R2 ............ Leavenworthia texana ...... Brassicaceae ....... Gladecress, Texas golden U.S.A. (TX). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Lesquerella globosa ......... Brassicaceae ....... Bladderpod, Short’s ......... U.S.A. (IN, KY, TN). 

C* ............. 2 R4 ............ Linum arenicola ................ Linaceae .............. Flax, sand ........................ U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 3 R4 ............ Linum carteri var. carteri .. Linaceae .............. Flax, Carter’s small-flowered.U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Lysimachia daphnoides ... Primulaceae ........ Lehua makanoe ............... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope christophersenii Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope degeneri ............ Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope hiiakae .............. Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope makahae ........... Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope paniculata ......... Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Melicope puberula ............ Rutaceae ............. Alani ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Myrsine fosbergii .............. Myrsinaceae ........ Kolea ................................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Myrsine mezii ................... Myrsinaceae ........ Kolea ................................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Myrsine vaccinioides ........ Myrsinaceae ........ Kolea ................................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 R5 ............ Narthecium americanum .. Liliaceae .............. Asphodel, bog .................. U.S.A. (DE, NC, NJ, NY, 

SC). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Nothocestrum latifolium ... Solanaceae ......... 1Aiea ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Ochrosia haleakalae ........ Apocynaceae ....... Holei ................................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R2 ............ Pediocactus peeblesianus 

fickeiseniae.

Cactaceae ........... Cactus, Fickeisen plains .. U.S.A. (AZ). 

C* ............. 2 R6 ............ Penstemon debilis ............ Scrophulariaceae Beardtongue, Parachute .. U.S.A. (CO). 

PT ............ 2 R6 ............ Penstemon grahamii ........ Scrophulariaceae Beardtongue, Graham ..... U.S.A. (CO, UT). 

C* ............. 6 R6 ............ Penstemon scariosus var. 

albifluvis.

Scrophulariaceae Beardtongue, White River U.S.A. (CO, UT). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Peperomia subpetiolata ... Piperaceae .......... 1Ala 1ala wai nui ................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 2 CNO ......... Phacelia stellaris .............. Hydrophyllaceae .. Brand’s phacelia .............. U.S.A. (CA), Mexico. 

C* ............. 8 R6 ............ Phacelia submutica .......... Hydrophyllaceae .. Phacelia, DeBeque .......... U.S.A. (CO). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Phyllostegia bracteata ...... Lamiaceae ........... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Phyllostegia floribunda ..... Lamiaceae ........... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53833 

TABLE 1.—CANDIDATE NOTICE OF REVIEW (ANIMALS AND PLANTS)—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Phyllostegia hispida ......... Lamiaceae ........... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R1 ............ Physaria (=Lesquerella) 

tuplashensis.

Brassicaceae ....... Bladderpod, White Bluffs U.S.A. (WA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Pittosporum napaliense ... Pittosporaceae .... Ho1awa ............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Platanthera integrilabia .... Orchidaceae ........ Orchid, white fringeless ... U.S.A. (AL, GA, KY, MS, 

NC, SC, TN, VA). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Platydesma cornuta var. 

cornuta.

Rutaceae ............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Platydesma cornuta var. 

decurrens.

Rutaceae ............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Platydesma remyi ............ Rutaceae ............. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Platydesma rostrata ......... Rutaceae ............. Pilo kea lau li1i .................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 2 R1 ............ Pleomele fernaldii ............ Agavaceae .......... Hala pepe ......................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Pleomele forbesii ............. Agavaceae .......... Hala pepe ......................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 11 CNO ......... Potentilla basaltica ........... Rosaceae ............ Cinquefoil, Soldier Meadow.U.S.A. (NV). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Pritchardia hardyi ............. Asteraceae .......... Lo1ulu ................................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Pseudognaphalium 

(=Gnaphalium) 

sandwicensium var. 

molokaiense.

