Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 60605

legged frog populations are larger and

more abundant compared to

populations north of the Sierra National

Forest.

However, even in the protected areas

of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National

Parks, mountain yellow-legged frog

populations have undergone significant

declines. Bradford et al. (1994)

published results of two separate

studies which resurveyed historic sites

where mountain yellow-legged frogs

were documented between 1959 and

1979 in Sequoia and Kings Canyon

National Parks. They found mountain

yellow-legged frogs at only 12 of 49 sites

surveyed in 1989 and 1990. In addition,

mountain yellow-legged frogs had

disappeared from one of these 12 sites

by 1991.

Outside of Sequoia and Kings Canyon

National Parks, Bradford et al. (1994)

reported the absence of mountain

yellow-legged frogs at 21 of 24 historic

sites. In another study, Drost and Fellers

(1996) resurveyed 14 sites originally

surveyed in 1915 by Grinnell and Storer

(1924), and found only two now

occupied by the mountain yellowlegged frog. These surveys all strongly

suggest that the mountain yellow-legged

frog has systematically declined

throughout its range.

We have reviewed the petition and

other information available in the

Service’s files. Based upon this review,

we believe that substantial evidence

exists that listing the mountain yellowlegged frog as endangered may be

warranted. When we make a positive

finding, we also are required to

promptly commence a review of the

status of the species. Based upon

available and any newly obtained

information, we will issue a 12-month

finding as required by section 4(b)(3)(B)

of the Act. Petitioners also requested

that critical habitat be designated for the

Sierra Nevada population of the

mountain yellow-legged frog. The 12-

month finding will address this issue.

Public Information Requested

The Service hereby announces its

formal review of the species’ status

pursuant to this 90-day petition finding.

We request any additional data,

comments, and suggestions from the

public, other concerned government

agencies, the scientific community,

industry, and any other interested

parties concerning the status of the

mountain yellow-legged frog. Of

particular interest is information

regarding: (1) The existence and status

of additional subpopulations, (2) the

impact of nonnative fish introductions,

contaminants, livestock grazing,

acidification from atmospheric

deposition, nitrate deposition,

ultraviolet radiation, drought, disease,

and other factors that may be

responsible for the range-wide decline

of the species, (3) the implementation of

any actions that are benefitting the

species, and (4) genetic variability in

known subpopulations.

If you wish to comment, you may

submit your comments and materials

concerning this finding to the Field

Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).

Our practice is to make comments,

including names and home addresses of

respondents, available for public review

during regular business hours.

Respondents may request that we

withhold their home address, which we

will honor to the extent allowable by

law. There also may be circumstances in

which we would withhold a

respondent’s identity, as allowable by

law. If you wish us to withhold your

name and/or address, you must state

this request prominently at the

beginning of your comment. However,

we will not consider anonymous

comments. To the extent consistent with

applicable law, 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.

Comments and materials received will

be available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited

herein is available on request from the

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,

(See ADDRESSES section).

Author: The primary author of this

document is Jason Davis, Sacramento

Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES

section).

Authority

The authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

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

Dated: October 5, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–26179 Filed 10–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants: 90-Day Finding on a

Petition to List the California Spotted

Owl as Threatened or Endangered

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition

finding.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a

90-day finding on a petition to list the

California spotted owl (Strix

occidentalis occidentalis) as threatened

or endangered, under the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We find that the

petition presents substantial

information indicating that listing the

species may be warranted. A status

review is initiated.

DATES: The finding announced in this

document was made on October 5, 2000.

To be considered in the 12-month

finding for this petition, comments and

information should be submitted to the

Service by December 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Data, information,

comments, or questions concerning this

petition should be submitted to the

Field Supervisor; Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office; Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office; 2800 Cottage Way,

Room W–2605; Sacramento, California

95825. The petition finding, supporting

literature, and comments are available

for public inspection, by appointment,

during normal business hours at the

above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine Hibbard or Maria Boroja at the

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office

(see ADDRESSES section above), or at

(916) 414–6600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that the

Service make a finding on whether a

petition to list, delist, or reclassify a

species presents substantial information

indicating that the petitioned action

may be warranted. This finding is based

on information contained in the

petition, supporting information

submitted with the petition, and

information otherwise available to us at

the time we make the finding. To the

maximum extent practicable, we make

this finding within 90 days of the

60606 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules

receipt of the petition, and the finding

is to be published promptly in the

Federal Register. If we find that

substantial information was presented,

we commence a review of the status of

the involved species.

The processing of this petition

conforms with the Service’s final listing

priority guidance published in the

Federal Register on October 22, 1999

(64 FR 57114). The guidance clarifies

the order in which we process

rulemakings. Highest priority is

processing emergency listing rules for

any species determined to face a

significant and imminent risk to its

well-being (Priority 1). Second priority

(Priority 2) is processing final

determinations on proposed additions

to the lists of endangered and

threatened wildlife and plants. Third

priority (Priority 3) is processing new

proposals to add species to the lists. The

processing of administrative petition

findings (petitions filed under section 4

of the Act) is the fourth priority. The

processing of critical habitat

determinations (prudency and

determinability decisions) and proposed

or final designations of critical habitat

will be funded separately from other

section 4 listing actions and will no

longer be subject to prioritization under

the listing priority guidance. The

processing of this petition finding is a

Priority 4 action.

