[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 8, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81388-81394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22914]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[FXES1111090FEDR-245-FF09E21000]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings 
for 8 Species

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notification of petition findings and initiation of status 
reviews.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on eight petitions to add species to the Lists of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find 
that the petitions to list the Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa 
mazamae), Florida intertidal firefly (Micronaspis floridana), Iowa 
skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa), San Francisco Estuary population of 
white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), and Tecopa bird's beak 
(Chloropyron tecopense) present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. 
Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we 
are initiating status reviews of these species to determine whether the 
petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are 
comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other 
information regarding the species and factors that may affect their 
status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition 
findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are 
warranted in accordance with the Act. We further find that the 
petitions to list Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque (Macaca 
fascicularis), and southern pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina) do 
not present substantial information indicating the petitioned action 
may be warranted. Therefore, we are not initiating status reviews of 
Betta miniopinna, long-tailed macaque, or southern pig-tailed macaque.

DATES: These findings were made on October 8, 2024. As we commence our 
status reviews, we seek any new information concerning the status of, 
or threats to, the Crater Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly, Iowa 
skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon, and Tecopa 
bird's beak, or their habitats. Any information we receive during the 
course of our status reviews will be considered.

ADDRESSES: 
    Supporting documents: Summaries of the basis for the petition 
findings contained in this document are available on https://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see tables 
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In addition, this supporting 
information is available by contacting the appropriate person, as 
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or 
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the Crater 
Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly, Iowa skipper, San Francisco 
Estuary population of white sturgeon, or Tecopa bird's beak, or their 
habitats, please provide those data or information by one of the 
following methods listed below.
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket 
number (see table 1 under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on 
the ``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may 
submit information by clicking on ``Comment.'' If your information will 
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information 
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate 
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach 
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a 
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments 
Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table 1 under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send information only by the methods described 
above. We will post all information we receive on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see Information Submitted for a 
Status Review, below).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

[[Page 81389]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Species common name                     Contact person
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betta miniopinna.............  Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
                                Delisting and Foreign Species,
                                Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
                                358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#91e3f0f2f9f4fdcefdfefff5feffd1f7e6e2bff6fee7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dfadbebcb7bab380b3b0b1bbb0b19fb9a8acf1b8b0a9">[email protected]</span></a>.
Crater Lake newt.............  Jennie Land, Field Supervisor, Klamath
                                Falls Fish and Wildlife Office, 541-885-
                                8481, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c66696262656953606d62684c6a7b7f226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ef4fbf0f0f7fbc1f2fff0fadef8e9edb0f9f1e8">[email protected]</span></a>.
Florida intertidal firefly...  Lourdes Mena, Classification and Recovery
                                Division Manager, Florida Ecological
                                Services Office, 904-731-3134,
                                <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4888b9196808197bb89818a85a4829397ca838b92"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="462a293334222335192b2328270620313568212930">[email protected]</span></a>.
Iowa skipper.................  Jason Luginbill, Project Leader, Kansas
                                Ecological Services Field Office, 785-
                                313-0772, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cfa5aebca0a190a3baa8a6a1ada6a3a38fa9b8bce1a8a0b9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c6aca7b5a9a899aab3a1afa8a4afaaaa86a0b1b5e8a1a9b0">[email protected]</span></a>.
Long-tailed macaque..........  Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
                                Delisting and Foreign Species,
                                Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
                                358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#daa8bbb9b2bfb685b6b5b4beb5b49abcada9f4bdb5ac"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="225043414a474e7d4e4d4c464d4c624455510c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>.
San Francisco Estuary          Donald Ratcliff, Field Supervisor, San
 population of white sturgeon.  Francisco Bay-Delta Fish and Wildlife
                                Office, 916-930-5632,
                                <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#97f3f8f9f6fbf3c8e5f6e3f4fbfef1f1d7f1e0e4b9f0f8e1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9cdc6c7c8c5cdf6dbc8ddcac5c0cfcfe9cfdeda87cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.
Southern pig-tailed macaque..  Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
                                Delisting and Foreign Species,
                                Ecological Services Headquarters, 703-
                                358-2491, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#037162606b666f5c6f6c6d676c6d436574702d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="86f4e7e5eee3ead9eae9e8e2e9e8c6e0f1f5a8e1e9f0">[email protected]</span></a>.
Tecopa bird's beak...........  Scott Sobiech, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad
                                Fish and Wildlife Office, 760-431-9440,
                                <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a4d7c7cbd0d0fbd7cbc6cdc1c7cce4c2d3d78ac3cbd2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2457474b50507b574b464d41474c644253570a434b52">[email protected]</span></a>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of 
hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or 
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals 
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within 
their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in 
the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Information Submitted for a Status Review

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning the status 
of, or threats to, the Crater Lake newt, Florida intertidal firefly, 
Iowa skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon, or 
Tecopa bird's beak, or their habitats, by one of the methods listed in 
ADDRESSES. We request that you send comments only by the methods 
described in ADDRESSES. Please include sufficient information with your 
submission (such as scientific journal articles or other publications) 
to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you 
include.
    If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy 
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the 
top of your document that we withhold this information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We 
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing these findings, will be available 
for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.

Background

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species 
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part 17. 
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on 
whether a petition to add a species to the List (i.e., ``list'' a 
species), remove a species from the List (i.e., ``delist'' a species), 
or change a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or 
from threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, 
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the 
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
    Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial 
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to credible 
scientific or commercial information in support of the petition's 
claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific 
review would conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be 
warranted (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i)). A positive 90-day petition finding 
does not indicate that the petitioned action is warranted; the finding 
indicates only that the petitioned action may be warranted and that a 
full review should occur.
    A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a 
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described 
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors 
are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes (Factor B);
    (c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); 
and
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence (Factor E).
    These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused 
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued 
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for 
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as 
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative 
effects or may have positive effects.
    We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or 
conditions that are known to, or are reasonably likely to, affect 
individuals of a species negatively. The term ``threat'' includes 
actions or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct 
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration 
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat'' 
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action 
or condition, or the action or condition itself. However, the mere 
identification of any threat(s) may not be sufficient to compel a 
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information 
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information 
presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest 
that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the 
species may meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened 
species under the Act.

[[Page 81390]]

    If we find that a petition presents such information, our 
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by 
considering the individual-, population-, and species-level effects and 
the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual 
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the 
cumulative effect of the threats on the species as a whole. We also 
consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions 
and conditions that are expected to have positive effects on the 
species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this 
cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate 
them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable 
future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition 
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act.
    If we find that a petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted, the Act requires that we promptly commence a review of the 
status of the species, and we will subsequently complete a status 
review in accordance with our prioritization methodology for 12-month 
findings (81 FR 49248; July 27, 2016).
    We note that designating critical habitat is not a petitionable 
action under the Act. Petitions to designate critical habitat (for 
species without existing critical habitat) are reviewed under the 
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et. seq.) and are not 
addressed in this finding (see 50 CFR 424.14(j)). To the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, any proposed critical habitat will be 
addressed concurrently with a proposed rule to list a species, if 
applicable.

Summaries of Petition Findings

    The petition findings contained in this document are listed in the 
tables below, and the basis for each finding, along with supporting 
information, is available on https://www.regulations.gov under the 
appropriate docket number.

                 Table 1--Internet Search Information for Substantial Findings for Five Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 URL to docket on https://
                  Common name                           Docket No.                  www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crater Lake newt...............................       FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025
Florida intertidal firefly.....................       FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026
Iowa skipper...................................       FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226
San Francisco Estuary population of white             FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/
 sturgeon.                                                                  FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049
Tecopa bird's beak.............................       FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               Table 2--Internet Search Information for Not-Substantial Findings for Three Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 URL to docket on https://
                  Common name                           Docket No.                  www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betta miniopinna...............................       FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229
Long-tailed macaque............................       FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228
Southern pig-tailed macaque....................       FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227  https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evaluation of a Petition To List Betta miniopinna

Species and Range
    Betta miniopinna; Bintan Island of the Riau Archipelago, Indonesia.
Petition History
    On July 6, 2023, we received a petition dated July 5, 2023, from 
the Center for Biological Diversity and the Monitor Conservation 
Research Society, requesting that Betta miniopinna be emergency listed 
as a threatened species or an endangered species under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c). Listing a species on an emergency basis is not a 
petitionable action under the Act, and the question of when to list on 
an emergency basis is left to the discretion of the Service. If the 
Service determines that the standard for emergency listing in section 
4(b)(7) of the Act is met, the Service may exercise that discretion to 
take an emergency listing action at any time. Therefore, we are 
considering the July 5, 2023, petition as a petition to list the B. 
miniopinna. This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of 
threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as 
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory 
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the 
petition, sources cited in the petition, and other readily available 
information, we find that the petition does not provide substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the B. 
miniopinna as a threatened species or an endangered species may be 
warranted.
    The petitioner provided credible information indicating potential 
threats to individuals of the species due to habitat loss and 
degradation and collection and trade. The petitioner also provided 
credible information that the existing regulatory mechanisms may be 
inadequate to address those potential threats. Although the petition 
did provide credible information regarding deforestation at less than 
one percent per year countrywide, the reference investigated 
deforestation across the entire country and did not mention either peat 
swamp forest, the specific habitat type for the species, or Bintan 
Island, the only island the species is known to exist. Furthermore, the 
references provided in the petition that discussed peat swamp forests 
did not include Bintan Island, the island where B. miniopinna currently 
exists. The petition did not link this general deforestation to effects 
on the species.

[[Page 81391]]

Therefore, the petition does not present credible information to 
support the claim that habitat loss and degradation is having a 
negative impact on the population(s) of the species.
    Additionally, regarding trade, the petitioners only presented 
information from a brief Google search on the trade of the species. 
While this brief search presents evidence of some illegal trade in wild 
specimens of the species, without more thorough information on the 
amount of trade of wild-caught B. miniopinna and abundance estimates, 
the petition does not present credible information to support the claim 
that trade is having a negative impact on the population(s) of the 
species. Credible sources cited in the petition do not provide 
substantial information indicating that threats identified by the 
petitions may have synergistic or cumulative effects on the population 
such that the petitioned action may be warranted for B. miniopinna.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0229 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Crater Lake Newt

Species and Range
    Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa mazamae); Crater Lake, Klamath 
County, Oregon.
Petition History
    On November 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for 
Biological Diversity, requesting that the Crater Lake newt (Taricha 
granulosa mazamae) be emergency listed as an endangered species and 
critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c). The petitioners additionally requested that the Service 
immediately protect Crater Lake newts with its emergency listing 
authority under 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(7). Because the Act does not provide 
for petitions to emergency list, we are considering it as a petition to 
list the Crater Lake newt. Listing a species on an emergency basis is 
not a petitionable action under the Act, and the question of when to 
list on an emergency basis is left to the discretion of the Service. If 
the Service determines that the standard for emergency listing in 
section 4(b)(7) of the Act is met, the Service may exercise that 
discretion to take an emergency listing action at any time. This 
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within 
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or 
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available 
information regarding predation by introduced species (particularly by 
signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus)) (Factor C), we find that 
the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that listing the Crater Lake newt may be warranted. The 
petitioners also presented information suggesting habitat and food web 
alteration by signal crayfish, climate change, reduced effective 
population size, and range restriction may be threats to the Crater 
Lake newt. We will fully evaluate these potential threats during our 
12-month status review, pursuant to the Act's requirement to review the 
best scientific and commercial information available when making that 
finding.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0025 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Florida Intertidal Firefly

Species and Range
    Florida intertidal firefly (Micronaspis floridana): Florida 
(Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Citrus, Collier, Dixie, Hernando, 
Hillsborough, Indian River, Levy, Manatee, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Pasco, 
Pinellas, Saint Lucie, Sarasota, and Volusia Counties) and the Bahamas.
Petition History
    On March 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Xerces Society 
for Invertebrate Conservation, requesting that the Florida intertidal 
firefly (Micronaspis floridana) be listed as an endangered species and 
critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding the effects of threats that fall within 
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or 
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available 
information regarding wetland destruction or loss and modified 
hydrology (Factor A), we find that the petition presents substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the 
Florida intertidal firefly may be warranted. The petition also 
presented information on the following potential threats to Florida 
intertidal firefly: sea level rise, habitat fragmentation, modification 
of marsh and mangrove habitats for mosquito control, coastal 
eutrophication, harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, overutilization, 
nematode infection, predators, light pollution, pesticides, invasive 
species, small populations, ocean acidification impacts on prey, and 
increased temperature and extreme temperature events, and increased 
intensity and proportion of severe storms. We will fully evaluate these 
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the 
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial 
information available when making that finding.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2024-0026 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Iowa Skipper