Asteraceae .......... 1Ena1ena ........................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Psychotria grandiflora ...... Rubiaceae ........... Kopiko .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Psychotria hexandra ssp. 

oahuensis var. 

oahuensis.

Rubiaceae ........... Kopiko .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Psychotria hobdyi ............. Rubiaceae ........... Kopiko .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Pteralyxia macrocarpa ..... Apocynaceae ....... Kaulu ................................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Ranunculus hawaiensis ... Ranunculaceae ... Makou .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Ranunculus mauiensis ..... Ranunculaceae ... Makou .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 8 CNO ......... Rorippa subumbellata ...... Brassicaceae ....... Cress, Tahoe yellow ........ U.S.A. (CA, NV). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Schiedea attenuata .......... Caryophyllaceae .. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Schiedea pubescens ........ Caryophyllaceae .. Ma1oli1oli ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Schiedea salicaria ............ Caryophyllaceae .. No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 CNO ......... Sedum eastwoodiae ........ Crassulaceae ...... Stonecrop, Red Mountain U.S.A. (CA). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Sicyos macrophyllus ........ Cucurbitaceae ..... 1Anunu .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 9 R4 ............ Sideroxylon reclinatum 

ssp. austrofloridense.

Sapotaceae ......... Bully, Everglades ............. U.S.A. (FL). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Solanum nelsonii .............. Solanaceae ......... Popolo .............................. U.S.A. (HI). 

C ............... 8 R4 ............ Solidago plumosa ............ Asteraceae .......... Goldenrod, Yadkin River .. U.S.A. (NC). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Stenogyne cranwelliae ..... Lamiaceae ........... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Stenogyne kealiae ........... Lamiaceae ........... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 5 R4 ............ Symphyotrichum 

georgianum.

Asteraceae .......... Aster, Georgia .................. U.S.A. (AL, FL, GA, NC, 

SC). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Zanthoxylum oahuense .... Rutaceae ............. A1e .................................... U.S.A. (HI). 

FERNS AND ALLIES 

C* ............. 11 R1 ............ Botrychium lineare ........... Ophioglossaceae Moonwort, slender ........... U.S.A. (CA, CO, ID, MT, 

OR, WA), Canada (AB, 

BC, NB, QC). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Christella boydiae (= 

Cyclosorus boydiae var. 

boydiae + Cyclosorus 

boydiae kipahuluensis).

Thelypteridaceae No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Doryopteris takeuchii ....... Pteridaceae ......... No common name ........... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 2 R1 ............ Huperzia 

(=Phlegmariurus) 

stemmermanniae.

Lycopodiaceae .... Wawae1iole ....................... U.S.A. (HI). 

C* ............. 3 R1 ............ Microlepia strigosa var. 

mauiensis (=Microlepia 

mauiensis).

Dennstaedtiaceae Palapali ............................ U.S.A. (HI). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
53834 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2.—ANIMALS AND PLANTS FORMERLY CANDIDATES OR FORMERLY PROPOSED FOR LISTING

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historical range 

Code Expl. 

MAMMALS 

T ............... L ............... R7 ............ Enhydra lutris kenyoni ....... Mustelidae ... Otter, Northern Sea (southwest Alaska DPS).U.S.A. (AK, WA). 

BIRDS 

Rc ............. A .............. R6 ............ Centrocercus minimus ....... Phasianidae Sage-grouse, Gunnison ..... U.S.A. (AZ, CO, KS, OK, 

NM, UT). 

Rc ............. A .............. R1 ............ Ptilinopus perousii perousii Columbidae .. Fruit-dove, many-colored ... U.S.A. (AS), Independent 

Samoa. 

REPTILES 

Rc ............. A .............. R2 ............ Graptemys caglei ............... Emydidae ..... Turtle, Cagle’s map ........... U.S.A. (TX). 