We have made a 90-day finding on a

petition to list the California spotted

owl as a threatened or endangered

species. On April 3, 2000, we received

a petition dated April 2000, to list the

California spotted owl as a threatened or

endangered species. The petition was

submitted by the Center for Biological

Diversity and the Sierra Nevada Forest

Protection Campaign, who acted on the

behalf of themselves and 14 other

organizations. The letter clearly

identified itself as a petition, and the

names, signatures, and addresses of

representatives of the two parties

submitting the petition followed in a

letter dated April 17, 2000. The

petitioners requested the Service to

designate critical habitat for the

California spotted owl concurrent with

listing, and also requested emergency

listing and emergency critical habitat

designation. The petition referenced

supporting information on the

subspecies’ description, natural history,

habitat, and population status. It also

presented threats to the California

spotted owl including present or

threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of the subspecies’ habitat or

range; other natural or manmade factors

affecting the subspecies’ continued

existence; predation; and the

inadequacy of existing regulatory

mechanisms to protect the subspecies.

This notice constitutes the 90-day

finding for the April 3, 2000, petition.

The California spotted owl is one of

three recognized subspecies of spotted

owls. The other subspecies, the northern

spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina),

and the Mexican spotted owl (Strix

occidentalis lucida), were listed by the

Service as threatened. The final rule to

list the northern spotted owl was

published in the Federal Register on

June 26, 1990 (55 FR 26114–26194) and

the final rule to list the Mexican spotted

owl was published in the Federal

Register on March 16, 1993 (58 FR

14248–14271). Genetic studies have

found evidence of interbreeding

between the northern and California

subspecies (Barrowclough et al. 1999).

The California spotted owl occurs on

the west side of the Sierra Nevada from

Shasta County south to the Tehachapi

Pass. It also occurs on the eastern side

of the Sierra, in the central Coast Ranges

at least as far north as Monterey County,

and in all major mountains of Southern

California including the San

Bernardino, San Gabriel, Tehachapi,

north and south Santa Lucia, Santa Ana,

Liebre/Sawmill, San Diego, San Jacinto,

and Los Padres ranges.

The petition and accompanying

documentation state that the California

spotted owl qualifies for listing under

the Act due to potential habitat

destruction and modification, predation,

the inadequacy of existing regulatory

mechanisms to protect the subspecies,

and other natural or human-caused

factors affecting its continued existence.

The petitioners contend that the

California spotted owl is threatened by

destruction, modification, or

curtailment of habitat or range by

logging on public and private lands,

urban development, livestock grazing,

mining, recreation, and road

construction. According to the

petitioners, logging, livestock grazing,

and fire suppression have altered fire

regimes over the range of the California

spotted owl, putting some owl habitat at

risk to loss by catastrophic fire. They

also assert that habitat loss and

modification may increase predation or

the negative effects of climate on

California spotted owls. Finally, they

cite existing regulations or guidelines to

manage California spotted owl habitat

on public and private lands as

inadequate regulatory mechanisms to

protect the owl and its habitat.

The distribution and abundance of

California spotted owls before intensive

surveys were initiated in the late 20th

century is largely unknown. As

summarized in the petition, recent

estimates of population change suggest

populations of California spotted owls

in the Lassen, Eldorado, and Sierra

National Forests and in the San

Bernardino Mountains of southern

California have been significantly

declining over the past several years,

while a population of owls in the

Sequoia/Kings Canyon National Park

may be stable (Steger et al. 1999). These

differences were attributed to higher

rates of adult survival in the park

(Steger et al. 1999).

Where owls are declining, modeled

estimates indicate annual declines of 7–

10 percent, but these estimates may not

reflect true rates of declines for several

reasons as discussed by Noon et al.

(1992), Verner (1999) and USDA (2000).

However, the declining trends of

California spotted owls suggested by

these models are generally corroborated

by actual declines in occupied sites

(Gordon Gould, California Department

of Fish and Game, pers. comm., 2000).

Most or all researchers studying the

demography of California spotted owls

agree that populations are declining, but

uncertainty exists about the steepness of

the decline (Verner 1999). For the Sierra

Nevada, the Forest Service (USDA 2000)

concluded ‘‘In summary, the

demographic studies strongly suggest

population declines in California

spotted owls. The declines are sufficient

to warrant concern, even in light of

uncertainties in the magnitude of the

declines.’’

No studies have been designed to test

cause and effects of population declines

of California spotted owls (Verner 1999).

