Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions

AGENCY:

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION:

Notice of review.

SUMMARY:

In this Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), present an updated list of plant and animal species native to the United States that we regard as candidates for or have proposed for addition to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Identification of candidate species can assist environmental planning efforts by providing advance notice of potential listings, allowing landowners and resource managers to alleviate threats and thereby possibly remove the need to list species as endangered or threatened. Even if we subsequently list a candidate species, the early notice provided here could result in more options for species management and recovery by prompting candidate conservation measures to alleviate threats to the species.

The CNOR summarizes the status and threats that we evaluated in order to determine that species qualify as candidates and to assign a listing priority number (LPN) to each species, or to remove species from candidate status. Additional material that we relied on is available in the Species Assessment and Listing Priority Assignment Forms (species assessment forms, previously called candidate forms) for each candidate species.

Overall, this CNOR recognizes 5 new candidates, changes the LPN for 29 candidates, and removes 4 species from candidate status. Combined with other decisions for individual species that were published separately from this CNOR, the new number of species that are candidates for listing is 280.

We request additional status information that may be available for the 280 candidate species identified in this CNOR. We will consider this information in preparing listing documents and future revisions to the notice of review, as it will help us in monitoring changes in the status of candidate species and in management for conserving them. We also request information on additional species that we should consider including as candidates as we prepare future updates of this notice.

This document also includes our findings on resubmitted petitions and describes our progress in revising the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants during the period September 26, 2006, through September 30, 2007.

DATES:

We will accept comments on the most recent Candidate Notice of Review at any time.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments regarding a particular species to the Regional Director of the Region identified in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

as having the lead responsibility for that species. You may mail or fax comments of a more general nature to the Chief, Division of Conservation and Classification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 (facsimile 703/358-2171). Written comments and materials we receive in response to this notice will be available for public inspection by appointment at the Division of Conservation and Classification (for comments of a general nature only) or at the appropriate Regional Office listed in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

.

Species assessment forms with information and references on a particular candidate species' range, status, habitat needs, and listing priority assignment are available for review at the appropriate Regional Office listed below in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

or at the Division of Conservation and Classification, Arlington, Virginia (see address above), or on our Internet Web site (

http://endangered.fws.gov/candidates/index.html

).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

The Endangered Species Coordinator(s) in the appropriate Regional Office(s) or Chris Nolin, Chief, Division of Conservation and Classification (telephone 703-358-2171; facsimile 703-358-1735). Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Candidate Notice of Review

Background

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531

et seq.

) (Act), requires that we identify species of wildlife and plants that are endangered or threatened, based on the best available scientific and commercial information. As defined in section 3 of the Act, an endangered species is any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a threatened species is any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Through the Federal rulemaking process, we add species that meet these definitions to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 CFR 17.12. As part of this program, we maintain a list of species that we regard as candidates for listing. A candidate species is one for which we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened, but for which preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-priority listing actions.

We maintain this list of candidates for a variety of reasons: to notify the public that these species are facing threats to their survival; to provide advance knowledge of potential listings that could affect decisions of environmental planners and developers; to provide information that may stimulate and guide conservation efforts that will remove or reduce threats to these species and possibly make listing unnecessary; to solicit input from interested parties to help us identify those candidate species that may not require protection under the Act or additional species that may require the Act's protections; and to solicit necessary information for setting priorities for preparing listing proposals. We strongly encourage collaborative conservation efforts for candidate species and offer technical and financial assistance to facilitate such efforts. For additional information regarding such assistance, please contact the appropriate Regional Office listed in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

or visit our Internet Web site,

http://endangered.fws.gov/candidates/index.html

.

Previous Notices of Review

We have been publishing candidate notices of review (CNOR) since 1975. The most recent CNOR (prior to this CNOR) was published on September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53755). CNORs published since 1994 are available on our Internet Web site,

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/candidates/index.html

. For copies of CNORs published prior to 1994, please contact the Division of

Conservation and Classification (see

ADDRESSES

section above).

On September 21, 1983, we published guidance for assigning an LPN for each candidate species (48 FR 43098). Using this guidance, we assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to 12, depending on the magnitude of threats, imminence of threats, and taxonomic status; the lower the LPN, the higher the listing priority (that is, a species with an LPN of 1 would have the highest listing priority). Such a priority ranking guidance system is required under section 4(h)(3) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1533(h)(3)). As explained below, in using this system we first categorize based on the magnitude of the threat(s), then by the immediacy of the threat(s), and finally by taxonomic status.

