Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14093

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

97–96, adopted March 12, 1997, and

released March 21, 1997. The full text

of this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, International

Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140,

Washington, DC 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–7440 Filed 3–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AE06

Proposal To List the Preble’s Meadow

Jumping Mouse as an Endangered

Species

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service proposes to list the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse (Zapus

hudsonius preblei) as an endangered

species pursuant to the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended.

The Preble’s meadow jumping mouse, a

small rodent in the family Zapodidae, is

known to occur in only four counties in

Colorado and two counties in Wyoming.

Historical surveys document its former

presence in five additional counties in

Colorado and three additional counties

in Wyoming. The Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse lives primarily in

heavily vegetated riparian habitats.

Habitat loss and degradation caused by

agricultural, residential, commercial,

and industrial development imperil its

continued existence. This proposal, if

made final, would extend protection of

the Act to the Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse.

DATES: Comments from all interested

parties must be received by May 27,

1997. Public hearing requests must be

received by May 9, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments or materials

concerning this proposed rule may be

sent to the Colorado Field Supervisor,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box

25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver,

Colorado 80225. The complete file for

this rule is available for public

inspection, by appointment, during

normal business hours at the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service’s Colorado Field

Office, 755 Parfet Street, Suite 361,

Lakewood, Colorado.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LeRoy W. Carlson, Field Supervisor,

Colorado Field Office (see ADDRESSES

section), (telephone 303/275–2370).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

(Zapus hudsonius preblei) is a small

rodent in the family Zapodidae and is

one of 11 subspecies of the species Z.

hudsonius, the meadow jumping mouse

(Krutzsch 1954, Whitaker 1972). The

family consists of small to mediumsized mice with long tails and long feet

adapted for jumping. Krutzsch (1954)

reviewed taxonomy and distribution of

the genus Zapus in North America and

recognized three living species, Z.

hudsonius, Z. trinotatus, and Z.

princeps. Fitzgerald et al. (1994)

described Z. hudsonius as greyish to

yellowish-brown in color with an

indistinct mid-dorsal band of darker

hair and paler sides, large hindlegs and

hindfeet, and a sparsely haired tail that

accounts for more than 60 percent of the

total length.

The Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

(Preble’s) was first discovered and

described from Loveland, Larimer

County, Colorado, by A.E. Preble in

1895 (Preble 1899, cited by Krutzsch

1954). All records are from southeastern

Wyoming and eastern Colorado. The

coloration of Preble’s was described by

Krutzsch (1954) as ‘‘color dull, back

from near Clay Color to near TawnyOlive with a mixture of black hair

forming poorly defined dorsal band;

sides lighter than back from near Clay

Color to near Cinnamon-Buff; lateral

line distinct and clear Ochraceous-Buff;

belly white, sometimes faint wash of

clear Ochraceous-Buff; tail bicolored,

brownish to light brownish-black above,

grayish-white to yellowish-white

below’’ (capitalized color terms refer to

a scientific standard, while lower case

terms reflect common usage). Krutzsch

(1954) also provided a technical

description of the skull of Preble’s,

which can prove critical to its

identification.

A source of confusion is the similarity

of appearance between the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse and Z. p.

princeps, a subspecies of the western

jumping mouse that also occurs in

portions of Colorado and Wyoming. In

general, Z. hudsonius may be

distinguished from Z. princeps by

average external size and cranial size

(Krutzsch 1954, Whitaker 1972).

Preble’s may be distinguished from Z. p.

princeps by a less pronounced middorsal band, smaller average total

length, and a skull that is small and

light with a narrower braincase and

smaller molars (Fitzgerald et al. 1994).

Since coloration of the mid-dorsal band

and total length are not definitive

characteristics, skull measurements are

most useful for positive identification

(Aaron Ellingson, Colorado Natural

Heritage Program, in litt. 1995). Ranges

of the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

and Z. p. princeps are not thought to

overlap in Colorado but may overlap in

Wyoming (Armstrong 1972).

Krutzsch (1954) commented on the

presence of physical habitat barriers and

lack of known intergradation between

the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse,

known only from eastern Colorado and

southeastern Wyoming, and other

identified subspecies of Z. hudsonius

ranging to the east and north. Among

recognized subspecies, Krutzsch found

that Preble’s most closely resembled Z.

h. campestris from northeastern

Wyoming, but summarized differences

in coloration and skull characteristics.

Krutzsch concluded that considerable

differences existed between Preble’s and

related subspecies. Hafner et al. (1981)

described an additional subspecies Z. h.

luteus present in New Mexico and

Arizona and differentiated it from

Preble’s. This subspecies was not

addressed by Krutzsch since it was

previously considered Z. p. luteus, a

subspecies of the western jumping

mouse.
14094 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Results from limited genetic analysis

of Z. hudsonius from Minnesota and

Indiana, presumed Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse from the Department of

Energy’s Rocky Flats Environmental

Technology Site (Rocky Flats) in

Jefferson County, Colorado, and Z.

princeps from Colorado, provided clear

evidence that the Rocky Flats mice were

of the species Z. hudsonius. However,

the analysis did not provide a means of

separating subspecies of Z. hudsonius

(Bruce Wunder, Colorado State

University, pers. comm. 1996). Under a

cost-sharing agreement with the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), the

Colorado Division of Wildlife supported

genetic studies of Preble’s trapped in

Colorado during the 1996 field season.

Tissue samples from Preble’s trapped in

Colorado are being assessed, through

mitochondrial DNA analysis, and will

be compared to available reference

samples from Z. hudsonius from other

areas. While mitochondrial DNA

analysis is an accepted technique for

establishing taxonomic relationships, it

is uncertain whether these studies will

produce conclusive results regarding the

genetic differences between Preble’s and

other recognized subspecies of Z.

hudsonius. Results of these studies will

be available in 1997.

Under section 15.3 of the Act, the

term ‘‘species’’ is defined to include

recognized subspecies. Therefore,

throughout the remainder of this

document, Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse (Z. h. preblei) is treated, in the

context of the Act, as a ‘‘species.’’

Though the Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse has not been studied as

intensively as Z. hudsonius has been

studied elsewhere, it is believed to be

similar to other subspecies of Z.

hudsonius in patterns of diet, behavior,

breeding and habitat utilization. In

general, Z. hudsonius subsists on seeds,

small fruits, fungi, and insects, and

hibernates from October to May

(Fitzgerald et al. 1994, Whitaker 1972).