Gutie ́rrez (1994) stated that logging has

caused the greatest loss of habitat for all

subspecies of spotted owls. California

spotted owls in the Sierra Nevada may

have undergone at least three periods of

decline due to: (1) The elimination of

prey species by intensive livestock

grazing and burning in the 1800s; (2)

logging beginning in the late 1800s,

which removed basic elements of owl

habitat; and (3) recent logging of

regenerated stands (Gutie ́rrez 1994).

We have reviewed the petition and

other information available in our files.

Based on this review, we find that

listing the California spotted owl as

threatened or endangered may be

warranted. When we make a positive

finding, we are also required to

promptly commence a review of the

status of the species. Based on available

and any newly obtained information, we

will issue a 12-month finding as

required by section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.

The petitioners requested that critical

habitat be designated for the California

spotted owl and also requested

emergency listing and emergency

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 60607

designation of critical habitat. We note

that emergency listing and designation

of critical habitat are not petitionable

actions under the Act. Based on the

information presented in the petition,

the habitat loss and other threats to the

species have been long-standing and

ongoing for many years. There are no

imminent, devastating actions that

could result in the extinction of the

species. Therefore, we find that an

emergency situation does not exist. The

12-month finding will address the issue

of critical habitat.

Public Information Requested

The Service hereby announces its

formal review of the species’ status

pursuant to this 90-day petition finding.

We request additional data, comments,

and suggestions from the public, other

concerned governmental agencies, the

scientific community, industry, or any

other interested parties regarding the

status of the California spotted owl. Of

particular interest is information

pertaining to the factors the Service uses

to determine if a species is threatened

or endangered: (1) the present or

threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)

overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational

purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4)

the inadequacy of existing regulatory

mechanisms; and (5) other natural or

manmade factors affecting its continued

existence.

If you wish to comment, you may

submit your comments and materials

concerning this finding to the Field

Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).

Our practice is to make comments,

including names and home addresses of

respondents, available for public review

during regular business hours.

Respondents may request that we

withhold their home address, which we

will honor to the extent allowable by

law. There also may be circumstances in

which we would withhold a

respondent’s identity, as allowable by

law. If you wish us to withhold your

name and/or address, you must state

this request prominently at the

beginning of your comment. However,

we will not consider anonymous

comments. To the extent consistent with

applicable law, 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.

Comments and materials received will

be available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

References Cited

You may request a complete list of all

references we cited, as well as others,

from the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife

Office (see ADDRESSES section).

Author: The primary author of this

document is Catherine Hibbard,

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office

(see ADDRESSES section).

Authority: The authority for this action is

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

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

Dated: October 5, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–26181 Filed 10–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants: 90-day Finding on a

Petition To List the Yosemite Toad as

Endangered

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition

finding.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) announces a 90-day

finding on a petition to list the Yosemite

toad (Bufo canorus) as endangered

under the Endangered Species Act (Act)

of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et

seq.). We find that the petition presents

substantial scientific or commercial

information to indicate that listing the

species may be warranted. Therefore,

we are initiating a status review to

determine if the petition action is

warranted. To ensure that the review is

comprehensive, we are asking for

information and data regarding this

species.

DATES: The finding announced in this

document was made on October 5, 2000.

To be considered in the 12-month

finding for this petition, comments and

information should be submitted to the

Service by December 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Data, information,

comments, or questions concerning this

petition should be submitted to the

Field Supervisor; Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office; Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office; 2800 Cottage Way,

Room W–2065; Sacramento, California

95825. The petition finding, supporting

data and comments are available for

public inspection, by appointment,

during normal business hours at the

above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jason Davis or Maria Boroja at the

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office

(see ADDRESSES section above), or at

(916–414–6600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that the

Service make a finding on whether a

petition to list, delist, or reclassify a

species presents substantial information

indicating that the petitioned action

may be warranted. To the maximum

extent practicable, this finding is to be

made within 90 days of the receipt of

the petition, and the finding is to be

published promptly in the Federal

Register. If the finding is that

substantial information was presented,

the Service will commence a review of

the status of the involved species. This

finding is based on information

contained in the petition, supporting

information submitted with the petition,

and other information available to the

Service at the time the finding was

made.

The processing of this petition

conforms with the Service’s final listing

priority guidance published in the

Federal Register on October 22, 1999

(64 FR 57114). The guidance clarifies

the order in which we will process

rulemakings. Highest priority is

processing emergency listing rules for

any species determined to face a

significant and imminent risk to wellbeing (Priority 1). Second priority

(Priority 2) is processing final

determinations on proposed additions

to the lists of endangered and

threatened wildlife and plants. Third

priority (Priority 3) is processing new

proposals to add species to the lists. The

processing of administrative petition

findings (petitions filed under section 4

of the Act) is the fourth priority (Priority

4). The processing of critical habitat

determinations (prudency and

determinability decisions) and proposed

or final designations of critical habitat

will be funded separately from other

section 4 listing actions and will no

longer be subject to prioritization under

the listing priority guidance. The

processing of this petition finding is a

Priority 4 action.

We have made a 90-day finding on a

petition to the list Yosemite toad (Bufo

canorus) as an endangered species. On

Monday, April 3, 2000, we received a