Under this priority ranking guidance system, magnitude of threat can be either “high” or “moderate to low.” This criterion helps ensure that the species facing the greatest threats to their continued existence receive the highest listing priority. It is important to recognize that all candidate species face threats to their continued existence, so the magnitude of threats is in relative terms. When evaluating the magnitude of the threat(s) facing the species, we consider information such as: the number of populations and/or extent of range of the species affected by the threat(s); the biological significance of the affected population(s), taking into consideration the life history characteristics of the species and its current abundance and distribution; whether the threats affect the species in only a portion of its range, and if so the likelihood of persistence of the species in the unaffected portions; and whether the effects are likely to be permanent.

As used in our priority ranking system, immediacy of threat is categorized as either “imminent” or “nonimminent” and is not a measure of how quickly the species is likely to become extinct if the threats are not addressed; rather, immediacy is based on when the threats will begin. If a threat is currently occurring or likely to occur in the very near future, we classify the threat as imminent. Determining the immediacy of threats helps ensure that species facing actual, identifiable threats are given priority for listing proposals over those for which threats are only potential or species intrinsically vulnerable to certain types of threats but not known to be presently facing such threats.

Our priority ranking system has three categories for taxonomic status: Species that are the sole members of a genus; full species (in a genus that has more than one species); and subspecies, distinct population segments of vertebrate species, and species for which listing is appropriate in a significant portion of their range.

The result of the ranking system is that we assign each candidate a listing priority number of 1 to 12. For example, if the threat(s) is of high magnitude, with immediacy classified as imminent, the listable entity is assigned an LPN of 1, 2, or 3 based on its taxonomic status (e.g., if the species is the only member of a genus, it would be assigned to the LPN 1 category, a full species to LPN 2, and a subspecies, DPS, or significant portion of the range to LPN 3). In summary, the LPN ranking system provides a basis for making decisions about the relative priority for preparing a proposed rule to list a given species. No matter which LPN we assign to a species, each species included in this notice as a candidate is one for which we have sufficient information to prepare a proposed rule to list it because it is in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

For more information on the process and standards used in assigning LPNs, a copy of the guidance is available on our Web site at:

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/policy/index.html

. For more information on the LPN assigned to a particular species, the species assessment for each candidate contains the LPN chart and a detailed explanation of the rationale for the determination of the magnitude and imminence of threat(s) and assignment of the LPN; that information is summarized in this CNOR.

This revised notice supersedes all previous animal, plant, and combined candidate notices of review.

Summary of This CNOR

Since publication of the CNOR on September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53756), we reviewed the available information on candidate species to ensure that a proposed listing is justified for each species, and reevaluated the relative LPN assigned to each species. We also evaluated the need to emergency-list any of these species, particularly species with high priorities (i.e., species with LPNs of 1, 2, or 3). This review and reevaluation ensures that we focus conservation efforts on those species at greatest risk first. (In addition to reviewing candidate species, we have worked on numerous findings in response to petitions to list species, and on proposed and final determinations for rules to list species under the Act; some of these findings and determinations have been completed and published in the

Federal Register

, while work on others is still under way. See the discussions of Preclusion and Expeditious Progress, below, for details.)

Based on our review of the best available scientific and commercial information, with this CNOR we identify 5 new candidate species (see

New Candidates

, below), change the LPN for 28 candidates (see Listing Priority Changes in Candidates, below) and determine that listing proposals are not warranted for 4 species and thus remove them from candidate status (see

Candidate Removals

, below). Combined with the other decisions published separately from this CNOR for individual species that previously were candidates, a total of 280 species (including 139 plant and 141 animal species) are now candidates awaiting preparation of rules proposing their listing. These 280 species, along with the 2 species currently proposed for listing, are included in Table 1. (Note, regarding the two species currently proposed for listing, we proposed one since the last CNOR and we proposed the other prior to the last CNOR.)

Table 2 includes 8 species identified in the previous CNOR as either proposed for listing or classified as candidates that are no longer in those categories. This includes four species for which we published separate findings that listing is not warranted, plus the four species that we have determined do not warrant preparation of a rule to propose listing and therefore have removed from candidate status in this CNOR.

New Candidates

Below we present brief summaries of five new candidates that we are recognizing in this CNOR, including one species of mammal, one amphibian, one fish, one snail, and one plant. Complete information, including references, can be found in the species assessment forms. You may obtain a copy of these forms from the Regional Office having the lead for the species, or from our Internet Web site (

http://endangered.fws.gov/candidates/index.html

). For each of these five species, we find that we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened, but that preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-priority listing actions (i.e., these meet our definition of a candidate species). We also note below that one other species, Casey's June beetle (an insect), was identified as a candidate

earlier this year in a separate finding published in the

Federal Register

.