It is adapted for digging, creates nests of

grasses, leaves, and woody material

several centimeters below the ground,

and is primarily nocturnal or

crepuscular, but can be observed during

daylight. During the breeding season

(June to mid-August), females typically

have two to three litters (Fitzgerald et al.

1994).

Krutzsch (1954), Quimby (1951), and

Armstrong (1972) agree that across its

range, Z. hudsonius occurs mostly in

low undergrowth consisting of grasses,

forbs, or both, in open wet meadows

and riparian corridors, or where tall

shrubs and low trees provide adequate

cover. In addition, Z. hudsonius prefers

lowlands with medium to high moisture

over drier uplands. Whitaker (1972)

concluded that Z. hudsonius avoids the

sparse vegetation that is generally

associated with low moisture habitats.

Fitzgerald et al. (1994) described Z.

hudsonius as most common in lush

vegetation along watercourses or in

herbaceous understories in wooded

areas. Some authors (Tester et al. 1993)

have suggested that proximity to water

may be the most important factor

influencing habitat selection and

utilization by Z. hudsonius.

Recent research on the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse has focused

mostly on current status; however, some

aspects of life history, behavior, and

habitat utilization have been

documented. In general, results of

recent investigations have not been

documented in peer-reviewed scientific

literature. Data have been gathered by

researchers at Rocky Flats on the timing

of the initial breeding period and time

of hibernation (PTI Environmental

Services 1996). The month of May

marks the beginning of the active period

for Preble’s, with May 5 the earliest

capture date at Rocky Flats. Breeding

probably occurs soon after emergence.

Adults begin hibernation in early

September, while juveniles enter

hibernation from mid-September to late

October.

At Rocky Flats, the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse appears to be primarily

dependent on riparian corridors along

creeks that are dominated by the shrubs

Salix exigua (coyote willow) or

Amorpha fruticosa (leadplant), and are

in proximity to mesic grasslands

dominated by Andropyron smithii

(western wheatgrass) and Poa pratensis

(Kentucky bluegrass) (Bakeman, Deans

and Ryon, EG&G, in litt. 1995). Field

studies at Rocky Flats led to the

conclusion that Preble’s is typically

found in or near complex riparian

communities with multi-strata

woodland and herbaceous species

(Harrington et al. 1996). Capture

locations were typically humid with

high litter content. In a spring 1996

study at Rocky Flats, all captures were

within 25 meters (m) (82 feet (ft)) of

streams, with 48 percent of captures

within 5 m (16 ft) of streams (PTI

Environmental Services 1996). In the

same study, 90 percent of captures

occurred within 5 m (16 ft) of canopy

edge consisting of Salix exigua,

Symphoricarpos occidentalis (western

snowberry), Prunus americana. (choke

cherry), and other species. Margins of

artificial ponds at Rocky Flats are

thought to be important foraging sites

(Harrington et al. 1996).

Most successful capture sites at Rocky

Flats presented burrowing or nesting

opportunities. Five nests were located

in dense vegetation (Harrington et al.

1995). Litter is used to construct nests,

which are occupied during the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse’s active season.

Based on a single underground

hibernaculum, located through use of

telemetry, upland habitats may be

preferred for hibernation by Preble’s

(Fred Harrington, Pawnee Natural

History Society, pers. comm. 1995).

Ryon (1995) reported that four of five

recent Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

capture sites he evaluated in Colorado

had five structural habitat components:

trees, tall shrubs, short shrubs,

herbaceous vegetation, and ground

cover. The fifth site had few trees. In

contrast, historic capture sites where

Ryon failed to capture Preble’s generally

lacked one or more of these

components. Harrington (1995) captured

Preble’s in riparian shrubland

dominated by Salix exigua along East

Plum Creek, Douglas County, Colorado.

Preble’s was captured along Monument

Creek within the U.S. Air Force

Academy lands in Colorado Springs, El

Paso County, Colorado, primarily in

densely vegetated riparian communities

where Salix spp., Symphoricarpos

occidentalis, Populus angustifolia.

(narrow-leaf cottonwood), and thick

grass understory were dominant (Corn

et al. 1995). Garber (1995) characterized

capture sites along Lodgepole Creek,

Albany County, Wyoming as moist areas

near beaver ponds with dense sedges

and Salix sp. Ryon (1995) suggested that

where Preble’s occupies habitat along

intermittent streams, adjacent wet

meadows and seeps may be important

habitats in dry periods.

Based on recent survey data, Preble’s

are most frequently encountered along

riparian corridors of small intermittent

and perennial streams, where low Salix

sp. and other dense shrubs are found

with lush ground cover (grasses, forbs,

etc.). Recent captures that were

exceptions to the above described

habitat, include individuals found along

a small irrigation ditch and in a mesic

grassy field on City of Boulder Open

Space land (Clint Miller, City of

Boulder, in litt. 1996).

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse may

never have been widespread in

historical times. Armstrong (1972)

described it as poorly known in

Colorado and apparently nowhere

abundant. The historical range of

Preble’s may represent a relic of a much

larger range, occupied when the climate

was cooler and damper (Fitzgerald et al.

1994). Nevertheless, the apparent

extirpation of Preble’s from historically

occupied sites in Colorado and

Wyoming, and the difficulties in finding
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14095

it in apparently adequate habitat

suggests a decline in populations of the

Preble’s throughout its range. The

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (in

litt. 1996) ranks Preble’s as T2,

imperiled globally, and S2, imperiled in

the State of Colorado.

Records for Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse define a historical range

including Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder,

Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson,

Larimer, and Weld counties in

Colorado; and Albany, Laramie, Platte,

Goshen, and Converse counties in

Wyoming (Krutzsch 1954, Compton and

Hugie 1993, Carron Meaney, Denver

Museum of Natural History, pers.

comm., 1996). Historical sites in

Colorado were further discussed by

Meaney and Clippenger (1995) and

Ryon (1995). Based on distribution of

apparently suitable habitat, the actual

range may have extended further north,

south, and east. Garber (1995) discussed

historical sites from Wyoming and

suggested that some historical Preble’s

study skins from Wyoming may have

been misidentified. He indicated that

without the skulls, positive

identification was not possible.

As one would expect, given the

intensity of recent surveys for Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse, many more

individuals have been trapped in the

last 5 years than were historically

documented in all previous years

combined. Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse is known to exist in four counties

in Colorado and two in Wyoming, but

it is not known to be present in five

other counties in Colorado and three

counties in Wyoming where previously

documented.