Species and Range
    Iowa skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa); mid-continent prairie in 
Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, 
Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and 
Wyoming.
Petition History
    On March 28, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for Food 
Safety, requesting that the Iowa Skipper (Atrytone arogos iowa) be 
listed as a threatened species or an endangered

[[Page 81392]]

species under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such 
and included the requisite identification information for the 
petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding addresses the 
petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within 
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or 
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available 
information regarding habitat loss and fragmentation (Factor A) and 
prairie management (Factor A), we find that the petition presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that 
listing the Iowa skipper may be warranted. The petitioners also 
presented information suggesting pesticides, invasive species, climate 
change, and small, isolated populations may be threats to the Iowa 
skipper. We will fully evaluate these potential threats during our 12-
month status review, pursuant to the Act's requirement to review the 
best scientific and commercial information available when making that 
finding.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2023-0226 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Long-Tailed Macaque

Species and Range
    Long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis); Brunei Darussalam, 
Cambodia, Hong Kong of China, Nicobar Islands of India, Indonesia, Lao 
People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Mauritius, Myanmar, Palau, 
Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and 
Vietnam.
Petition History
    On April 12, 2023, we received a petition requesting that long-
tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis) be listed as a threatened species 
or an endangered species under the Act from People for the Ethical 
Treatment of Animals, Lisa Jones-Engel, Birut[edot] Mary Galdikas, Jane 
Goodall, Action for Primates, Born Free USA, Sarah Kite, Nedim C. 
Buyukmihci, Angela Grimes, Liz Tyson-Griffin, The Macaque Coalition, 
Ecoflix, Ian Redmond, International Primate Protection League, Wildlife 
Alliance, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Michael 
Schillaci, One Voice, Abolici[oacute]n Vivisecci[oacute]n, Sam Shanee, 
Gemunu de Silva, Northwest Animal Rights Network, Pam Mendosa, Phoenix 
Zones Initiative, Hope Ferdowsian, ACP, Nikhil Kulkarni, Neotropical 
Primate Conservation, EMS Foundation, Tim Ajax, Rise for Animals, 
Wildlife Friends Foundation Thailand, Douc Langur Foundation, Fundacion 
Entropika, Angela Maldonado, Animal Defenders International, World 
Animal Protection, Paula Pebsworth, and Japan Anti-Vivisection 
Association. The petition clearly identified itself as such and 
included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, 
required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of 
the threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as 
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory 
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the petition 
and readily available information regarding the effects of habitat loss 
and degradation (Factor A), collection and hunting (Factor B), disease 
(Factor C), and culling and sterilization (Factor E), we find that the 
petition does not provide substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that listing the long-tailed macaque as a 
threatened or an endangered species may be warranted. While we found 
that the petition provided documentation of negative impacts to 
individual macaques from these potential threats, the petition did not 
present credible information to support impacts to populations or the 
species as a whole due to these potential threats, either separately or 
cumulatively, such that the species may warrant listing.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0228 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List San Francisco Estuary Population of 
White Sturgeon

Species and Range
    White sturgeon [petitioned ``San Francisco Estuary Distinct 
Population Segment''] (Acipenser transmontanus) (= San Francisco 
Estuary white sturgeon); Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in 
California.
Petition History
    On December 6, 2023, we received a petition from San Francisco 
Baykeeper, The Bay Institute, Restore the Delta, and California 
Sportfishing Protection Alliance, requesting that the San Francisco 
Estuary white sturgeon population (Acipenser transmontanus) be listed 
as a threatened distinct population segment (DPS) and critical habitat 
be designated for this species under the Act. The petition clearly 
identified itself as such and included the requisite identification 
information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This 
finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within 
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or 
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available 
information regarding harmful algal blooms (Factor E), we find that the 
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that listing the San Francisco Estuary population of white 
sturgeon as a DPS may be warranted. The petitioners also presented 
information suggesting dams, water diversions, entrainment mortality, 
recreational harvest, poaching, pollution, climate change, proposed 
hatchery supplementation, ship strikes, and dredging may be threats to 
the San Francisco Estuary white sturgeon. We will fully evaluate these 
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the 
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial 
information available when making our 12-month finding.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0049

[[Page 81393]]

under the Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Southern Pig-Tailed Macaque