Mammals

New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (

Zapus hudsonius luteus

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. The New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (jumping mouse) is endemic to New Mexico, Arizona, and a small area of southern Colorado. The jumping mouse nests in dry soils but uses moist, streamside, dense riparian/wetland vegetation. Recent genetic studies confirm that the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse is a distinct subspecies from other

Zapus hudsonius

subspecies, confirming the currently accepted subspecies designation.

The threats that have been identified are excessive grazing pressure, water use and management, highway reconstruction, development, and recreation. Surveys conducted in 2005 and 2006 documented a drastic decline in the number of occupied localities and suitable habitat across the range of the species in New Mexico and Arizona. Of the original 98 known historical localities, there are now only 10 known extant localities in New Mexico, 1 in Arizona, and an additional 8 localities that have not been surveyed since the early to mid 1990s. Moreover, the highly fragmented nature of its distribution is also a major contributor to the vulnerability of this species and increases the likelihood of very small, isolated populations being extirpated. The paucity of secure populations, and the destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat, poses the most immediate threats to this species. Because the threats affect the jumping mouse in all but two of the extant localities, the threats are of a high magnitude. These threats are currently occurring and, therefore, are imminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 3 to this subspecies.

Amphibians

Arizona treefrog, Huachuca/Canelo Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (

Hyla wrightorum

)—The following summary is based on information in our files. The population is known from three general localities at Rancho Los Fresnos, northern Sonora, Mexico, and 13-15 verified localities and one unverified locality in the Huachuca Mountains and Canelo Hills of Arizona. The population is both discrete and significant in accordance with our February 7, 1996, DPS policy (61 FR 4721). Evidence exists that the DPS persists in an ecological setting that is unique for the taxon, that loss of the population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon, and that the population segment differs markedly from other populations of the species in its genetic characteristics. The population is discrete from the Mogollon Rim population of Arizona and New Mexico based on a physical separation of 130 miles, and from the Sierra Madre Occidental population in Sonora and Chihuahua, Mexico by 145 miles.

The most significant threats to the existence of the Huachuca/Canelo population of the Arizona treefrog are, in order of importance, habitat loss or degradation and direct mortality due to catastrophic fire; loss of populations due to drought or floods, which may be exacerbated by climatic extremes; predation by introduced species; and habitat degradation caused by livestock grazing, off-highway vehicles, and environmental contamination. The effects of these threats are exacerbated by small population sizes and low genetic diversity, as the Huachuca/Canelo Hills population has less than 20 known localities, each with observed breeding populations of 2-30 individuals. Taken together, these threats are of high magnitude, particularly in Arizona. The threats are also imminent or ongoing, particularly the threat of catastrophic wildfire; there have been several recent catastrophic fires in the Huachuca Mountains. Therefore, we have assigned an LPN of 3 to this population.

Fish

Laurel dace (

Phoxinus saylori

)—The laurel dace is a rare minnow known only from three independent systems on the Walden Ridge section of the Cumberland Plateau, including Soddy Creek, Sale Creek, and Piney River. The primary threats to the laurel dace stem from impacts to riparian and instream habitat resulting from incompatible land uses. The riparian habitats associated with some streams occupied by laurel dace have been affected by extensive timber removal activities on Walden Ridge in their vicinity; these activities often do not employ adequate streamside management zones or best management practices for road construction. Proposed projects, including installation of a water line that would cross occupied streams and construction of an impoundment on a tributary to an occupied stream, present additional direct and indirect threats to laurel dace habitat in the headwaters of Sale and Soddy creeks. We believe that the threat of habitat degradation from siltation across the range of laurel dace and the localized threats facing populations in Sale and Soddy creeks combined with vulnerable status of the populations in Soddy and Sale creeks constitute threats collectively of high magnitude, but are nonimminent. Therefore, we assigned the laurel dace an LPN of 5.

Snails

San Bernardino springsnail (

Pyrgulopsis bernardina

)—This species is endemic to one natural spring, Snail Spring, on private lands, and one artificial spring, Tule Spring, on National Wildlife Refuge lands, in the Rio Yaqui basin of Cochise County, Arizona. The species was formerly known from six to eight springs. Known threats include water diversion, spring modification, and contaminants, while suspected threats include livestock grazing and groundwater depletion. The San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge is actively managing Tule Spring and is attempting to acquire the property containing Snail Spring. However, the Refuge cannot address the potential threat from groundwater depletion without assistance from local stakeholders. The magnitude of threats is high because the limited distribution of this narrow endemic makes any catastrophic event likely to result in extinction of the species. The threats are ongoing and therefore imminent. Thus, we have assigned an LPN of 2 for the San Bernardino springsnail.

Insects

Casey's June beetle (

Dinacoma caseyi

)—We previously announced candidate status for this species in a separate warranted but precluded 12-month petition finding published on July 5, 2007 (72 FR 36635).