Colorado

A number of historical and recent

records of Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse exist for Boulder County;

however, relatively few individuals

have been documented in recent

surveys. A summary of past records and

a report of 1995 survey results was

provided by Armstrong et al. (1996).

Compton and Hugie (1993) reported a

single Preble’s capture, on the Van Vleet

site near South Boulder Creek, resulting

from a 1992 Service-funded study of

four City of Boulder Open Space sites.

One Preble’s was found dead on the Van

Vleet site in 1993 (Armstrong et al.

1996). A single Preble’s was captured on

City of Boulder Open Space land at

Dowdy Draw (a tributary to South

Boulder Creek) during 1994 surveys. In

1995, extensive surveys were

conducted, through a challenge grant

cost-share agreement with the Service,

to determine the presence of Preble’s on

City of Boulder and Boulder County

Open Space lands supporting suitable

habitat. Of 13 sites surveyed, Preble’s

were captured from the Van Vleet site

(14 individuals) and the Gebhard site (9

individuals), both along South Boulder

Creek (Armstrong et al. 1996). The

capture of 23 Preble’s in 17,800

trapnights (one trap set for one night

equals one trapnight) of effort in

suspected habitat lead to the conclusion

that Preble’s is not abundant in the

Colorado Piedmont of Boulder County.

In 1996, one Preble’s was captured on

the Van Vleet site and two on the Burke

1 site (also City of Boulder Open Space),

along South Boulder Creek, during an

extensive study of grassland

biodiversity entailing 6,600 trapnights

of effort (Clint Miller, in litt. 1996).

Meany and Clippenger (in litt. 1996)

reported capturing seven or eight

Preble’s at a Boulder County Open

Space site on St. Vrain Creek in 1996,

the only captures of five Boulder County

sites they surveyed.

At Rocky Flats, Jefferson County,

annual studies have taken place since

the discovery of the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse there in 1991

(Harrington et al. 1996). Currently,

known populations are located in all

four major drainages within the Rocky

Flats buffer zone (Tom Ryon, PTI

Environmental Services, pers. comm.

1996). During the 1995 field season, 61

Preble’s meadow jumping mice were

trapped at Rocky Flats bringing the total

number of individual mice trapped

since 1991 to 161 (Fred Harrington,

pers. comm. 1995). Estimated density of

Preble’s in areas trapped during 1995

studies ranged up to 36 per hectare 9

(ha) (15 per acre (ac)). In 1996, two

Preble’s were captured on Jefferson

County Open Space land near the

mouth of Coal Creek Canyon west of

Rocky Flats (Chris Pague, Colorado

Natural Heritage Program, pers. comm.

1996). This is the only recent report of

Preble’s in Jefferson County outside of

Rocky Flats.

In 1995, seven Preble’s meadow

jumping mice were captured from a site

on East Plum Creek, near Larkspur,

Douglas County, by Harrington

(Harrington 1995). Also in 1995, the

Colorado Natural Heritage Program

located Preble’s at two sites, one on East

Plum Creek and one on West Plum

Creek (Carron Meaney, pers. comm.

1996). Surveys in 1996 by Meaney and

Clippenger (in litt. 1996) located

Preble’s at an additional site on West

Plum Creek south of Sedalia and at a

site on Indian Creek (a tributary to Plum

Creek) south of Louviers. Three Douglas

County sites are on private land, with

the fourth, Indian Creek, on Colorado

Division of Wildlife property.

In 1994, the Colorado Natural

Heritage Program discovered the

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse on Air

Force Academy lands along Monument

Creek, El Paso County, while performing

small mammal surveys. In

comprehensive 1995 studies, an

estimated 67 individual Preble’s were

captured (Corn et al. 1995). Using

varying assumptions regarding trapping

results and habitat available, total

population estimates for Air Force

Academy lands of 308 and 449 Preble’s

were generated. These correspond to

density estimates in occupied habitat of

2.00 per hectare (0.81 per ac) and 2.92

per ha (1.18 per ac). Twenty Preble’s

were captured in 1996 on private land

along Smith Creek, east of the Air Force

Academy (Meaney and Clippenger, in

litt. 1996). Based on recent survey

results, Air Force Academy lands and

nearby private lands may support the

largest existing population of Preble’s.

Wyoming

Preble’s meadow jumping mice were

not located at five sites within their

historical range during 1993 surveys

funded by the Service (Compton and

Hugie 1994). Tony Elliott of the

Wyoming Cooperative Research Unit

successfully captured two Preble’s

meadow jumping mice on F.E. Warren

Air Force Base, Laramie County, in the

1995 field season (Garber 1995). Garber

conducted Preble’s surveys at four

Wyoming sites during the 1995 field

season. He was unable to locate any

Preble’s on F.E. Warren Air Force Base,

but did find Preble’s at two locations in

the Lodgepole Creek drainage within the

Medicine Bow National Forest in

Albany County. The Colorado Natural

Heritage Program surveyed for Preble’s

at Warren Air Force Base in 1996 and

captured 8 individuals in 2,200

trapnights of effort (Chris Pague, pers.

comm. 1996).

Previous Federal Action

The Service included the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse as a (category

2) candidate species in the 1985 Animal

Notice of Review (50 FR 37958) and

retained that status in subsequent notice

of review, published in the Federal

Register on January 6, 1989 (54 FR 554),

November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58810), and

November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982). The

Service has since discontinued the

practice of maintaining a list of category

2 species and the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse did not appear in the

February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), notice

of review. Category 2 species were those

species for which information in the

Service’s possession indicated that

listing was possibly appropriate, but for
14096 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules

which substantive data on biological

vulnerability and threats were not

available to support a proposed rule.

On August 16, 1994, the Service

received a petition from the Biodiversity

Legal Foundation to list all known

populations of the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse as endangered or

threatened throughout its range and to

designate critical habitat within a

reasonable amount of time following the

listing. The petitioner submitted

information that Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse populations in Colorado

and Wyoming are imperiled by—

ongoing and increasing urban,

industrial, agricultural, ranching, and

recreational development; ongoing and

increasing wetland/riparian habitat

destruction and/or modification; small

size of known populations; and

inadequacy or lack of governmental

protection for the species and its

habitats.

On February 27, 1995, the 90-day

finding was approved. On March 15,

1995 (60 FR 13950–13952), the Service

published notice of the 90-day finding

that the petition presented substantial

information indicating that listing the

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse may

be warranted, and requested comments

and biological data on the status of the

mouse.

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, as

amended, requires the Secretary of the

Interior to reach a final decision on any

petition accepted for review within 12

months of the receipt of the petition.

This proposal constitutes the final

finding on the petitioned action.

Summary of Factors Affecting the

Species

Section 4 of the Act and regulations

(50 CFR part 424) promulgated to

implement the listing provisions of the

Act set forth the procedures for adding

species to the Federal lists. A species

may be determined to be a threatened or

endangered species due to one or more

of the five factors described in section

4(a)(1). These factors and their

application to the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius

preblei) are as follows:

A. The present or threatened

destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range. The

best indication of range curtailment and

current status is the lack of captures at

historical sites and other sites with

suitable habitat within its historical

range. Since 1992, efforts to document

existing populations of Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse have increased

commensurate with rising concern over

its status. Presence of Preble’s in

Colorado has been documented in four

counties—along South Boulder Creek

and St. Vrain Creek (Boulder County);

within drainages at Rocky Flats and

along Coal Creek (Jefferson County);

along East Plum Creek and West Plum

Creek (Douglas County); and, along

Monument Creek within the Air Force

Academy and along Smith Creek (El

Paso County). In Wyoming, Preble’s has

been recently documented in two

counties, along Crow Creek at F.E.

Warren Air Force Base (Laramie County)

and in the Lodgepole Creek drainage,

within the Medicine Bow National

Forest (Albany County). Documented

populations at the Air Force Academy

and Rocky Flats are by far the largest

known populations. Known Wyoming

populations are separated from the

closest known Colorado population by

over 80 kilometers (km) (50 miles (mi)).

Preble’s is not known to be present in

five counties in Colorado and three

counties in Wyoming where previously

documented.

Researchers are concerned with the

lack of captures of Preble’s at historical

sites and other sites with suitable

habitat within its historical range and

believe that habitat loss and

fragmentation resulting from human

land uses have adversely impacted

Preble’s populations, and continues to

do so. Ryon (1995) evaluated the current

status of historical Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse capture sites in

Colorado, addressing both the mouse’s

presence and current habitat conditions.

No Preble’s were captured when Ryon

trapped six historical sites in five

counties. Ryon found the lack of

captures ‘‘disturbing’’ and related

absence of Preble’s to changes in

habitat. He concluded that the range of

Preble’s has decreased, especially

adjacent to or east of the Interstate

Highway 25 urban corridor.

Meaney and Clippinger (1995)

reviewed aerial photographs of 9

Colorado counties and, based on habitat

and other factors, selected 16 priority

sites to survey for Preble’s. Of these,

seven sites in five counties were

surveyed in 1995, with priority given to

counties representing the boundaries of

suspected Preble’s range. No Preble’s

were captured at these seven sites

despite 6,750 trapnights of effort.

Extensive studies of public lands in

Boulder County in 1995 documented

Preble’s on only 2 of 13 sites surveyed

(Armstrong et al. 1996). Sites were

selected based on documented historical

presence and perceived quality of

habitat. One conclusion of the study

was that suitable habitat appeared to be

present on some sites where trapping

was unsuccessful.

Compton and Hugie (1993) found it

difficult to assess historical trends and

current status of Preble’s due to the

scarcity of demographic data. They

recommended that Preble’s be federally

listed as a threatened species. However,

after a largely unsuccessful search for

suitable habitat in Wyoming and

unsuccessful trapping surveys for

Preble’s at five sites in southeastern

Wyoming in 1993, they concluded that

Preble’s might be extirpated from

Wyoming (Compton and Hugie 1994).

Their revised recommendation was that

Preble’s be federally listed as an

endangered species. Garber (1995)

documented Preble’s persisting at only

two Wyoming sites, commented on the

difficulty of capturing Preble’s on these

sites, and concluded that substantial

additional work was needed to

determine the status of Preble’s in

Wyoming.

Recent surveys for Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse at a number of

additional locations in Colorado have

been unsuccessful in documenting

presence. Surveys funded and carried

out by the Department of the Army at

the Army’s Fort Carson Military

Reservation in El Paso and Pueblo

counties, resulted in no Preble’s

captures despite 3,311 trapnights of

effort in apparently suitable habitat

(Bunn et al. 1995). Private researchers

and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s

Forest Service (Forest Service)

personnel found no Preble’s in limited

surveys of seemingly adequate habitats

within the Forest Service’s Pawnee

National Grassland in northern Weld

County (Fred Harrington, pers. comm.

1995).

Dozens of site surveys for Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse have been

conducted by environmental

consultants in recent years at locations

of anticipated development. Beane (Ron

Beane, MDG Inc., pers. comm. 1996)

reported conducting Preble’s trapping

surveys at 11 sites in 1996 with no

captures. Aside from Harrington’s

(1995) work on East Plum Creek, none

of these site-specific predevelopment

surveys have resulted in Preble’s

captures.

Decline of the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse is linked to widespread

habitat alteration. Ryon (1995)

commented that recent capture sites he

observed were on large, historically

undisturbed lands supporting native

plant communities. Compton and Hugie

(1993, 1994) cite human activities that

have adversely impacted Preble’s

including: conversion of grasslands to

farms; livestock grazing; water

development and management

practices; and, residential and
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14097

commercial development. They mention

the ‘‘urban sprawl’’ occurring from

Colorado Springs, Colorado, to

Cheyenne, Wyoming, as a continuing

threat to remaining populations.

Some researchers hypothesize that

warm season livestock grazing may be

an important cause of the decline of the

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse.

Compton and Hugie (1994) stated that in

southeastern Wyoming almost all

private land of appropriate topography

and hydrology to support Preble’s

habitat was heavily grazed by livestock

and that grazing probably was the most

significant factor in reducing habitat for

Preble’s. Ryon (1995) cited livestock

grazing as a contributor to lack of

structural habitat diversity he observed

on historical Preble’s sites in Colorado.

The two largest known populations of

Preble’s exist on Federal properties

(Rocky Flats and the Air Force

Academy) where livestock grazing is

excluded.

The importance of ‘‘late season

obesity’’ (the buildup of fat reserves) in

jumping mice and its positive

correlation to hibernation survival, posthibernation development, and

successful reproduction has been well

documented (Nichols and Conley 1982,

Muchlinski 1980, Falk and Millar 1987,

Brown 1970). Preble’s entering

hibernation with low fat reserves would

be less likely to survive the winter or to

successfully breed the following spring.