Species and Range
    Southern pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina); Brunei Darussalam, 
Indonesia (Kalimantan, Sumatra), Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, 
Sarawak), and Thailand.
Petition History
    On April 12, 2023, we received a petition requesting that southern 
pig-tailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina) be listed as a threatened 
species or an endangered species under the Act from People for the 
Ethical Treatment of Animals, Lisa Jones-Engel (Ph.D.), Birute Mary 
Galdikas (Ph.D.), Jane Goodall (Ph.D.), Action for Primates, Born Free 
USA, Sarah Kite, Nedim Buyukmihci (Ph.D.), Angela Grimes, Liz Tyler-
Griffin (Ph.D.), The Macaque Coalition, Ecoflix, Ian Redmond (Ph.D.), 
International Primate Protection League, Wildlife Alliance, the 
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Michael Schillaci 
(Ph.D.), One Voice, Abolicion Vivseccion, Sam Shanee (Ph.D.), Gemunu de 
Silva, Northwest Animal Rights Network, Pam Mendosa, Phoenix Zones 
Initiative, Hope Ferdowsian (Ph.D.), Nikhil Kulkarni (Ph.D.), 
Neotropical Primate Conservation, The EMS Foundation, Tim Ajax, Rise 
for Animals, Wildlife Friends Foundation Thailand, Douc Langur 
Foundation, Fundacion Entropika, Angela Maldonado (Ph.D.), Animal 
Defenders International, World Animal Protection, Paula Pebsworth, and 
The Japan Anti-Vivisection Association. The petition clearly identified 
itself as such and included the requisite identification information 
for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This finding 
addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding the individual and cumulative effects of 
threats that fall within factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as 
potentially ameliorated or exacerbated by any existing regulatory 
mechanisms or conservation efforts. Based on our review of the 
petition, sources cited in the petition, and other readily available 
information, we find that the petition does not provide substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the 
southern pig-tailed macaque as a threatened species or an endangered 
species may be warranted. While we found that the petition provided 
documentation of negative impacts to individual macaques from these 
potential threats, the petition did not present credible information to 
support impacts to populations or the species and the petition did not 
present credible information to support impacts to populations or the 
species as a whole due to these potential threats, either separately or 
cumulatively, such that the species may warrant listing.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0227 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Tecopa Bird's Beak

Species and Range
    Tecopa bird's beak (Chrloropyron tecopense); Esmeralda and Nye 
Counties in Nevada and Inyo County in California.
Petition History
    On September 26, 2023, we received a petition from the Center for 
Biological Diversity, requesting that Tecopa bird's beak (Chrloropyron 
tecopense) be listed as a threatened species or an endangered species 
and critical habitat be designated for this species under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    We reviewed the petition, sources cited in the petition, and other 
readily available information (within the constraints of the Act and 50 
CFR 424.14(h)(1)). We considered the credible information that the 
petition provided regarding effects of the threats that fall within 
factors under the Act's section 4(a)(1) as potentially ameliorated or 
exacerbated by any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts. Based on our review of the petition and readily available 
information regarding hydrological alteration and groundwater 
extraction related to agriculture and exurban sprawl (Factor A), we 
find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that listing the Tecopa bird's beak may be 
warranted. The petitioners also presented information suggesting off-
road vehicles, non-native ungulate grazing, herbivory, climate change, 
and invasive species, as well as other potential effects from 
geothermal power production and mineral exploration and development, 
may be threats to the Tecopa bird's beak. We will fully evaluate these 
potential threats during our 12-month status review, pursuant to the 
Act's requirement to review the best scientific and commercial 
information available when making that finding.
    The basis for our finding on this petition and other information 
regarding our review of the petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0256 under the 
Supporting Documents section.

Conclusion

    On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the 
petitions under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that 
the petitions summarized above for the Crater Lake newt, Florida 
intertidal firefly, Iowa skipper, San Francisco Estuary population of 
white sturgeon, and Tecopa bird's beak present substantial scientific 
or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be 
warranted. We are, therefore, initiating status reviews of these 
species to determine whether the actions are warranted under the Act. 
At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue findings, in 
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether the 
petitioned actions are not warranted, warranted, or warranted but 
precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any species is an 
endangered species or a threatened species. In addition, we have 
determined that the petitions summarized above for Betta miniopinna, 
long-tailed macaque, and southern pig-tailed macaque do not present 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned actions may be warranted. We are, therefore, not initiating 
status reviews for these species in response to the petitions.

Authors

    The primary authors of this document are staff members of the 
Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[[Page 81394]]

Authority

    The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-22914 Filed 10-7-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>