Plants

Eriogonum corymbosum

var.

nilesii

(Las Vegas buckwheat)—The following information is based on information contained in our files. The Las Vegas buckwheat is a woody perennial shrub up to 4 feet high with a mounding shape. The flowers of this plant are numerous, small and yellow with small bract like leaves at the base of each flower. The Las Vegas buckwheat is very conspicuous when flowering in late September and early October. It is restricted to gypsum soil outcroppings in Clark and Lincoln Counties, Nevada. Only recently has the taxonomy of the subspecies been confirmed using molecular genetic analyses.

Loss of habitat from development is a significant threat with over 95 percent of the historic range and potential habitat of the subspecies lost to development. In 2005, the Las Vegas

buckwheat was known from nine locations on approximately 1,149 acres. However, since that time, approximately 289 acres were or soon will be developed, and the current distribution of the plant occupies 892 acres. In addition, OHV activity and other public land uses (casual public use, mining, and dumping) directly and indirectly threaten over half of the remaining habitat. To date, regulatory mechanisms to protect the Las Vegas buckwheat are inadequate. Its designation as a BLM special status species and limited resource and law enforcement personnel has not provided adequate protection on lands managed by the BLM. The Las Vegas buckwheat is not protected by the State of Nevada or any other regulatory mechanisms on other federal lands. We have determined that candidate status is warranted for the Las Vegas buckwheat as a result of threats to the remaining 892 acres of Las Vegas buckwheat. Conservation measures are being developed that could reduce the amount of occupied habitat at risk, but we believe it would be premature to consider these measures sufficiently complete as to remove these threats. The magnitude of threats is high since the more significant threats (development and surface mining) would result in direct mortality of the plants in over half of its' habitat. While both development and mining are very likely to occur in the future, they are not expected to happen in the immediate future, and thus, the threats are nonimminent. Accordingly, we assigned the Las Vegas buckwheat an LPN of 6.

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

We reviewed the LPN for all candidate species and are changing the numbers for the following species. Some of the changes reflect actual changes in either the magnitude or imminence of the threats, and in one case, the LPN change reflects a change in the taxonomy of the species. For some species, our changes in the LPN reflect efforts to ensure national consistency as well as closer adherence to the 1983 guidelines in assigning these numbers, rather than a change in the nature of the threats.

Birds

Friendly ground-dove, American Samoa DPS (

Gallicolumba stairi stairi

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. The genus

Gallicolumba

is distributed throughout the Pacific and Southeast Asia. The genus is represented in the oceanic Pacific by six species. Three are endemic to Micronesian islands or archipelagos, two are endemic to island groups in French Polynesia, and

G. stairi

is endemic to Samoa, Tonga, and Fiji. All six species have some level of threatened status on the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List. Some authors recognize two subspecies of the friendly ground-dove, one, slightly smaller, in the Samoan archipelago (

G. s. stairi

), and one in Tonga and Fiji (

G. s. vitiensis

), but morphological differences between the two are minimal.

In American Samoa, the friendly ground-dove has been found on the islands of Ofu and Olosega (Manua Group). Threats to this subspecies have not changed over the past year. Of the primary threats to the subspecies (predation by nonnative species and natural catastrophes such as hurricanes), predation by nonnative species is thought to be occurring now, and predation likely has been occurring for several decades. This predation may be an important impediment to increasing the population. Predation by introduced species has played a significant role in reducing, limiting, and extirpating populations of island birds, especially ground-nesters, in the Pacific and other locations worldwide. Nonnative predators known or thought to occur in the range of the friendly ground-dove in American Samoa are feral cats (

Felis catus

), Polynesian rats (

Rattus exulans

), black rats (

R. rattus

), and Norway rats (

R. norvegicus

).

In January 2004 and February of 2005, hurricanes virtually destroyed the habitat of

G. stairi

in an area on Olosega Island where the species had been most frequently recorded. Although this species has coexisted with severe storms for millennia, this example illustrates the potential for natural disturbance to exacerbate the effect of anthropogenic disturbance on small populations. Consistent monitoring using a variety of methods over the last 5 years yielded few observations of this taxon in American Samoa. The total population size is poorly known, but is unlikely to number more than a few hundred pairs. The past five years or so of surveys have revealed no change in the relative abundance of this taxon in American Samoa. The distribution of the friendly ground-dove is limited to steep, forested slopes with an open understory and a substrate of fine scree or exposed earth; this habitat is not common in American Samoa. We revised the LPN from a 6 to a 9 to better reflect the fact that the threats posed to the friendly ground-dove (its small population size and nonnative predators), while imminent and occurring throughout its range, are believed to be of a moderate magnitude rather than a high magnitude.

Kittlitz's Murrelet (

Brachyramphus brevirostris

)—Kittlitz's murrelet is a small diving seabird whose entire North American population, and most of the world's population, inhabits Alaskan coastal waters discontinuously from Point Lay south to northern portions of Southeast Alaska. Kittlitz's murrelets are associated with tidewater glaciers. The current population estimate for Kittlitz's murrelets in Alaska is approximately 16,700 birds, a decline of 74 to 84 percent during the past 10 to 20 years. New survey information supports and strengthens the negative population trend estimates that have been previously reported.

Threats to Kittlitz's murrelets include large-scale processes such as global climate change and marine climate regime shift. These large-scale processes may influence Kittlitz's murrelet survival and reproduction. Glacial retreat, a global phenomenon that affects many of the glaciers with which Kittlitz's murrelets are associated, is associated with changing forage fish availability and may result in increased predation from corvids (retreat of glaciers allows corvids easier access to murrelets on which they prey). Even if the causes of rapid climate warming were curbed today, feedback mechanisms would result in the continued retreat of tidewater glaciers into the foreseeable future. In addition, the declining population trend makes this species particularly susceptible to ongoing threats from other human activities, including oil spills, bycatch in commercial gillnet fisheries, and disturbance by tour boats. Kittlitz's murrelets are believed to have been seriously affected by the

Exxon Valdez

oil spill in Prince William Sound (PWS) in 1989. Estimates of direct mortality of Kittlitz's murrelets from this oil spill constituted a loss of 7 to15 percent of the PWS population. Catastrophic events such as oil spills could have a significant negative effect on the population of this already diminished species. Susceptibility to mortality as bycatch in commercial fishing could be a significant factor in their population decline; Kittlitz's murrelets are caught in gill nets in numbers disproportionate to their density. In PWS, salmon gillnet fisheries occur each summer in or near Kittlitz's murrelet habitat. Kittlitz's murrelets represented 5 percent and 30 percent of murrelet bycatch in gillnets during 1990 and 1991, respectively. Tour boat visitation to glacial fjords is a growing industry, and this activity may increasingly disrupt Kittlitz's murrelet feeding behavior; tour boats

may provide artificial perch sites for avian predators. The number of cruise ships allowed into Glacier Bay has increased 30 percent since 1985, while smaller charter boats and private boats have increased 8 percent and 15 percent, respectively. An increase in tour boat operations has been noted in Kenai Fjords National Park as well. Disturbance can disrupt feeding birds and persistent boat traffic may prevent murrelets from using high quality foraging areas.

Based on the observed population trajectory and the severity of present threats (rapid glacial retreat, acute and chronic oil spills, commercial gillnet fishing, and human disturbance from tour boats), the threats to this species are high in magnitude and imminent. We changed the LPN from a 5 to a 2 to reflect that the threats to this species are ongoing.

Xantus's murrelet (

Synthliboramphus hypoleucus

)—The Xantus's murrelet is a small seabird in the Alcid family that occurs along the west coast of North America in the United States and Mexico. The species has a limited breeding distribution, only nesting on the Channel Islands in southern California and on islands off the west coast of Baja California, Mexico. Although data on population trends are scarce, the population is suspected to have declined greatly over the last century, mainly due to introduced predators such as rats (

Rattus

sp.) and feral cats (

Felis catus

) to nesting islands, with extirpations on three islands in Mexico. A dramatic decline (up to 70 percent) from 1977 to 1991 was detected at the largest nesting colony in southern California, possibly due to high levels of predation on eggs by the endemic deer mouse (

Peromyscus maniculatus elusus

). Identified threats include introduced predators at nesting colonies, oil spills and oil pollution, reduced prey availability, human disturbance, and artificial light pollution.

Although substantial declines in the Xantus's murrelet population likely occurred over the last century, some of the largest threats are being addressed, and, to some degree, ameliorated. Declines and extirpations at several nesting colonies were thought to have been caused by nonnative predators, which have been removed from many of the islands where they once occurred. Most notably, since 1994, Island Conservation and Ecology Group has systematically removed rats, cats, and dogs from every murrelet nesting colony in Mexico, with the exception of cats and dogs on Guadalupe Island. In 2002, rats were eradicated from Anacapa Island in southern California, which has resulted in improvements in reproductive success at that island. In southern California, there are also plans to remove rats from San Miguel Island, and to restore nesting habitat on Santa Barbara Island through the Montrose Settlements Restoration Project, which may benefit the Xantus's murrelet population at those islands.

Artificial lighting from squid fishing and other vessels, or lights on islands, remains a potential threat to the species. Bright lights make Xantus's murrelets more susceptible to predation, and they can also become disoriented and exhausted from continual attraction to bright lights. Chicks can become disoriented and separated from their parents at sea, which could result in death of the dependent chicks. High-wattage lights on commercial market squid (

Loligo opalescens

) fishing vessels used at night to attract squid to the surface of the water in the Channel Islands was the suspected cause of unusually high predation on Xantus's murrelets by western gulls and barn owls at Santa Barbara Island in 1999. To address this threat, in 2000, the California Fish and Game Commission required light shields and a limit of 30,000 watts per boat; it is unknown if this is sufficient to reduce impacts. Squid fishing has not occurred at a particularly noticeable level near any of the colonies in the Channel Islands since 1999; however, this remains a potential future threat.

A proposal to build a liquid natural gas (LNG) facility 600 meters (1,969 feet) off the Coronados Islands in Baja California, Mexico, was considered a potential major threat to the species. This island contains one of the largest nesting populations of Xantus's murrelets in the world. Potential impacts of this facility to the nesting colony included bright lights at night from the facility and visiting tanker vessels, noise from the facility or from helicopters visiting the facility, and the threat of oil spills associated with visiting tanker vessels. However, Chevron announced in March 2007 that they have abandoned plans to develop this facility and withdrew their permits. LNG facilities are proposed for construction in the Channel Islands; however, these are early in the complex and long-term planning processes; it is possible that none of these facilities will be built. In addition, none of them are directly adjacent to nesting colonies, where their impacts would be expected to be more significant.

We considered the LNG facility off the Coronados Islands to be an imminent threat of high magnitude, which resulted in the previous listing priority of a 2. While this proposed LNG facility no longer poses a threat, the remaining threats, in particular oil spills, are high in magnitude since they have the potential to cause direct mortality and reduce reproductive success throughout a majority of the species' range. The threats are nonimminent since they are not currently occurring. Therefore, we have changed the LPN from a 2 to a 5.

Reptiles

Louisiana pine snake (

Pituophis ruthveni

)—The Louisiana pine snake (LPS) historically occurred in fire-maintained longleaf-pine ecosystems of west-central Louisiana and extreme east-central Texas. Those ecosystems provided an herbaceous layer necessary to maintain the Louisiana pine snake's primary prey, the Baird's pocket gopher. Current potentially occupied habitat in Louisiana and Texas is estimated to be approximately 300,000 acres, with 70 percent occurring on public lands and 30 percent in private ownership. Results of trapping and radio-telemetry surveys suggest that extensive population declines and local extirpations have occurred during the last 50 to 80 years. To address those issues on public lands, a Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) was completed in 2003 to maintain and enhance potentially occupied habitat, and protect known Louisiana-pine-snake populations. Much of the public land is now being managed on longer rotations (i.e., 70+ years) where silvicultural prescriptions include smaller clearcuts, midstory removal, thinning, and prescribed fire. Private lands generally are not managed to support the longleaf-pine ecosystem and its characteristic herbaceous layer; however, several private landowners with known Louisiana-pine-snake populations continue to be involved in conservation efforts with reported conservation of more than 2,000 acres in 2006.

Within both the public and private sectors, interest in longleaf-pine restoration appears to be growing and with the appropriate emphasis could slow or reverse habitat loss trends. To address this and other issues, the LPS Conservation Group is expanding conservation efforts through the development of a Comprehensive Conservation Plan that would build upon the CCA success. Other factors affecting Louisiana pine snakes throughout its range include low fecundity, which magnifies other threats and increases the likelihood of local extinctions, and vehicular mortality, which can significantly affect Louisiana-pine-snake population and community

structure. While the magnitude of Louisiana-pine-snake habitat loss has been great in the past and the remaining habitat is degraded, habitat loss does not represent an imminent threat, because the rate of habitat loss is declining. Additionally, pro-active partnerships to address key management concerns and research needs are resulting in some additional long-leaf pine habitat that is suitable for the Louisiana pine snake or its prey species. However, while conservation actions have produced needed results, they have not yet adequately reduced threats to the species, particularly on private land. The lack of adequate habitat still poses a threat and when coupled with the very low fecundity rate and extremely low population size (based on capture rates and population estimates) make the threat high in magnitude. Overall, due to nonimminent, high-magnitude threats, we changed the LPN from an 8 to a 5 for this species.

