```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1421-1433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31761]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0041; FXES1111090FEDR-256-FF09E21000] RIN 
1018-BH49

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species 
Status for the Bleached Sandhill Skipper

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
list the bleached sandhill skipper (Polites sabuleti sinemaculata), an 
insect subspecies from Humboldt County, Nevada, as an endangered 
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 
This determination also serves as our 12-month finding on a petition to 
list the bleached sandhill skipper. After a review of the best 
available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing 
the subspecies is warranted. Accordingly, we propose to list the 
bleached sandhill skipper as an endangered species under the Act. If we 
finalize this rule as proposed, the final rule would add this 
subspecies to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and extend 
the Act's protections to the subspecies. We find that a designation of 
critical habitat for the bleached sandhill skipper is not determinable 
at this time.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
March 10, 2025.
    Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. eastern 
time on the closing date. We must receive requests for a public 
hearing, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT by February 24, 2025.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

[[Page 1422]]

    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R8-ES-2024-0041, 
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the 
Search button. On the resulting page, in the panel on the left side of 
the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rule 
box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on 
``Comment.''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments 
Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2024-0041, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send comments only by the methods described 
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This 
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide 
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
    Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials, such as 
the subspecies status assessment report, are available on the Service's 
website at https://www.fws.gov/office/reno-fish-and-wildlife, at 
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0041, or both.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Barrett, Deputy Field 
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Reno Fish and Wildlife 
Field Office, 1340 Financial Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502-7147; 
telephone 775-861-6300.
    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. Please see Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2024-0041 on https://www.regulations.gov for a document that summarizes this proposed rule.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

    Why we need to publish a rule. The Act defines a ``species'' as 
including any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any 
distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or 
wildlife which interbreeds when mature. Under the Act, a species 
warrants listing if it meets the definition of an endangered species 
(in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range) or a threatened species (likely to become an endangered species 
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range). If we determine that a species warrants listing, we must 
list the species promptly and designate the species' critical habitat 
to the maximum extent prudent and determinable. We have determined that 
the bleached sandhill skipper meets the definition of an endangered 
species; therefore, we are proposing to list it as such. Listing a 
species as an endangered or threatened species can be completed only by 
issuing a rule through the Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking 
process (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.).
    What this document does. This document proposes to add the bleached 
sandhill skipper to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife as 
an endangered species under the Act.
    The basis for our action. Under the Act, we may determine that a 
species is an endangered or threatened species because of any of five 
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or humanmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. We have determined that the bleached sandhill 
skipper is endangered due to the following threats: increased warming 
and drying conditions due to the synergistic effects of climate change 
and groundwater pumping.
    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the Secretary of the Interior 
(Secretary), to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, 
concurrently with listing to designate critical habitat for the 
species. We have not yet been able to obtain the necessary economic 
information needed to develop a proposed critical habitat designation 
for the bleached sandhill skipper, although we are in the process of 
obtaining this information. At this time, we find that designation of 
critical habitat for the bleached sandhill skipper is not determinable. 
When critical habitat is not determinable, the Act allows the Service 
an additional year to publish a critical habitat designation (16 U.S.C. 
1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)).

Information Requested

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule 
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and 
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request 
comments or information from other governmental agencies, Native 
American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other 
interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek 
comments concerning:
    (1) The subspecies' biology, range, and population trends, 
including:
    (a) Biological or ecological requirements of the subspecies, 
including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns 
and the locations of any additional populations of this subspecies;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the subspecies, its 
habitat, or both.
    (2) Threats and conservation actions affecting the subspecies, 
including:
    (a) Factors that may be affecting the continued existence of the 
subspecies, which may include habitat modification or destruction, 
overutilization, disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing 
regulatory mechanisms, or other natural or humanmade factors.
    (b) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threats (or lack thereof) to this subspecies.
    (c) Existing regulations or conservation actions that may be 
addressing threats to this subspecies.
    (3) Additional information concerning the historical and current 
status of this subspecies.
    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.
    Please note that submissions merely stating support for, or 
opposition to, the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information, although noted, do not provide substantial 
information necessary to support a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of 
the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an 
endangered or a threatened species must be made solely on the basis of 
the best scientific and commercial data available.
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you 
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
    If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire

[[Page 1423]]

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 this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.
    Our final determination may differ from this proposal because we 
will consider all comments we receive during the comment period as well 
as any information that may become available after this proposal. Based 
on the new information we receive (and, if relevant, any comments on 
that new information), we may conclude that the subspecies is 
threatened instead of endangered, or we may conclude that the 
subspecies does not warrant listing as either an endangered species or 
a threatened species. In our final rule, we will clearly explain our 
rationale and the basis for our final decision, including why we made 
changes, if any, that differ from this proposal.

Public Hearing

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this 
proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date specified 
in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule a public hearing on this 
proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the 
hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the 
Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the 
hearing. We may hold the public hearing in person or virtually via 
webinar. We will announce any public hearing on our website, in 
addition to the Federal Register. The use of virtual public hearings is 
consistent with our regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).

Previous Federal Actions

    We identified the bleached sandhill skipper as a Category 2 
candidate on November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58804). Category 2 candidates 
were defined as species for which we had information that proposed 
listing was possibly appropriate, but conclusive data on biological 
vulnerability and threats were not available to support a proposed rule 
at the time. In the February 28, 1996, Candidate Notice of Review (61 
FR 7596), we discontinued the designation of Category 2 species as 
candidates; therefore, the bleached sandhill skipper was no longer a 
candidate species.
    On January 29, 2010, we received a petition from WildEarth 
Guardians requesting that 10 subspecies of Great Basin butterflies, 
including the bleached sandhill skipper, be listed as an endangered or 
threatened species with critical habitat under the Act. On October 4, 
2011, we made our 90-day finding that the petition presented 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that 
listing of the bleached sandhill skipper may be warranted, and we 
initiated a status review for this subspecies (76 FR 61532). On 
September 4, 2012, we published a 12-month finding that the bleached 
sandhill skipper did not warrant listing under the Act (77 FR 54294).
    On October 16, 2022, we received a petition from the Center for 
Biological Diversity requesting that the bleached sandhill skipper be 
listed as a threatened species or an endangered species and critical 
habitat be designated for this subspecies under the Act. On August 17, 
2023, we made our 90-day finding that the petition presented 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that 
listing of the bleached sandhill skipper may be warranted (88 FR 
55991). The petition also requested that the bleached sandhill skipper 
be emergency listed as endangered. The Act does not provide for a 
process to petition for emergency listing. However, in light of the 
concerns raised by the petitioner, at the time the petition was 
received, we did consider the immediacy of possible threats to the 
subspecies and whether emergency listing may be necessary. We reviewed 
the information in the petition and in our files, and because the 
threats were not deemed to be of such a magnitude and extent that 
immediate species protection was necessary, we did not find emergency 
listing to be an appropriate course of action. This proposed rule 
constitutes our 12-month finding on the petition.

Peer Review

    A species status assessment (SSA) team prepared an SSA report for 
the bleached sandhill skipper. The SSA team was composed of Service 
biologists, in consultation with other species experts. The SSA report 
represents a compilation of the best scientific and commercial data 
available concerning the status of the subspecies, including the 
impacts of past, present, and future factors (both negative and 
beneficial) affecting the subspecies.
    In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22, 
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in 
listing and recovery actions under the Act, we solicited independent 
scientific review of the information contained in the bleached sandhill 
skipper SSA report. We sent the SSA report to 10 independent peer 
reviewers and received 3 responses. Results of this structured peer 
review process can be found at https://www.regulations.gov. In 
preparing this proposed rule, we incorporated the results of these 
reviews, as appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation 
for this proposed rule.

Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments

    As discussed in Peer Review above, we received comments from three 
peer reviewers on the draft SSA report. We reviewed all comments we 
received from the peer reviewers for substantive issues and new 
information regarding the information contained in the SSA report. The 
peer reviewers concurred with our methods and conclusions and provided 
additional information, clarifications, and suggestions, including 
updates to the discussion on population counts, clarifications in 
terminology and discussions of physiological limits, and editorial 
suggestions. Otherwise, no substantive changes to our analysis and 
conclusions within the SSA report were deemed necessary, and peer 
reviewer comments are addressed in version 1.1 of the SSA report.

I. Proposed Listing Determination

Background

    A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the 
bleached sandhill skipper is presented in the SSA report (version 1.1; 
Service 2024, pp. 9-23).
    The bleached sandhill skipper is a small-sized, narrow endemic 
butterfly found in Humboldt County, Nevada. The bleached sandhill 
skipper is one of 13 named subspecies of the sandhill skipper and can 
be distinguished from other sandhill skipper subspecies based on the 
unusually pale coloration of the wings that give the subspecies a 
bleached appearance (Austin 1987, p. 8). It occupies alkali meadows in 
three isolated populations: Pueblo Slough, Gridley Lake, and Rincon 
Creek which are located within an approximately 14-mile (22-kilometer) 
area (figure 1). The populations at Pueblo Slough and Gridley Lake are 
primarily found on Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

[[Page 1424]]

lands, with some occurrences on private land, and the population at 
Rincon Creek is found on the Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge. The 
three populations are genetically differentiated (Jahner 2023, pp. 3, 
9-10) which suggests limited gene flow and that dispersal is minimal. 
Additionally, the combination of small wing size and large thorax, 
coupled with short generation time (approximately one year) and short 
adult flight period further suggests low dispersal habits (Scott 1986, 
pp. 42-43, 425; Sekar 2011, pp. 179-182; Stantec 2020, p. 10).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JA25.007

Figure 1--Distribution of the Bleached Sandhill Skipper

[[Page 1425]]

    The specific timing and expression of life-history characteristics 
of the bleached sandhill skipper have not been studied in detail, but 
its phenology is likely similar to other P. sabuleti subspecies and 
univoltine (having one adult flight period per year) skipper species 
found in similar habitat communities (Service 2024, pp. 11-12).
    Bleached sandhill skippers occupy alkali meadow communities 
dominated by saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) and rabbitbrushes 
(Chrysothamnus spp. and Ericameria spp.). Saltgrass is the presumed 
sole larval hostplant, providing food and shelter for larvae and 
presumably shelter for pupae; the availability of nutritious saltgrass 
plants throughout the fall is essential for larvae growth, development, 
and survival (Austin 1987, p. 8; Service 2024, p. 15). Rabbitbrushes 
are the primary nectar sources for adults; the availability of non-
senescing plants during late summer through fall is essential for adult 
reproduction and survival. These food plants typically grow in areas 
where there is a shallow water table, and they rely on groundwater as 
their primary source of water uptake. Lastly, all bleached sandhill 
skipper life stages--egg, larvae, pupae, and adult-- require suitable 
microclimate, including suitable temperatures and moisture levels.

Regulatory and Analytical Framework

Regulatory Framework

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth 
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered 
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for 
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and 
threatened species.
    The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a species that is in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range and a ``threatened species'' as a species that is likely to 
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we 
determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened 
species because of any of the following factors:
    (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range;
    (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes;
    (C) Disease or predation;
    (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
    (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence.
    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 negatively 
affect individuals of a species. 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) does not 
necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an 
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' In determining 
whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all 
identified threats by considering the species' expected response and 
the effects of the threats--in light of those actions and conditions 
that will ameliorate the threats--on an individual, population, and 
species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the 
species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all 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 will have 
positive effects on the species, such as any existing regulatory 
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether 
the species meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or a 
``threatened species'' only after conducting this cumulative analysis 
and describing the expected effect on the species.
    The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which 
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our 
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for 
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, which is 
further described in the 2009 Memorandum Opinion on the foreseeable 
future from the Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor (M-
37021, January 16, 2009; ``M-Opinion,'' available online at https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf).
    The foreseeable future extends as far into the future as the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service can 
make reasonably reliable predictions about the threats to the species 
and the species' responses to those threats. We need not identify the 
foreseeable future in terms of a specific period of time. We will 
describe the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, using the best 
available data and taking into account considerations such as the 
species' life-history characteristics, threat projection timeframes, 
and environmental variability. In other words, the foreseeable future 
is the period of time over which we can make reasonably reliable 
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means 
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the 
prediction, in light of the conservation purposes of the Act.

Analytical Framework

    The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive 
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding 
the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential 
threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent our decision 
on whether the species should be proposed for listing as an endangered 
or threatened species under the Act. However, it does provide the 
scientific basis that informs our regulatory decisions, which involve 
the further application of standards within the Act and its 
implementing regulations and policies.
    To assess bleached sandhill skipper viability, we used the three 
conservation biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and 
representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly, 
resiliency is the ability of the species to withstand environmental and 
demographic stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold 
years); redundancy is the ability of the species to withstand 
catastrophic events (for example, droughts, large pollution events); 
and representation is the ability of the species to adapt to both near-
term and long-term changes in its physical and biological environment 
(for example, climate conditions, pathogens). In general, species 
viability will increase with increases in resiliency, redundancy, and 
representation (Smith et al. 2018, p. 306). Using these principles, we 
identified the subspecies' ecological

[[Page 1426]]

requirements for survival and reproduction at the individual, 
population, and species levels and described the beneficial and risk 
factors influencing the subspecies' viability.
    The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages. 
During the first stage, we evaluated the individual subspecies' life-
history needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical 
and current condition of the subspecies' demographics and habitat 
characteristics, including an explanation of how the subspecies arrived 
at its current condition. The final stage of the SSA involved making 
predictions about the subspecies' responses to positive and negative 
environmental and anthropogenic influences. Throughout all of these 
stages of the SSA process, we used the best available information to 
characterize viability as the ability of a species to sustain 
populations in the wild over time, which we then used to inform our 
regulatory decision.
    The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from 
the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found at Docket FWS-R8-ES-
2024-0041 on https://www.regulations.gov and at https://www.fws.gov/office/reno-fish-and-wildlife.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    In this discussion, we review the biological condition of the 
subspecies and its resources, and the threats that influence the 
subspecies' current and future condition, in order to assess the 
subspecies' overall viability and the risks to that viability.

Species Needs

    The SSA report contains a detailed discussion of the bleached 
sandhill skipper individual, population, and subspecies requirements 
(Service 2024, pp. 9-23); we provide a summary here. Based upon the 
best available scientific and commercial information, and acknowledging 
existing ecological uncertainties, the resource and demographic needs 
for breeding, feeding, sheltering, and microclimate conditions of the 
bleached sandhill skipper are summarized below.
    Bleached sandhill skippers need alkali meadow communities dominated 
by saltgrass (the sole larval food plant) and rabbitbrushes (the 
primary adult nectar source). Each stage of the bleached sandhill 
skipper's life cycle relies on saltgrass (Austin 1987, p. 8). The 
density or cover of saltgrass needed for the bleached sandhill skipper 
is unknown. The quality (health) of saltgrass is important during the 
larval stage as green plants are more nutritious (due to increased 
moisture content) and likely more edible. Because rabbitbrushes are the 
primary nectar plants for adults (Austin 1987, p. 8; Stantec 2020, p. 
125), they are essential for reproduction and survival of bleached 
sandhill skippers.
    All life stages--egg, larvae, pupae, and adult--require suitable 
microclimate, including suitable temperatures and moisture levels. 
Bleached sandhill skippers are poikilothermic, meaning that their body 
temperature is controlled by ambient temperature, which controls 
critical physiological functions and behaviors, such as respiration, 
immunity, metabolism, growth and development, fecundity, flight 
ability, dispersal, oviposition, feeding, and diapause. Moisture 
conditions are also an important determinant of survival, especially in 
desert areas. The optimal range of temperature and moisture levels is 
unknown for bleached sandhill skipper (see ``Climate Change'' below), 
but as a desert occupant, it likely experiences conditions close to its 
upper thermal and moisture limits under normal conditions (Service 
2024, pp. 21-23). Studies from a number of other insects, including 
butterflies, across broad geographic areas show significant fitness 
(growth, development, fecundity, and survival) consequences as 
temperatures exceed upper thermal limits (Service 2024, pp. 17-19). 
Although the optimal range of temperature for bleached sandhill skipper 
is unknown, based on studies conducted for other butterfly species, 
substantial fitness consequences (reproduction and survival) are likely 
triggered when temperatures exceed 35-41 degrees Celsius (C) (95- 105 
degrees Fahrenheit (F)) (Service 2024, pp. 17-19, 49-51).
    Bleached sandhill skipper populations, owing to their 
poikilothermic physiology, can experience large swings in abundance 
year-to-year in response to environmental conditions. Thus, to 
successfully recruit over time, populations need to be large (thousands 
of individuals) and maintain robust growth rates ([lambda] >1.0). 
Populations also require large sizes and gene flow to maintain genetic 
health and evolutionary potential. Bleached sandhill skipper 
populations also require high quality and quantity of habitat to 
support a robust demography. The amount of habitat required is unknown, 
but we know that suitable habitat means non-senescing patches of 
saltgrass and rabbitbrushes embedded within a healthy alkali meadow 
vegetation community with few dispersal barriers.

Threats

    The main threats affecting the bleached sandhill skipper are 
related to warming and drying conditions due to climate change and 
exacerbated by groundwater pumping. We also evaluated existing 
regulatory mechanisms and ongoing conservation measures. In the SSA 
report, we considered additional threats: livestock grazing and 
potential impacts from future geothermal development. We concluded 
that, as indicated by the best available scientific and commercial 
information, these additional threats individually are having no to 
minor impact, but the effects could be intensified through synergistic 
interactions among all threats. For full descriptions of all threats 
and how they impact the bleached sandhill skipper, please see the SSA 
report (Service 2024, pp. 29-56).
Climate Change
    Bleached sandhill skipper fitness is tightly controlled by the 
microclimate (temperature and moisture) experienced by individuals and 
the quality and quantity of habitat resources (nectar resources and 
hostplants) (Service 2024, pp. 11-19). Changes in the microclimate 
conditions and the quality of their habitat, therefore, directly and 
indirectly influence critical processes such as adult flight ability 
and timing, reproductive behavior, fecundity, oviposition, feeding, 
development, and diapause (Palumbo 2011, entire; Caldas 2012, entire). 
Furthermore, the bleached sandhill skipper is a desert occupant, likely 
living close to its upper thermal limits under normal conditions, 
leaving little buffer for accommodating warming and drying conditions.
    The climate within bleached sandhill skipper range has been drying 
and warming over the last several decades. The Southwest region where 
the bleached sandhill skipper occurs is one of the hottest and driest 
areas of the United States, and climate change has exacerbated these 
conditions. Average annual temperatures have increased almost 1.1 
degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (2.0 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)) over the 
last century (Garfin et al. 2014, p. 464). Every part of the Southwest 
experienced higher average temperatures between 2000 and 2020 than the 
long-term average (1895-2020) (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 
2023, p. 3). Within the last decade (comparing 2010-2019 to 1958-2009) 
in Humboldt County, Nevada, the average annual number of days where the 
maximum

[[Page 1427]]

temperature exceeded the 35 [deg]C (95 [deg]F) thermal limit of 
bleached sandhill skipper, increased by 2 days (21 versus 23 days) and 
1.5 days (3 versus 4.5 days) for 38 [deg]C (100 [deg]F). During the 
years (2020-2022), the average annual number of days where the maximum 
temperature exceeded 35 [deg]C (95 [deg]F) increased from the 
historical average by 15 days, with 5 and 10 days in fall and summer, 
respectively, and 38 [deg]C (100 [deg]F) was exceeded for 3 days, with 
2 days in fall and one day in summer (Service 2024, pp. 47-50).
    Temperatures are increasing more at night than during the day and 
more in winter than in summer, leading to fewer cold snaps, more 
heatwaves, fewer frosty days and nights, less snow, and earlier 
snowmelt (Stewart et al. 2005, p. 1152; Mote et al. 2006, entire; 
Knowles et al. 2006, p. 4557; Abatzoglou and Kolden 2013, entire; 
Snyder et al. 2019, p. 3; Service 2024, p. 49). Both daytime high 
temperatures and nighttime low temperatures have exhibited widespread 
warming trends (Garfin et al. 2013, pp. 79-80; Service 2024, p. 49). In 
recent decades, reductions in precipitation and winter snowpack--key 
sources of moisture--have been observed (Garfin et al. 2014, p. 465). 
Since 2001, large portions of the arid Southwest have experienced 
prolonged drought, with widespread drought occurring in 2002, 2003, 
2007, and 2009 (MacDonald 2010, p. 21256). During these years, the 
region's precipitation averaged as much as 22-25 percent below the 
20th-century mean, with local deficits being greater (MacDonald 2010, 
p. 21256; Service 2024, pp. 49-53). Based on the long-term Palmer 
Drought Severity Index, drought conditions in the Southwest have varied 
since 1895 (EPA 2023, p. 3; Service 2024, p. 46) and since 1990, the 
Southwest has seen some of the most persistent droughts on record 
(Garfin et al 2013, p. 84).
    The warming and drying conditions are also likely impacting the 
quality of bleached sandhill skipper habitat, specifically causing 
early senescence or loss of saltgrass and rabbitbrushes, although the 
extent to which this situation is occurring is unknown. Given the 
subspecies' limited dispersal ability (Service 2024, p. 12), low 
genetic diversity (Jahner 2023, pp. 3-4), inflexible thermal limits, 
and narrow diet, bleached sandhill skippers likely lack the capacity to 
timely and sufficiently adapt to warming temperatures and drying 
conditions.
Groundwater Pumping
    Bleached sandhill skippers are found across two different 
groundwater basins. The Pueblo Slough and Rincon Creek populations are 
found within Continental Lake Valley groundwater basin, and the Gridley 
Lake population is found within Gridley Lake Valley groundwater basin 
(Service 2024, pp. 31-39). Pumping of groundwater occurs in these 
basins for many uses, but the vast majority is for irrigation of 
agricultural crops (Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) 2023a, p. 
1; NDWR 2023b, p. 1). Groundwater pumping that exceeds aquifer recharge 
may result in surface or groundwater level decline, spring drying and 
degradation, or the loss of aquatic habitat (Zektser et al. 2005, pp. 
396-397; Aldous and Gannett 2021, p. 10). Saltgrass and rabbitbrushes 
are groundwater-dependent species with shallow root systems. Because of 
their shallow root systems, they can be harmed by long-term declining 
or fluctuating water tables (Groeneveld 1994, entire; Manning 1999, 
entire; Elmore et al. 2006, pp. 775-776; Patten et al. 2008, p. 8). 
With declining water tables, as the depth to groundwater increases, the 
ability of shallow roots to access this water resource is affected. A 
long-term decline in groundwater supply may shift the vegetative 
community from groundwater-dependent plants to more upland species that 
rely on precipitation rather than groundwater (Patten et al. 2008, p. 
10) or to successional dead-ends where further disturbance results in 
bare soils dominated by nonnative species (Manning 1999, p. 236).
    Groundwater pumping for irrigation occurs hydrologically upgradient 
from all three populations. Increasing depth-to-groundwater levels have 
been documented for several groundwater wells upgradient of the Pueblo 
Slough population (Service 2024, pp. 31-38). Although there are no 
wells upgradient of the other two populations with sufficient data to 
determine trends, the increasing depth-to-groundwater trend near Pueblo 
Slough, coupled with an analysis of normalized vegetation difference 
index (NVDI) data (a measure of vegetation health; higher values mean 
more dense and green vegetation) adjusted for climate variability, 
suggests a drying of the groundwater- dependent vegetation communities 
across the two water basins where bleached sandhill skipper are found. 
These data suggest that pumping is currently contributing to increasing 
the depth-to-groundwater levels at Pueblo Slough and Gridley Lake and 
drying of the groundwater-dependent vegetation (Service 2024, pp. 31-
38). Gridley Lake Valley groundwater basin (where the Gridley Lake 
population is located) is currently appropriated and pumped above 
perennial yield, which is consistent with this assessment. Continental 
Lake Valley groundwater basin (where Rincon Creek and Pueblo Slough 
populations are located) is close to fully appropriated and pumped 
around 25 percent of perennial yield. Our assessment of the available 
data clearly indicates that, despite being pumped below perennial yield 
in this valley, the increasing depth-to-groundwater trend is still 
being realized (Service 2024, pp. 38-39).
    In the near-term (years 2020-2029), continued and/or increased 
groundwater pumping is projected, which will continue to increase the 
depth to groundwater, impairing the ability of saltgrass and 
rabbitbrushes to connect with the water table (due to shallow root 
systems) (Service 2024, p. 65). Thus, we anticipate that continued 
groundwater pumping, coupled with the impacts of climate change, will 
continue to cause drying of these areas such that they will no longer 
support a vegetation community needed to support bleached sandhill 
skipper populations.

Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms

    The Nevada Department of Wildlife and the Nevada Department of 
Conservation and Natural Resources do not have authority to manage or 
conserve terrestrial invertebrates such as the bleached sandhill 
skipper. Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) section 501.110 outlines the 
``Classification of Wildlife'' in Nevada and lists the Nevada 
Department of Wildlife as having authority over wild mammals, wild 
birds, fish, reptiles, amphibians, mollusks, and crustaceans but does 
not mention insects. The Nevada Department of Agriculture has statutory 
authority over insects that are ``normally considered to be a pest of 
cultivated plants, uncultivated plants, agricultural commodities, 
horticultural products or nursery stock, or that the Director [of the 
Department of Agriculture] declares to be a pest'' (NRS section 
555.005(5)). Because the bleached sandhill skipper is not an 
agricultural pest, it is functionally unmanaged by any State agency.
    The bleached sandhill skipper has been placed on Nevada's list of 
``at-risk species'' by the Nevada Division of Natural Heritage (Nevada 
Division of Natural Heritage 2022, p. 16). However, species included on 
the At[hyphen]Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List are not provided any 
protections by the State (Nevada Division of Natural Heritage 2022, p. 
1). The bleached sandhill skipper is considered a BLM Sensitive

[[Page 1428]]

Species in Nevada (BLM 2017, p. 24). BLM Sensitive Species are 
``species requiring special management consideration to promote their 
conservation and reduce the likelihood and need for future listing 
under the Act'' (BLM 2008, p. 3). Beyond the Sensitive Species 
designation, other BLM regulations do not provide protections for the 
bleached sandhill skipper. The BLM Winnemucca District Resources 
Management Plan requires that proposed actions on BLM land do not 
affect a species in such a way that it may lead to further listing 
under the Act (BLM 2013, p. 34). This is the only regulatory mechanism 
providing any level of protection for the bleached sandhill skipper.

Cumulative Effects

    We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of 
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have 
analyzed the cumulative effects of identified threats and conservation 
actions on the subspecies. To assess the current and future condition 
of the subspecies, we evaluate the effects of all the relevant factors 
that may be influencing the subspecies, including threats and 
conservation efforts. Because the SSA framework considers not just the 
presence of the factors, but to what degree they collectively influence 
risk to the entire subspecies, our assessment integrates the cumulative 
effects of the factors and replaces a standalone cumulative-effects 
analysis.

Current and Near-Term Conditions

    Since 2010, periodic standardized surveys (visual encounter 
techniques resulting in numbers of individuals counted) have been 
conducted at Pueblo Slough (Service and BLM 2014, entire; Service and 
BLM 2022, entire); count data are available for 6 out of the last 10 
years (figure 2). At Pueblo Slough, bleached sandhill skipper counts 
have steeply declined since 2014, with counts decreasing from an 
estimated 7,482 individuals in 2014 to an estimate of 245 individuals 
in 2023 (figure 2). Prior to 2014, bleached sandhill skipper numbers 
were suggested to be in the thousands, but this information is 
anecdotal as standardized surveys were not conducted before that time. 
Although the count data do not provide an abundance estimate, the 
decline from thousands of butterflies to hundreds of butterflies 
indicates that the population size is now much smaller, approximately 
97 percent less than it had been in 2014. Thus, these data also suggest 
a declining population trend.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JA25.008

Figure 2--Number of Individuals Counted During Standardized Transect 
Surveys at Pueblo Slough

(Stantec 2015, p. 14; Stantec 2016, p. 9; Stantec 2020, p. 10; Arid 
West 2022, p. 10; Arid West 2023, p. 11; Stantec 2023, p. 2. Trend 
line: linear model in R using Tidyverse, ggplot2, and Viridis 
packages.)

    From Gridley Lake, we have only 1 year of count data (from 2023), 
and the number of bleached sandhill skippers counted was low (313 
individuals). Similarly, we have only 1 year of count data (from 2015) 
from Rincon Creek, and the number of bleached sandhill skippers counted 
there was also low (78 individuals). Therefore, data are not available 
to discern population trends for either Gridley Lake or Rincon Creek 
populations.
    Data are too limited to assess whether the extent and health of 
saltgrass and rabbitbrushes have changed over time at all three 
populations. However, NVDI data suggest that the health of the 
vegetation community has declined at Pueblo Slough and Gridley Lake and 
this trend is expected to continue into the near-term.
    The steep decline in bleached sandhill skipper population counts 
coupled with recent studies implicating climate change as the cause of 
butterfly declines in the Southwestern United States (Crossley et al. 
2021, p. 2,707; Forister et al. 2021, p. 1,044) suggest that climate 
change is a key driver in bleached sandhill population dynamics at 
Pueblo Slough. Given the regional extent of climate change, it is 
likely that it is a key driver of the population dynamics at Gridley 
Lake and Rincon Creek populations as well. Taken together with the 
magnitude of warming and drying that has occurred in the last couple of 
decades, it can be reasonably discerned that climate change and 
groundwater pumping is having negative impacts on all three bleached 
sandhill skipper populations.
Current and Near-Term Condition Summary
    Bleached sandhill skipper viability requires multiple, resilient 
populations (high abundance and strong growth rates). Until recently, 
bleached sandhill skipper populations appeared to have sufficient 
abundances and growth rates to withstand unfavorable environmental 
conditions despite its narrow geographic range (low redundancy) and 
seemingly low representation (owing to the limited ability to shift its 
range and its low within and among population genetic diversity). 
However, over the

[[Page 1429]]

last 10 years, bleached sandhill skipper abundance has been declining 
at Pueblo Slough, due to climate change and groundwater pumping. 
Gridley Lake and Rincon Creek populations, because of their proximity 
to Pueblo Slough, are likely experiencing and responding similarly to 
rising temperatures and drying conditions. Thus, given its overall 
declining population health (low number of individuals, deteriorating 
habitat conditions), the subspecies is considered to have low 
resiliency.
    Because the subspecies is limited to a relatively small area (three 
populations within an approximately 14-mile (22-kilometer) area), and 
because all three populations are considered to have low resiliency, 
the subspecies is considered to have little redundancy. A single 
catastrophic event, such as a severe drought or heat wave, could result 
in the extinction of the subspecies. Additionally, given the 
subspecies' narrow range and limited to no dispersal capabilities, we 
consider the subspecies to have low representation, and we do not 
expect any significant changes in behavioral, ecological, or genetic 
variation.
    Within the near-term (by 2029), the synergistic effects of climate 
change and groundwater pumping are projected to intensify, further 
reducing the bleached sandhill skipper's ability to sustain itself, 
while concurrently impairing the subspecies' ability to withstand 
stochasticity and catastrophic events. Moreover, current and near-term 
declining population health will further constrain the bleached 
sandhill skipper's low representation, thereby exacerbating declines in 
the subspecies' resiliency and redundancy over time.

Future Condition

    As part of the SSA, we also developed three future-condition 
scenarios to capture the range of uncertainties regarding future 
threats and the projected responses by the bleached sandhill skipper. 
Our scenarios assumed a moderate to major increase in the warming and 
drying conditions within bleached sandhill skipper habitats, due to 
climate change and the synergistic effects of continued or enhanced 
groundwater pumping activities. Because we determined that the current 
condition of the bleached sandhill skipper is consistent with an 
endangered species (see Determination of Bleached Sandhill Skipper 
Status, below), we are not presenting the results of the future 
scenarios in this proposed rule. Please refer to the SSA report 
(Service 2024, pp. 58-81) for the full analysis of future scenarios.

Determination of the Bleached Sandhill Skipper Status

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining 
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a 
threatened species. The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a 
species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range and a ``threatened species'' as a species likely to become 
an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we determine 
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a 
threatened species because of any of the following factors: (A) The 
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its 
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, 
scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the 
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or 
manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
    We presented summary evaluations of the primary threats analyzed in 
the SSA report including climate change (Factor E) and groundwater 
pumping (Factor A). We also evaluated existing regulatory mechanisms 
(Factor D) and ongoing conservation measures. In the SSA report, we 
also considered additional threats: livestock grazing (Factor A) and 
geothermal development (Factor A). We concluded that, as indicated by 
the best available scientific and commercial information, livestock 
grazing and geothermal development currently have no impact to minor 
impacts on the bleached sandhill skipper and its habitat and, thus, the 
overall effect of these activities now and into the near-term is 
expected to be minimal. However, we consider each of these factors in 
the determination for the subspecies, because although they may have 
low impacts on their own, combined with impacts of other threats, they 
could further reduce the already low number of bleached sandhill 
skippers.

Status Throughout All of Its Range

    After evaluating threats to the subspecies and assessing the 
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1) 
factors, we have determined that the bleached sandhill skipper has 
limited resiliency, redundancy, and representation to maintain 
viability over time. Since 2014, counts of bleached sandhill skipper 
have been declining at Pueblo Slough, due to climate change and 
exacerbated by groundwater pumping. Gridley Lake and Rincon Creek 
populations have limited population data, but because of their 
proximity to Pueblo Slough, they are likely experiencing and responding 
similarly to warming temperatures and drying conditions. Because the 
subspecies is limited to a relatively small area (three populations 
within an approximately 14-mile (22-kilometer) area), the subspecies is 
considered to have little redundancy. A single catastrophic event, such 
as a severe drought or heat wave, could result in the extinction of the 
subspecies. Additionally, given the subspecies' narrow range and 
limited to no dispersal capabilities, we consider the subspecies to 
have low representation, and we do not expect any significant changes 
in behavioral, ecological, or genetic variation.
    Within the near-term (by 2029), the synergistic effects of climate 
change and groundwater pumping are projected to intensify, further 
reducing the bleached sandhill skipper's ability to sustain itself, 
while concurrently impairing the subspecies' ability to withstand 
stochasticity and catastrophic events. Moreover, current and near-term 
declining population health will further constrain the bleached 
sandhill skipper's seemingly low evolutionary potential, thereby 
exacerbating declines in the subspecies' resiliency and redundancy over 
time.
    With declining population health (low number of individuals, 
deteriorating habitat conditions) coupled with its small geographic 
range, the subspecies currently has limited ability to withstand 
inherent stochasticity (environmental, demographic, and genetic), 
catastrophic events (e.g., heat waves and droughts), and changing 
environmental conditions (e.g., chronic increases in temperatures, 
drying conditions). Thus, extirpation risks at all three populations 
are expected to continue and increase in the near-term.
    We do not find the bleached sandhill skipper meets the definition 
of a threatened species because the subspecies currently has a low 
number of individuals, has already shown population declines resulting 
in low resiliency of its populations, and has deteriorating habitat 
conditions driven or exacerbated by the identified threats. Because the 
bleached sandhill skipper has low redundancy and representation is 
limited, the subspecies is vulnerable to even a single catastrophic 
heat wave or drought event. Thus, after assessing the best scientific 
and commercial data available, we conclude that the bleached

[[Page 1430]]

sandhill skipper is currently in danger of extinction throughout all of 
its range.

Status Throughout a Significant Portion of Its Range

    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may 
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or likely to become so 
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range. We have determined that the bleached sandhill skipper is 
in danger of extinction throughout all of its range and accordingly did 
not undertake an analysis of any significant portion of its range. 
Because the bleached sandhill skipper warrants listing as endangered 
throughout all of its range, our determination does not conflict with 
the decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. Everson, 435 F. 
Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2020), because that decision related to significant 
portion of the range analyses for species that warrant listing as 
threatened, not endangered, throughout all of their range.

Determination of Status

    Our review of the best available scientific and commercial 
information indicates that the bleached sandhill skipper meets the 
definition of an endangered species. Therefore, we propose to list the 
bleached sandhill skipper as an endangered species in accordance with 
sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act.

Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or 
threatened species under the Act include recognition as a listed 
species, planning and implementation of recovery actions, requirements 
for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain practices. 
Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and 
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, foreign 
governments, private organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages 
cooperation with the States and other countries and calls for recovery 
actions to be carried out for listed species. The protection required 
by Federal agencies, including the Service, and the prohibitions 
against certain activities are discussed, in part, below.
    The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered 
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The 
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these 
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of 
the Act. Section 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop and 
implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and 
threatened species. The goal of this process is to restore listed 
species to a point where they are secure, self- sustaining, and 
functioning components of their ecosystems.
    The recovery planning process begins with development of a recovery 
outline made available to the public soon after a final listing 
determination. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation 
of urgent recovery actions while a recovery plan is being developed. 
Recovery teams (composed of species experts, Federal and State 
agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and stakeholders) may be 
established to develop and implement recovery plans. The recovery 
planning process involves the identification of actions that are 
necessary to halt and reverse the species' decline by addressing the 
threats to its survival and recovery. The recovery plan identifies 
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for 
reclassification from endangered to threatened (``downlisting'') or 
removal from protected status (``delisting'') and methods for 
monitoring recovery progress. Recovery plans also establish a framework 
for agencies to coordinate their recovery efforts and provide estimates 
of the cost of implementing recovery tasks. Revisions of the plan may 
be done to address continuing or new threats to the species, as new 
substantive information becomes available. The recovery outline, draft 
recovery plan, final recovery plan, and any revisions will be available 
on our website as they are completed (https://www.fws.gov/program/endangered-species), or from our Reno Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the 
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal 
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, 
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat 
restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research, captive 
propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The 
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on 
Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-
Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires 
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands.
    If this subspecies is listed, funding for recovery actions will be 
available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State 
programs, and cost-share grants for non-Federal landowners, the 
academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition, 
pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the State of Nevada would be eligible 
for Federal funds to implement management actions that promote the 
protection or recovery of the bleached sandhill skipper. Information on 
our grant programs that are available to aid species recovery can be 
found at: https://www.fws.gov/service/financial-assistance.
    Although the bleached sandhill skipper is only proposed for listing 
under the Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in 
participating in recovery efforts for this subspecies. Additionally, we 
invite you to submit any new information on this subspecies whenever it 
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery 
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Section 7 of the Act is titled, ``Interagency Cooperation,'' and it 
mandates all Federal action agencies to use their existing authorities 
to further the conservation purposes of the Act and ensure that their 
actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed 
species or adversely modify critical habitat. Regulations implementing 
section 7 are codified at 50 CFR part 402.
    Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal action agency shall, in 
consultation with the Secretary, ensure that any action they authorize, 
fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence 
of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of designated critical habitat. Each Federal agency shall 
review its action at the earliest possible time to determine whether it 
may affect listed species or critical habitat. If a determination is 
made that the action may affect listed species or critical habitat, 
formal consultation is required (50 CFR 402.14(a)), unless the Service 
concurs in writing that the action is not likely to adversely affect 
listed species or critical habitat. At the end of a formal 
consultation, the Service issues a biological opinion, containing its 
determination of whether the Federal action is likely to result in 
jeopardy or adverse modification.
    In contrast, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies 
to confer with the Service on any action which is likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under the 
Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat proposed to be designated for such species. Although the 
conference procedures are required

[[Page 1431]]

only when an action is likely to result in jeopardy or adverse 
modification, action agencies may voluntarily confer with the Service 
on actions that may affect species proposed for listing or critical 
habitat proposed to be designated. In the event that the subject 
species is listed or the relevant critical habitat is designated, a 
conference opinion may be adopted as a biological opinion and serve as 
compliance with section 7(a)(2).
    Examples of discretionary actions for the bleached sandhill skipper 
that may be subject to conference and consultation procedures under 
section 7 are land management or other landscape-altering activities on 
Federal lands administered by the BLM, the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service, and the Federal Highway Administration as well as 
actions on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that require a 
Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a 
permit from the Service under section 10 of the Act) or that involve 
some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal Highway 
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency). Federal actions not affecting listed 
species or critical habitat--and actions on State, Tribal, local, or 
private lands that are not federally funded, authorized, or carried out 
by a Federal agency--do not require section 7 consultation. Federal 
agencies should coordinate with the local Service Field Office (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) with any specific questions on section 7 
consultation and conference requirements.
    The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of 
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife. 