Late season grazing of Preble’s habitat,

as well as mowing or burning, could

adversely affect Preble’s by reducing the

availability of food resources essential

for buildup of fat reserves.

City of Boulder Open Space lands

endured intensive grazing, farming, or

haying regimes until they became part

of the City of Boulder Open Space

system. Grazing and haying continue on

sites supporting Preble’s, largely as land

management tools. Impacts of current

management practices to Preble’s and

their habitats are unknown. Given the

relatively low numbers of Preble’s found

during recent surveys of City of Boulder

Open Space sites, continuation of any

land management practices detrimental

to Preble’s and their habitat may

contribute to extirpation from these

sites.

Human development has produced

profound changes in the hydrology of

streams flowing east from the Colorado

Front Range. Water development and

management in its various forms can

alter Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

habitat, usually with adverse impacts.

Fitzgerald et al. (1994) stated that

inundation of riparian areas to create

reservoirs had deceased available

Preble’s habitat. Compton and Hugie

(1993) concluded that management of

water for commercial and residential

use tends to channelize and isolate

water resources, and has reduced in size

and fragmented riparian habitats used

by Preble’s. They found development of

irrigated farmland had a negative impact

on Preble’s habitat, and that any habitat

creation it produced was minimal.

Water diversions and associated land

use changes can impact Preble’s habitat

directly, as well as through hydrologic

alterations to Preble’s habitat located

downstream. Corn et al. (1995)

expressed concerns regarding the

hydrologic integrity of Monument Creek

and its tributaries upstream of the Air

Force Academy. Flood control, through

the placement of riprap and other

structural stabilization options, is

currently being considered on areas of

the Smith Creek floodplain that support

Preble’s.

While Rocky Flats supports one of the

two largest known populations of

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse and

has served as a refuge for Preble’s, the

future conservation of Preble’s at this

site is uncertain due to possible impacts

to occupied habitat. A specific threat is

potential disruption of the current

hydrology by mining operations.

Alluvial aggregate extraction, often in or

near riparian habitats, continues to

expand as development intensifies

along the Colorado Front Range. At

Rocky Flats, there are proposals to

expand existing commercial sand and

gravel extraction and processing

activities in the Rock Creek drainage

both outside and within the boundary of

Rocky Flats. The Department of Energy

does not control mineral rights on the

land in question. Proposed mining

operations are consistent with Jefferson

County zoning. Results of ongoing

hydrological studies will be used by

Jefferson County in site plan review.

Without careful planning Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse habitats could

be impacted by the Department of

Energy’s planned bioremediation (the

detoxification of toxic substances using

biological agents) and hazardous

contaminant cleanup, associated water

management practices designed to

contain hazardous materials spills and

prevent their migration offsite, and dam

safety and maintenance activities.

The Colorado Piedmont east of the

Front Range and adjacent areas of

southeastern Wyoming have changed

from predominantly prairie habitat

intermixed with perennial and

intermittent streams and associated

riparian habitats, to a more agricultural

and urban setting with grazing,

residential, commercial, industrial, and

recreational development. The Colorado

Front Range urban corridor represents

only about 4 percent of the State’s land

area but supports 80 percent of its

population (Wright 1993).

Unfortunately, the area of development

corresponds almost directly to known

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse range.

Fueled by human population increases

(another 1 million people estimated by

2020), development in this area

continues at an unprecedented rate. The

results are destruction, modification,

and encroachment upon Preble’s habitat

and, with ever increasing real estate

pressure, an increase in the

vulnerability of the species to vandalism

or intentional destruction of its habitat.

Residential and commercial

development, accompanied by highway

and bridge construction, and instream

alterations to implement flood control,

directly removes Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse habitat, or reduces,

alters, fragments, and isolates habitat to

the point where Preble’s can no longer

persist. At some historical capture sites,

habitat appears intact, but isolation has

probably rendered the sites unsuitable

for Preble’s (Ryon 1995). Bailey (1926)

observed that jumping mice avoid roads

and runways. Roads, trails, or other

linear development through Preble’s

habitat may act as barriers to movement.

Corn et al. (1995) proposed that a 100

m (328 ft) buffer of unaltered habitat be

established to protect the floodplain of

Monument Creek from a range of human

activities that might adversely Affect

Preble’s or its habitat.

Development and heavy use of trails

within occupied Preble’s habitats may

impact the species by destroying its

habitat, nests, and food resources, or by

disrupting behavior. Recreational trail

systems have been established or are

proposed along may riparian corridors

within Preble’s range. Heavily used

recreational trails currently exist on City

of Boulder Open Space lands, including

sites that support Preble’s. Based on

information received by the Service’s

Colorado Field Office, a new paved trail

is currently proposed by the City of

Boulder within the Burke 1 and

Gephard sites along South Boulder

Creek.

Habitat alteration may in turn

encourage invasion of weeds. While

little is known regarding impact of

invasive, nonnative vegetation on

Preble’s, Ryon (1995) expressed concern

and Garber (1995) stated that this may

represent one of the most serious

problems facing the mouse. Corn et al.

(1995) discussed both the problem of

invasive weeds and the potential

problem of weed control programs

impacting Preble’s habitat.
14098 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Patterns of capture suggest that

populations may fluctuate over time at

occupied sites, raising questions

regarding status of documented

populations. This report is based on the

best scientific data currently available.

In that context, Preble’s appears to have

undergone a significant decline in

range. As the summary above

demonstrates, a large number of known

and potential threats to its continued

existence have been documented.

B. Overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational

purposes. The Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse has no known commercial or

recreational value. Scientific and

educational collecting has not been

widespread over the past century.

Overutilization is not currently thought

to contribute to decline in the mouse’s

populations.

C. Disease or predation. The Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse, as well as

other native rodents, carries parasites

and diseases that may reduce vigor,

curtail reproductive success, and cause

death. There is no evidence that

epizootic disease has caused significant

impact to Preble’s. While plague is

regularly found in other rodent species

within Preble’s range, its impact to

Preble’s populations is not known.

Predation on the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse has always existed as a

naturally occurring association between

predator and prey. While evidence is

scant, human development may have

altered this relationship. Armstrong et

al. (1996) recommended studies be

conducted on influences of the

suburban environment and associated

densities of species such as striped

skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raccoon

(Procyon lotor), and the domestic cat

(Felis catus) on Preble’s. Free-ranging

domestic cats may locally present a

problem to Preble’s. Corn et al. (1995)

recommended a 1.5 km (.9 mi) setback

of housing development from Preble’s

habitat to exclude predation by ‘‘house

cats.’’ As an alternative they suggested

a strict prohibition on cats. More

information is needed about the effects

from predation by domestic and feral

cats, and perhaps dogs (Canis

familiaris), on Preble’s.

D. The inadequacy of existing

regulatory mechanisms. The decline of

the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse is

partially due to the inherent weakness

of the existing laws and regulations that

could serve to protect Preble’s and their

habitat. Relevant Federal laws include

the Clean Water Act, Endangered

Species Act, Federal Power Act, Fish

and Wildlife Coordination Act, Food

Security Act, and National

Environmental Policy Act. Federal

regulations and policies have limited

protection authority and scope since

Preble’s is not a federally proposed or

listed species. These statutes only

recommend, not require, that projects

carried out, funded, or permitted by the

Federal government attempt to mitigate

impacts to species of special concern.

Colorado Division of Wildlife

Regulations (Chapter 10, Article IV)

classify Z. hudsonius the as a

‘‘nongame’’ species. This designation

means that permits must be obtained for

take of Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

related to scientific, educational, or

rehabilitation purposes. Preble’s is a

‘‘species of special concern’’ in

Colorado; however, this is not a

statutory designation. In Wyoming, the

Wyoming Game and Fish Department

has classified Z. hudsonius as a

nongame species protected under

Wyoming Game and Fish Department

Nongame Wildlife Regulations

promulgated by WF23–1–103 and 23–1–

302. This designation protects Preble’s

from takings and sales by only issuing

permits for the purpose of scientific

collection. While the above regulations

limit the taking of Preble’s, they provide

no measures to protect the habitats

critical to the survival of the species.

State listing encourages State agencies

to allocate funds and exercise authority

to achieve recovery, stimulate research,

and allow redirection of priorities

within State natural resource

departments. However, without

additional measures to protect habitat,

such State laws are generally

inadequate. There are no known

regional or local laws, regulations, or

ordinances that specifically protect

Preble’s or its habitat from inadvertent

or intentional adverse impacts.

E. Other natural or manmade factors

affecting its continued existence. Use of

pesticides and herbicides has

undoubtably increased across known

Preble’s range as human land use has

intensified. These chemicals could

directly poison Preble’s or they may be

ingested through contaminated food or

water. Specific impacts to Preble’s from

pesticides and herbicides are not

currently known. Intensive human

development creates a range of

additional environmental impacts

(including but not limited to noise, and

the degradation of air and water quality)

that could alter Preble’s behavior,

increase the levels of stress, and

ultimately contribute to loss of vigor or

death of individuals, and extirpation of

populations.

In summary, the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse has seriously declined

from historic levels to a point where

only four counties in Colorado and two

in Wyoming are known to support

Preble’s populations. Based on numbers

of Preble’s, extent of suitable habitat,

and land ownership, Rocky Flats and

the Air Force Academy appear to be the

sites with the greatest potential for

maintaining Preble’s. Riparian habitats

required to support Preble’s have been

severely modified or destroyed by

human development in many areas east

of the Colorado Front Range and in

southeastern Wyoming. With current

human population increases, the loss

and modification of riparian habitat

continues unabated. Existing regulations

have proven to be inadequate to protect

Preble’s, as witnessed by its

documented decline and the continued

destruction and modification of its

habitats.

The Service has carefully assessed the

best scientific and commercial

information available regarding the past,

present, and future threats faced by this

species in determining to propose this

rule. Based on this evaluation, the

preferred action is to list the Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse as an

endangered species. The Service has

determined that the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse is in danger of

extinction throughout all or a significant

portion of its range and therefore meets

the requirements to be listed as

endangered. On September 5, 1995, the

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse was

determined by the Service to have a

listing priority of three. This priority

emphasizes the need of this species to

be protected under the Act.

Following publication of the proposed

rule in the Federal Register, peer review

by appropriate experts will occur.

Responses from the peer review process

will be incorporated into any final rule

for listing Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse. Critical habitat is not being

proposed for the reasons stated below.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3

of the Act as: (i) the specific areas

within the geographical area occupied

by the species, at the time it is listed in

accordance with the Act, on which are

found those physical or biological

features (I) essential to the conservation

of the species and (II) that may require

special management considerations or

protection and; (ii) specific areas

outside the geographical area occupied

by a species at the time it is listed, upon

a determination that such areas are

essential for the conservation of the

species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use

of all methods and procedures needed

to bring the species to the point at
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14099

which listing under the Act is no longer

necessary.

The Service finds that critical habitat

is not prudent for Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse. Section 4(a)(3) of the

Act, as amended, and implementing

regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that,

to the maximum extent prudent and

determinable, the Secretary designate

critical habitat at the time the species is

determined to be endangered or

threatened. Service regulations (50 CFR

424.12(a)(1)) state that designation of

critical habitat is not prudent when one

or both of the following situations

exist—(1) The species is threatened by

taking or other human activity, and

identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat

to the species, or (2) such designation of

critical habitat would not be beneficial

to the species.

Listing of the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse as an endangered

species publicizes the present

vulnerability of this species and, thus,

can be reasonably expected to increase

the threat of vandalism or intentional

destruction of the species habitat. In

light of the vulnerability of this species

to vandalism or the intentional

destruction of its habitat, publication of

maps providing its precise locations

within increasingly developing urban

areas and descriptions of critical habitat,

as required for the designation of critical

habitat, would reasonably be expected

to increase the degree of threat to the

species, increase the difficulties of

enforcement, and further contribute to

the decline of Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse.

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

would not benefit from the designation

of critical habitat. The Service

determines that any potential benefits

beyond those afforded by listing, when

weighted against the negative impacts of

disclosing site-specific location, does

not yield an overall benefit and is

therefore not prudent.

Protection of the habitat of the species

will be addressed through the Act’s

recovery process and section 7

consultation process. Four of the

remaining populations are located on

Federal lands administered by the

Department of Defense, the Department

of Energy and the U.S. Forest Service.

These Federal agencies are aware of the

species’ occurrence at these sites and

the requirement to consult with the

Service to ensure that any actions

Federally authorized, funded or carried

out do not jeopardize the continued

existence of an endangered or

threatened species. Therefore, the

Service finds that designation of critical

habitat for this species is not prudent,

for such designation would reasonably

increase the degree of threat from

vandalism or intentional destruction of

habitat and would provide no additional

benefit to the species.

The Service will continue in its efforts

to obtain more information on the

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

biology and ecology, including essential

habitat characteristics, current and

historic distribution, and existing and

potential sites that can contribute to

conservation of the species. The

information resulting from this effort

will be used to identify measures

needed to achieve conservation of the

species, as defined under the Act. Such

measures could include, but are not

limited to, development of conservation

agreements with the State, other Federal

agencies, local governments, and private

landowners and organizations.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to a

species listed as endangered or

threatened under the Act include

recognition, recovery actions,

requirements for Federal protection, and

prohibitions against certain practices.

Recognition through listing results in

public awareness and conservation

actions by Federal, State, and local

agencies, private organizations, and

individuals. The Act provides for

possible land acquisition, cooperation

with the States, and requires that

recovery actions be carried out for all

listed species. The protection required

of Federal agencies and the prohibitions

against taking and harm are discussed,

in part, below.

Section 7(a) of the Act requires

Federal agencies to evaluate their

actions with respect to any species that

is proposed or listed as endangered or

threatened, and with respect to its

critical habitat, if any is being

designated. Regulations implementing

this interagency cooperation provision

of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part

402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal

agencies to confer with the Service on

any action that is likely to jeopardize

the continued existence of a proposed

species or result in destruction or

adverse modification of proposed

critical habitat. If a species is listed

subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires

Federal agencies to insure that activities

they authorize, fund, or carry out are not

likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of the species or destroy or

adversely modify its critical habitat. If a

Federal action may affect a listed

species or its critical habitat, the

responsible Federal agency must enter

into formal consultation with the

Service.

The Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

occurs on lands administered by the Air

Force, Department of Energy, U.S.

Forest Service, Colorado Division of

Wildlife, Boulder County, Jefferson

County, City of Boulder, and on private

lands. For Federal lands where Preble’s

meadow jumping mice occur, the Act

would require the appropriate land

management agency to evaluate

potential impacts to Preble’s meadow

jumping mice that may result from

activities they authorize or permit. The

Act requires consultation under section

7 of the Act for activities on Federal,

State, county, or private lands,

including tribal lands, that may impact

the survival and recovery of Preble’s, if

such activities are funded, authorized,

carried out, or permitted by Federal

agencies. The Federal agencies that may

be involved as a result of this proposed

rule include the Service, Department of

Energy, Forest Service, U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, Bureau of Land

Management, Agricultural Stabilization

and Conservation Service, Bureau of

Reclamation, Department of the Army,

Department of the Air Force, Office of

Surface Mining, Western Area Power

Administration, Rural Electrification

Administration, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Department of

Housing and Urban Development,

Federal Highway Commission, and

Environmental Protection Agency.

Federally listing the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse will require these

agencies to consider potential impacts

to Preble’s prior to approval of any

activity authorized or permitted by them

(e.g., Clean Water Act’s section 404

permits, grazing management, military

maneuvers, bioremediation and

hazardous materials cleanup, mining

permitting and expansion, highway

construction, etc.).

Federal agency actions that may

require conference and/or consultation

as described in the preceding paragraph

include—removing, thinning or altering

vegetation; implementing livestock

grazing management that alters

vegetation during warm seasons;

construction of roads or hiking/biking

trails along or through riparian areas;

channelization and other alteration of

perennial and intermittent streams and

their hydrological regimes for flood

control and other water management

purposes; permanent and temporary

damming of streams to create water

storage reservoirs or deviate the stream’s

course; human activities in or near

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

habitats; construction of residential,

commercial, and industrial
14100 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules

developments, including roads, bridges,

public utilities and telephone lines,

pipelines, and other structures;

bioremediation and hazardous materials

management, containment, and cleanup

efforts such as those at Rocky Flats; and,

sand and gravel and other types of

mining activities within or upstream of

Preble’s meadow jumping mouse

habitats.

The Act and implementing

regulations set forth a series of general

prohibitions and exceptions that apply

to all endangered wildlife. The

prohibitions codified at 50 CFR 17.21,

in part, make it illegal for any person

subject to the jurisdiction of the United

States to take (including harass, harm,

pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,

capture, or collect; or attempt any of

these), import or export, ship in

interstate commerce in the course of

commercial activity, or sell or offer for

sale in interstate or foreign commerce

any listed species. It also is illegal to

possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or

ship any such wildlife that has been

taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply

to agents of the Service and

conservation agencies.

Permits may be issued to carry out

otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered wildlife under

certain circumstances. Regulations

governing permits are codified at 50

CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits are

available for scientific purposes, to

enhance the propagation or survival of

the species, and/or incidental take in

connection with otherwise lawful

activities.

Requests for copies of the regulations

regarding listed wildlife and inquiries

about prohibitions and permits may be

addressed to U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal

Center, Denver, Colorado 80225

(telephone 303/236–8155, Facsimile

303/236–8192).

The Service adopted a policy on July

1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the

maximum extent practicable at the time

a species is proposed for listing those

activities that would or would not

constitute a violation of section 9 of the

Act. The intent of this policy is to

increase public awareness of the effect

of the listing on proposed and ongoing

activities within a species’ range. The

Service believes that, based upon the

best available information, the following

actions will not result in a violation of

section 9, provided these activities are

carried out in accordance with existing

regulations and permit requirements:

(1) Activities authorized, funded, or

carried out by Federal agencies (e.g.,

grazing management, agricultural

conversions, wetland and riparian

habitat modification, flood and erosion

control, mineral and housing

development, recreational trail

development, road and dam

construction, hazardous material

containment and cleanup activities,

prescribed burns, pest control activities,

pipelines or utility lines crossing

riparian/wet meadow habitats, logging,

military maneuvers and training) when

such activity is conducted in

accordance with any incidental take

statement prepared by the Service in

accordance with section 7 of the Act;

(2) Activities such as grazing

management, flood and erosion control,

agricultural conversions, wetland and

riparian habitat modification, mineral

and housing development, road and

dam construction, recreational trail

development, hazardous material

containment and cleanup activities,

prescribed burns, pest control activities,

pipelines or utility lines crossing

riparian/wet meadow habitats, logging,

military maneuvers and training when

such activity does not occur in habitats

suitable for the survival and recovery of

the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse, do

not alter downstream hydrology or

riparian habitat supporting Preble’s, and

do not result in actual death or injury

to the species by significantly modifying

essential behavioral patterns;

(3) Within the hibernating period and

outside denning areas, controlled burns

and mowing, or other activities that

alter the Preble’s meadow jumping

mouse food sources. The period when

mowing and burning activities would

not impact the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse nourishment may vary

at specific locations, but would usually

fall between October 15 and April 15 of

every year;

(4) Human activities undertaken on

foot or horseback at breeding, feeding,

and hibernating sites that are noninvasive to the Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse (e.g., waterfowl hunting,

bird watching, sightseeing,

photography, camping, hiking); and,

(5) Application of pesticides in areas

that do not drain into Preble’s meadow

jumping mouse habitats.

Activities that the Service believes

could potentially result in a violation of

section 9 include but are not limited to:

(1) Unauthorized or unpermitted

collecting, handling, harassing, or taking

of the species;

(2) Activities that directly or

indirectly result in the actual death or

injury death of Preble’s meadow

jumping mice, or that modify the known

habitat of the species by significantly

modifying essential behavioral patterns

(e.g., plowing; conversion of wet

meadow or riparian habitats to

residential, commercial, industrial,

recreational areas, or cropland;

overgrazing; road and trail construction;

water development or impoundment;

mineral extraction or processing; offhighway vehicle use; and, hazardous

material cleanup or bioremediation).

Questions regarding whether specific

activities, such as changes in land use,

will constitute a violation of section 9

should be directed to the Colorado Field

Office (see ADDRESSES section).

The prohibition against intentional

and unintentional ‘‘take’’ of listed

species applies to all landowners

regardless of whether or not their lands

are within critical habitat (see 16 U.S.C.

1538(a)(1), 1532(1a) and 50 CFR 17.3).

Section 10(a)(1)(B) authorizes the

Service to issue permits for the taking of

listed species incidental to otherwise

lawful activities such as agriculture,

surface mining, and urban development.

Take permits authorized under section

10 must be supported by a habitat

conservation plan (HCP) that identifies

conservation measures that the

permittee agrees to implement to

conserve the species. A key element of

the Service’s review of an HCP is a

determination of the plan’s effect upon

the long-term conservation of the

species. The Service would approve an

HCP, and issue a section 10(a)(1)(B)

permit if the plan would minimize and

mitigate the impacts of the taking and

would not appreciably reduce the

likelihood of the survival and recovery

of that species in the wild.

Public Comments Solicited

The Service intends that any final

action resulting from this proposal will

be as accurate and as effective as

possible. Therefore, comments or

suggestions from the public, other

concerned governmental agencies, the

scientific community, industry, or any

other interested party concerning this

proposed rule are hereby solicited.

Comments particularly are sought

concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to this species;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of this species and the

reason why any habitat should or

should not be determined to be critical

habitat as provided by section 4 of the

Act;

(3) Additional information concerning

the range, distribution, and population

size of this species;

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on this species;

(5) Information regarding Preble’s

meadow jumping mouse ecology and
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 57 / Tuesday, March 25, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14101

habitat requirements and preferences

(e.g., preferential use, daily routines,

night activities, site fidelity);

(6) Biological or physical elements

that best describe Preble’s habitat, that

could be considered critical for the

conservation of the species (e.g.,

colonies, hibernation, vegetation, food,

topography);

(7) Possible alternative recreational,

grazing, or farming practices that will

reduce or eliminate the take of Preble’s

or their habitats (e.g., moderate grazing

regimes); and,

(8) Other management strategies that

will conserve the species throughout its

range.

Final promulgation of the regulations

on this species will take into

consideration the comments and any

additional information received by the

Service, and such communications may

lead to a final regulation that differs

from this proposal.

The Act provides for one or more

public hearings on this proposal, if

requested. Requests must be received

within 45 days of the date of publication

of the proposal in the Federal Register.

Such requests must be made in writing

and addressed to the Colorado Field

Supervisor, see ADDRESSES section.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Service has determined that

Environmental Assessments and

Environmental Impact Statements, as

defined under the authority of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969, need not be prepared in

connection with regulations adopted

pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A

notice outlining the Service’s reasons

for this determination was published in

the Federal Register on October 25,

1983 (48 FR 49244).

Required Determinations

The Service has examined this

regulation under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to

contain no information collection

requirements. This rulemaking was not

subject to review by the Office of

Management and Budget under

Executive Order 12866.

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited

is available upon request from the

Colorado Field Office (see ADDRESSES

above).

Author

The primary author of this document

is Peter Plage of the Colorado Field

Office (see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species,

Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, and

Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, the Service hereby

proposes to amend part 17, subchapter

B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of

Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–

625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.

2. It is proposed to amend § 17.11(h)

by adding the following, in alphabetical

order under Mammals, to the List of

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to

read as follows:

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened

wildlife.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

Species

Historic range

Vertebrate population

where endangered or

threatened

Status When

listed

Critical

habitat

Special

rules Common name Scientific name

MAMMALS

* * * * * * *

Mouse, Preble’s

meadow jumping.

Zapus hudsonius

preblei.

U.S.A. (CO, WY) ........ ......do ......................... E ................ NA NA

* * * * * * *

Dated: March 7, 1997.

John G. Rogers,

Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 97–7428 Filed 3–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AA98

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Notice of Reopening of

Comment Period on Reports and Other

Data Pertaining to the Listing of the

Bruneau Hot Springsnail

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of reopening of public

comment period.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) gives notice that the

comment period on reports and other

data pertaining to the listing of the

Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis

bruneauensis) is reopened for an

additional 75 days. A notice of

availability that opened the original

public comment period was published

on September 12, 1995 (60 FR 47339).

The Service extended the comment

period until December 15, 1995, in a

notice published on November 13, 1995

(60 FR 56976). The Service reopened the

comment period in a notice published

on January 23, 1997 (62 FR 3493).

Because of requests from the High

Desert Coalition, Inc., Bruneau Valley

Coalition, and Quey Johns, the Service

hereby reopens the comment period and

solicits new information and public

comment on all information and data

received since the listing of the species

in 1993.

DATES: The comment period is reopened

until June 9, 1997. Any comments and

materials received by the closing date

will be considered in the final

determination.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials

concerning the reports and other

information pertaining to the listing of

the Bruneau hot springsnail should be

submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, Snake River Basin Office, 1387

South Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise,

Idaho 83709. Reports and other data

cited in this notice, and public

comments and other materials received

will be available for public inspection

during normal business hours at the

above address.