Amphibians

Columbia spotted frog, Great Basin DPS (

Rana luteiventris

)—Currently, Columbia spotted frogs appear to be widely distributed throughout southwestern Idaho, eastern Oregon, and northeastern and central Nevada, but local populations within these general areas appear to be small and isolated from each other. Recent work by researchers in Idaho and Nevada has documented loss of historically known sites, reduced numbers of individuals within local populations, and declines in the reproduction of those individuals. Small highly fragmented populations, characteristic of the majority of existing populations of Columbia spotted frogs in the Great Basin, are highly susceptible to extinction processes. Threats to Columbia-spotted-frog habitat, including water development, improper grazing, mining activities and non-native species, have and continue to contribute to the degradation and fragmentation of habitat. Emerging fungal diseases, such as chytridiomycosis, and the spread of parasites are contributing factors to Columbia-spotted-frog population declines throughout portions of its range. Effects of climate change such as drought and stochastic (randomly occurring) events such as fire often have detrimental effects to small isolated populations and can often exacerbate existing threats.

A 10-year Conservation Agreement and Strategy was signed in September 2003 for both the Northeast and the Toiyabe subpopulations in Nevada. The goals of the conservation agreements are to reduce threats to Columbia spotted frogs and their habitat to the extent necessary to prevent populations from becoming extirpated throughout all or a portion of their historic range and to maintain, enhance, and restore a sufficient number of populations of Columbia spotted frogs and their associated habitat to ensure their continued existence throughout their historical range. Additionally, a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances was completed in 2006 for the Owyhee subpopulation at Sam Noble Springs, Idaho. Because these conservation agreements have reduced the magnitude of the imminent threats from high to moderate, we changed the LPN from a 3 to a 9 for this DPS of the Columbia spotted frog.

Black Warrior waterdog (

Necturus alabamensis

)—The Black Warrior waterdog is a salamander that inhabits streams above the Fall Line within the Black Warrior River Basin in Alabama. There is very little specific locality information available on the historical distribution of the Black Warrior waterdog since little attention was given to this species between its description in 1937 and the 1980s. At that time, there were a total of only 11 known historical records from 4 Alabama counties. Two of these sites have now been inundated by impoundments. Extensive survey work was conducted in the 1990s to look for additional populations. Currently, the species is known from 14 sites in 5 counties.

Water-quality degradation is the biggest threat to the continued existence of the Black Warrior waterdog. Most streams that have been surveyed for the waterdog showed evidence of pollution and many appeared biologically depauperate. Sources of point and nonpoint pollution in the Black Warrior River Basin have been numerous and widespread. Pollution is generated from inadequately treated effluent from industrial plants, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment plants, poultry operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface mining represents another threat to the biological integrity of waterdog habitat. Runoff from old, abandoned coal mines generates pollution through acidification, increased mineralization, and sediment loading. The North River, Locust Fork, and Mulberry Fork, all streams that this species inhabits, are on the Environmental Protection Agency's list of impaired waters. An additional threat to the Black Warrior waterdog is the creation of large impoundments that have flooded thousands of square hectares (acres) of its habitat. These impoundments are likely marginal or unsuitable habitat for the salamander. While the water-quality threat is pervasive and problematic, the overall magnitude of the threat is moderate as there has not been a steep rate of decline in this species population. Water quality degradation in the Black Warrior basin is ongoing; therefore, the threats are imminent. We changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8 for this species since the threats are of a moderate rather than high magnitude.

Clams

Fluted kidneyshell (

Ptychobranchus subtentum

)—The fluted kidneyshell is a freshwater mussel (Unionidae) endemic to the Cumberland and Tennessee River systems (Cumberlandian Region) in Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. It requires shoal habitats in free-flowing rivers to survive and successfully recruit new individuals into its populations.

This species has been extirpated from numerous regional streams and is no longer found in the State of Alabama. Habitat destruction and alteration (e.g., impoundments, sedimentation, and pollutants) are the chief factors that contributed to its decline. The fluted kidneyshell was historically known from at least 37 streams but is currently restricted to no more than 12 isolated populations. Current status information for most of the 12 populations deemed to be extant is available from recent periodic sampling efforts (sometimes annually) and other field studies, particularly in the upper Tennessee River system. Some populations in the Cumberland River system have had recent surveys as well (e.g., Wolf, Little Rivers; Little South Fork; Horse Lick, Buck Creeks). Populations in Buck Creek, Little South Fork, Horse Lick Creek, Powell River, and North Fork Holston River have clearly declined over the past two decades. Based on recent information, the overall population of the fluted kidneyshell is declining rangewide and the species remains in large numbers and is clearly viable in just the Clinch River/Copper Creek, although smaller, viable populations remain (e.g., Wolf, Little, North Fork Holston Rivers; Rock Creek). Most other populations are of questionable or limited viability, with some on the verge of extirpation (e.g., Powell River; Little South Fork; Horse Lick, Buck, Indian Creeks). Newly reintroduced populations in the Nolichucky and Duck Rivers will hopefully begin to reverse the downward population trend of this species. The threats are high in magnitude since all populations of this species are severely affected by numerous threats (impoundments, sedimentation, small population size,

isolation of populations, gravel mining, municipal pollutants, agricultural run-off, nutrient enrichment, and coal processing pollution) which results in mortality and/or reduced reproductive output. Since the threats are ongoing, they are imminent. Therefore, to help ensure consistency in the application of our listing priority process, we changed the LPN from a 5 to a 2 to reflect that the threats are imminent and high in magnitude.