The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, and the Service's 
implementing regulations codified at 50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for 
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to commit, 
to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit or to cause to be 
committed any of the following acts with regard to any endangered 
wildlife: (1) import into, or export from, the United States; (2) take 
(which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 
capture, or collect) within the United States, within the territorial 
sea of the United States, or on the high seas; (3) possess, sell, 
deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, any such 
wildlife that has been taken illegally; (4) deliver, receive, carry, 
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce, by any means 
whatsoever and in the course of commercial activity; or (5) sell or 
offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce. Certain exceptions to 
these prohibitions apply to employees or agents of the Service, the 
National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management 
agencies, and State conservation agencies.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations 
governing permits for endangered wildlife are codified at 50 CFR 17.22, 
and general Service permitting regulations are codified at 50 CFR part 
13. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued: for 
scientific purposes, for enhancing the propagation or survival of the 
species, or for take incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The 
statute also contains certain exemptions from the prohibitions, which 
are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.

II. Critical Habitat

Background

    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires that, to the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, we designate a species' critical habitat 
concurrently with listing the species. Critical habitat is defined in 
section 3 of the Act as:
    (1) 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
    (a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
    (b) Which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and
    (2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas 
are essential for the conservation of the species.
    Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area 
occupied by the species as an area that may generally be delineated 
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e., 
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part 
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (e.g., 
migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically, 
but not solely by vagrant individuals).
    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use 
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring 
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures 
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and 
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated 
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law 
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live 
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where 
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise 
relieved, may include regulated taking.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the requirement that each Federal action agency ensure, in 
consultation with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or 
carry out is not likely to result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of designated critical habitat. The designation of 
critical habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, 
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such 
designation also does not allow the government or public to access 
private lands. Such designation does not require implementation of 
restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by non-Federal 
landowners. Rather, designation requires that, where a landowner 
requests Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may 
affect an area designated as critical habitat, the Federal agency 
consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. If the 
action may affect the listed species itself (such as for occupied 
critical habitat), the Federal agency would have already been required 
to consult with the Service even absent the designation because of the 
requirement to ensure that the action is not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of the species. Even if the Service were to 
conclude after consultation that the proposed activity is likely to 
result in destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat, 
the Federal action agency and the landowner are not required to abandon 
the proposed activity, or to restore or recover the species; instead, 
they must implement ``reasonable and prudent alternatives'' to avoid 
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
    Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, 
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time 
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they 
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the 
conservation of the

[[Page 1432]]

species and (2) which may require special management considerations or 
protection. For these areas, critical habitat designations identify, to 
the extent known using the best scientific data available, those 
physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation 
of the species (such as space, food, cover, and protected habitat).
    Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, 
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical 
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a 
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the 
species.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on 
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on 
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in 
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information 
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), 
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria, 
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions 
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our 
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of 
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources 
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical 
habitat.
    When we are determining which areas should be designated as 
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the 
information compiled in the SSA report and information developed during 
the listing process for the species. Additional information sources may 
include any generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or outline 
that may have been developed for the species; the recovery plan for the 
species; articles in peer-reviewed journals; conservation plans 
developed by States and counties; scientific status surveys and 
studies; biological assessments; other unpublished materials; or 
experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
    Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another 
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a 
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that 
we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. 
For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that 
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed 
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the 
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical 
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation 
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) regulatory 
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act 
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened 
species; and (3) the prohibitions found in section 9 of the Act. 
Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside 
their designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy 
findings in some cases. These protections and conservation tools will 
continue to contribute to recovery of the species. Similarly, critical 
habitat designations made on the basis of the best available 
information at the time of designation will not control the direction 
and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans, or 
other species conservation planning efforts if new information 
available at the time of those planning efforts calls for a different 
outcome.

Critical Habitat Determinability

    Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat 
is not determinable when one or both of the following situations exist:
    (i) Data sufficient to perform required analyses are lacking, or
    (ii) The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well 
known to identify any area that meets the definition of ``critical 
habitat.''
    We reviewed the available information pertaining to the biological 
needs of the bleached sandhill skipper and habitat characteristics 
where the subspecies is located. A careful assessment of the economic 
impacts that may occur due to a critical habitat designation is still 
ongoing, and we are in the process of acquiring the complex information 
needed to perform that assessment. Therefore, due to the current lack 
of data sufficient to perform required analyses, we conclude that the 
designation of critical habitat for the bleached sandhill skipper is 
not determinable at this time. The Act allows the Service an additional 
year to publish a critical habitat designation that is not determinable 
at the time of listing (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)).

Required Determinations

Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and E.O. 12988 and 
by the Presidential memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in 
plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us 
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For 
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs 
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, 
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994 
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments; 59 FR 22951, May 4, 1994), E.O. 13175 (Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), the President's 
memorandum of November 30, 2022 (Uniform Standards for Tribal 
Consultation; 87 FR 74479, December 5, 2022), and the Department of the 
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with federally recognized 
Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) on a government-to-
government basis. In accordance with Secretaries' Order 3206 of June 5, 
1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily 
acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with Tribes in 
developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that Tribal 
lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to 
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available 
to Tribes. We will work with Tribal entities during the future 
development of a proposed rule for the designation of critical habitat 
for the bleached sandhill skipper.

[[Page 1433]]

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from 
the Reno Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of 
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Species Assessment Team and the Reno 
Fish and Wildlife Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter 
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, 
unless otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec.  17.11, in paragraph (h), amend the List of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife by adding an entry for ``Skipper, bleached 
sandhill'' in alphabetical order under INSECTS to read as follows:

Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Listing citations and
          Common name             Scientific name        Where listed          Status        applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Insects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Skipper, bleached sandhill.....  Polites sabuleti   Wherever found........  E             [Federal Register
                                  sinemaculata.                                            citation when
                                                                                           published as a final
                                                                                           rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-31761 Filed 1-7-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
```