AMPHIBIANS 

Rc ............. N .............. R6 ............ Bufo boreas boreas ........... Bufonidae ..... Toad, boreal (Southern 

Rocky Mountains DPS).

U.S.A. (AK, CA, CO, ID, 

MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, 

WY), Canada (BC). 

FISHES 

E ............... L .............. R2 ............ Gila intermedia ................... Cyprinidae .... Chub, Gila .......................... U.S.A. (AZ, NM), Mexico. 

SNAILS 

E ............... L .............. R2 ............ Tryonia kosteri ................... Hydrobiidae .. Snail, Koster’s tryonia ........ U.S.A. (NM). 

E ............... L .............. R2 ............ Assiminea pecos ................ Assimineidae Snail, Pecos assiminea ..... U.S.A. (NM, TX), Mexico. 

E ............... L .............. R2 ............ Pyrgulopsis roswellensis .... Hydrobiidae .. Springsnail, Roswell .......... U.S.A. (NM). 

INSECTS 

Rc ............. U .............. R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

pholete.

Carabidae .... Cave beetle, greater 

Adams.

U.S.A. (KY). 

Rc ............. U .............. R4 ............ Pseudanophthalmus 

cataryctos.

Carabidae .... Cave beetle, lesser Adams U.S.A. (KY). 

Rc ............. I ............... R1 ............ Phaeogramma sp. ............. Tephritidae ... Gall fly, Po‘olanui ............... U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila aglaia ............... Drosophilidae fly, Picture .......................... U.S.A. (HI). wing 

[unnamed] 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila differens ........... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila hemipeza ......... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila heteroneura ..... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila montgomeryi .... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

T ............... L ............... R1 ............ Drosophila mulli ................. Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila musaphila ........ Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila neoclavisetae ... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila obatai ............... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila ochrobasis ....... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila substenoptera .. Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R1 ............ Drosophila tarphytrichia ..... Drosophilidae fly, Picture wing [unnamed] U.S.A. (HI). 

E ............... L .............. R6 ............ Cicindela nevadica 

lincolniana.

Cicindelidae Tiger beetle, Salt Creek ..... U.S.A. (NE). 

CRUSTACEANS 

E ............... L .............. R2 ............ Gammarus desperatus ...... Gammaridae Amphipod, Noel’s ............... U.S.A. (NM). 

Rc ............. I ............... R1 ............ Antecaridina lauensis ......... Atyidae ......... Shrimp, anchialine pool ..... U.S.A. (HI), Mozambique, 

Saudi Arabia, Japan. 

Rc ............. I ............... R1 ............ Calliasmata pholidota ........ Alpheidae ..... Shrimp, anchialine pool ..... U.S.A. (HI), Funafuti Atoll, 

Saudi Arabia, Sinai Peninsula, Tuvalu. 

FLOWERING PLANTS 

Rc ............. A .............. R6 ............ Aliciella cespitosa .............. Polemoniaceae.Alice-flower, wonderland .... U.S.A. (UT). 

Rc ............. A .............. R6 ............ Astragalus equisolensis ..... Fabaceae ..... Milk-vetch, horseshoe ........ U.S.A. (UT). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules 53835 

TABLE 2.—ANIMALS AND PLANTS FORMERLY CANDIDATES OR FORMERLY PROPOSED FOR LISTING—Continued 

[Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.] 

Status Lead 

region Scientific name Family Common name Historical range 

Code Expl. 

Rc ............. A .............. R6 ............ Castilleja aquariensis ......... Scrophulariaceae.Paintbrush, Aquarius ......... U.S.A. (UT). 

Rc ............. I ............... R2 ............ Paronychia congesta ......... Caryophyllaceae.Whitlow-wort, bushy ........... U.S.A. (TX). 

Rc ............. A .............. CNO ......... Sidalcea hickmanii parishii Malvaceae ... Checkerbloom, Parish’s ..... U.S.A. (CA). 

[FR Doc. 06–7375 Filed 9–11–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS