[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 27, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40186-40189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15497]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[FF09E21000 FXES11110900000212]


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

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

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

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90-
day findings on two petitions to add species to the Lists of Endangered 
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants and one petition to remove a species 
(``delist'') under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions to list the 
Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni) and western ridged 
mussel (Gonidea angulata) present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. 
Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we 
plan to initiate status reviews of these species to determine whether 
the petitioned actions are warranted. We find that the petition to 
delist the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) does not 
present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating the 
petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, we are not initiating a 
status review of the species. To ensure that the status reviews are 
comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and 
other information regarding the species and factors that may affect 
their status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month 
petition findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned 
actions are warranted, in accordance with the Act.

DATES: These findings were made on July 27, 2021. As we commence our 
status reviews, we seek any new information concerning the status of, 
or threats to, the species or their habitats. Any information we 
receive during the course of our status reviews will be considered.

ADDRESSES: 
    Supporting documents: Summaries of the basis for the petition 
findings contained in this document are available on http://www.regulations.gov under the appropriate docket number (see table 
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In addition, this

[[Page 40187]]

supporting information is available by contacting the appropriate 
person, as specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or 
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the species 
for which we are initiating status reviews, please provide those data 
or information by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the appropriate docket 
number (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Then, click on the 
``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may submit 
information by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your information will 
fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information 
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate 
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach 
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a 
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments 
Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate docket number; see table under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send information only by the methods described 
above. We will post all information we receive on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Species common name                                         Contact person
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Archipelago wolf.............................  Douglass Cooper, Ecological Services Branch Chief,
                                                          Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 907-
                                                          271-1467, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cb8fa4beaca7aab8b89488a4a4bbaeb98badbcb8e5aca4bd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="88cce7fdefe4e9fbfbd7cbe7e7f8edfac8eefffba6efe7fe">[email protected]</span></a>.
Golden-cheeked warbler.................................  Adam Zerrener, Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological
                                                          Services Field Office, 512-490-0057 x248,
                                                          <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7a3b1e1b1725201f08081f14141f083a1c0d09541d150c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="105174717d4f4a756262757e7e7562507667633e777f66">[email protected]</span></a>.
Western ridged mussel..................................  Paul Henson, State Supervisor, Portland Ecological
                                                          Services Field Office, 503-231-6179,
                                                          <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c3b3a2b6af9caba6adb0acad83a5b4b0eda4acb5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="334352465f6c5b565d405c5d735544401d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call the 
Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species 
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists or List) in 50 CFR part 17. 
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on 
whether a petition to add a species to the List (i.e., ``list'' a 
species), remove a species from the List (i.e., ``delist'' a species), 
or change a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or 
from threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, 
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the 
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
    Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial 
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to credible 
scientific or commercial information in support of the petition's 
claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific 
review would conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be 
warranted (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i); before 2016, 50 CFR 424.14(b)).
    A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a 
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described 
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors 
are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes (Factor B);
    (c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); 
and
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence (Factor E).

These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused 
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued 
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for 
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as 
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative 
effects or may have positive effects.
    We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or 
conditions that are known to, or are reasonably likely to, affect 
individuals of a species negatively. The term ``threat'' includes 
actions or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct 
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration 
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat'' 
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action 
or condition, or the action or condition itself. However, the mere 
identification of any threat(s) may not be sufficient to compel a 
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information 
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information 
presented in the petition must include evidence sufficient to suggest 
that these threats may be affecting the species to the point that the 
species may meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened 
species under the Act.
    If we find that a petition presents such information, our 
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by 
considering the individual-, population-, and species-level effects and 
the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual 
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the 
cumulative effect of the threats on the species as a whole. We also 
consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions 
and conditions that are expected to have positive effects on the 
species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this 
cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate 
them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable 
future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition 
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act.

[[Page 40188]]

    If we find that a petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted, the Act requires that we promptly commence a review of the 
status of the species, and we will subsequently complete a status 
review in accordance with our prioritization methodology for 12-month 
findings (81 FR 49248; July 27, 2016).

Summaries of Petition Findings

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

                                              Table--Status Reviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Common name                       Docket No.              URL to docket on http://www.regulations.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Archipelago wolf......  FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147.............  https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147
Golden-cheeked warbler..........  FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062.............  https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062
Western ridged mussel...........  FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150.............  https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evaluation of a Petition To List Alexander Archipelago Wolf

Species and Range
    Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni); Alaska and Canada.
Petition History
    We received a petition on July 15, 2020, dated the same, from the 
Center for Biological Diversity, Alaska Rainforest Defenders, and 
Defenders of Wildlife, requesting that we list the Alexander 
Archipelago wolf as an endangered species or a threatened species and 
designate critical habitat for this species under the Act. The petition 
clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c). This finding addresses the petition.
Finding
    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating the petitioned action may be 
warranted for the Alexander Archipelago wolf due to potential threats 
associated with the following: Logging and road development (Factor A); 
illegal and legal trapping and hunting (Factor B); the effects of 
climate change (Factor E); and loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding 
depression (Factor E).
    The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information 
regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at 
http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R7-ES-2020-0147 under 
the Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To Delist Golden-Cheeked Warbler

Species and Range
    Golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia = Setophaga 
chrysoparia); Texas, Mexico (Chiapas), and Central America (Guatemala, 
Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador).
Petition History
    On December 27, 1990, the Service published in the Federal Register 
(55 FR 53153) a final rule to list the golden-cheeked warbler as an 
endangered species. On June 30, 2015, we received a petition dated June 
29, 2015, from Nancie G. Marzulla (Marzulla Law, LLC--Washington, DC) 
and Robert Henneke (Texas Public Policy Foundation--Austin, TX) 
requesting that we remove the golden-cheeked warbler from the Federal 
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (``delist'' the species) due 
to recovery or error in information. The petition clearly identified 
itself as such and included the requisite identification information 
for the petitioner, required at now 50 CFR 424.14(c) (before 2016, 50 
CFR 424.14(a)).
    On December 11, 2015, we received supplemental information from the 
petitioners that included additional published studies and an 
unpublished report. These studies, as well as others known to the 
Service and in our files at the time the supplement was received, were 
considered, as appropriate. On June 3, 2016, we published in the 
Federal Register (81 FR 35698) our finding that the petition did not 
provide substantial scientific or commercial information indicating 
that the petition action may be warranted.
    The General Land Office of Texas (GLO) challenged our June 3, 2016, 
negative 90-day finding on the petition to delist. The District Court 
found in favor of the Service. The GLO appealed the June 3, 2016, 90-
day finding that decision, and the Circuit Court vacated and remanded 
it to the Service. This finding addresses the petition in response to 
the court's decision.
Finding
    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition does not present substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating the petitioned action 
may be warranted for the golden-cheeked warbler. Because the petition 
does not present substantial information indicating that delisting the 
golden-cheeked warbler may be warranted, we are not initiating a status 
review of this species in response to this petition. However, we ask 
that the public submit to us any new information that becomes available 
concerning the status of, or threats to, this species or its habitat at 
any time by contacting the appropriate person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT, above.
    The basis for our finding on this petition, and other information 
regarding our review of the petition, can be found as an appendix at 
http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0062 under 
the Supporting Documents section.

Evaluation of a Petition To List Western Ridged Mussel

Species and Range
    Western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulata); California, Oregon, 
Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and the Canadian Province of British 
Columbia.
Petition History
    On August 21, 2020, we received a petition dated August 18, 2020, 
from the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, requesting that 
we list the western ridged mussel as an endangered species and 
designate critical habitat for this species under the Act. The petition 
clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite 
identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 
424.14(c).
Finding
    Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the 
petition, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted for

[[Page 40189]]

the western ridged mussel due to potential threats associated with the 
following: Habitat destruction, modification, and curtailment of range; 
impacts to water quantity, water quality, and natural flow and 
temperature regimes; aquatic invasive species (Factor A); and disease 
(Factor C).
    We find that the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that regulatory mechanisms may be 
inadequate to ameliorate or reduce those threats (Factor D). We 
determined that the petition does not provide substantial documentation 
for the threats of overutilization of the species for commercial, 
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (Factor B) and loss 
of genetic diversity (Factor E). The basis for our finding on this 
petition, and other information regarding our review of the petition, 
can be found as an appendix at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket 
No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0150 under the Supporting Documents section.

Conclusion

    On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the 
petitions under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we 
have determined that the petitions summarized above for Alexander 
Archipelago wolf and western ridged mussel present substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned 
actions may be warranted. We are, therefore, initiating status reviews 
of these species to determine whether the actions are warranted under 
the Act. At the conclusion of the status reviews, we will issue 
findings, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to 
whether the petitioned actions are not warranted, warranted, or 
warranted but precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any 
species is an endangered species or a threatened species. In addition, 
we have determined that the petition summarized above for the golden-
cheeked warbler does not present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. We 
are, therefore, not initiating a status review of this species in 
response to this petition.

Authors

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

Authority

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

Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director Exercising the Delegated Authority of the 
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-15497 Filed 7-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P


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