Snails

Black mudalia (

Elimia melanoides

)—The black mudalia is a small species of aquatic snail found clinging to clean gravel, cobble, boulders and/or logs in flowing water on shoals and riffles. The historical habitat of the black mudalia included much of the upper Black Warrior River drainage above the Fall Line at Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The species has been extirpated from more than 80 percent of that range through the construction of dams and impoundments, sedimentation, and non-point source pollution from land surface runoff. Populations that may have avoided impoundment apparently disappeared due to historical pollution events and/or natural catastrophic events. However, after being considered extinct for two decades, the black mudalia was rediscovered in a small portion of its historical range in the Black Warrior drainage. Discovery of surviving populations in shoals of five streams in the upper Black Warrior River and high densities reported at Blackburn Fork reduce the magnitude of the threats from high to moderate. However, all known populations are currently affected by point and/or non-point source pollution; human land uses, including cattle grazing, row crops, timber, chicken farms, and home construction are currently causing sedimentation and eutrophication (reduction of oxygen in the water) of black mudalia habitats. Thus, based on ongoing threats that we now consider to be moderate in magnitude, we changed the LPN from 2 to 8 for the black mudalia.

Huachuca springsnail (

Pyrgulopsis thompsoni

)—The following summary is based on information from our files. No new information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Huachuca springsnail inhabits 13 springs and ciénegas at elevations of 4,500 to 7,200 feet in southeastern Arizona (11 sites) and adjacent portions of Sonora, Mexico (2 sites). The springsnail is typically found in the shallower areas of springs or cienegas, often in rocky seeps at the spring source. Ongoing threats include habitat modification, wildfire, cattle grazing, and groundwater pumping. Prior communication with personnel from Fort Huachuca indicated they were in the process of evaluating the status of this species on Department of Defense lands and developing conservation strategies; this may result in a reduction or elimination of threats in the future. Because we determined that the proportion of the range subjected to various threats is smaller than we previously determined, the threats are moderate in magnitude. In addition, although there is no actual change in threats over the past year, modification of the spring habitat, wildfire, cattle grazing, and groundwater pumping are ongoing or imminent threats. Therefore, to help ensure consistency in the application of our listing priority process, we changed the LPN from a 5 to an 8 to reflect that the threats are imminent but are moderate in magnitude.

Page springsnail (

Pyrgulopsis morrisoni

)—The following summary is based on information from our files. No new information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Page springsnail is known to exist only within a complex of springs located within an approximately 1.5-kilometer (0.93-mile) stretch along the west side of Oak Creek around the community of Page Springs, Yavapai County, Arizona. Many of the springs where the springsnail occurs have been subjected to some level of modification for domestic, agricultural, ranching, fish hatchery, and recreational activities. Arizona Game and Fish Department management plans for the Bubbling Ponds and Page Springs fish hatcheries include commitments to replace lost habitat and to monitor remaining populations of invertebrates such as the Page springsnail. The Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Service have made significant progress on development of a candidate conservation agreement, but the effectiveness of planned and implemented actions has not been demonstrated. Based on recent survey data, it appears that the Page springsnail is abundant within natural habitats and persists in modified habitats, albeit at reduced densities. The magnitude of threats is considered high because limited distribution of this narrow endemic makes any detrimental effects from threats likely to result in extirpation or extinction. The immediacy of the threat of groundwater withdrawal is uncertain due to conflicting information that suggests it may be either imminent or not. However, overall, the threats are imminent because the majority of them are currently occurring. Although there is no actual change in threats over the past year, modification of the spring habitat for this species is an ongoing or imminent threat. Therefore, to help ensure consistency in the application of our listing priority process, we changed the LPN from a 5 to a 2 to reflect that the threats are imminent.

Insects

Dakota skipper (

Hesperia dacotae

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files, including information from the petition we received on May 12, 2003. The Dakota skipper is a small- to mid-sized butterfly that inhabits high-quality tallgrass and mixed grass prairie in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada. The species is presumed to be extirpated from Iowa and Illinois and from many sites within occupied States.

The species is threatened by conversion of its native prairie habitat for agricultural purposes, overgrazing, invasive species, gravel mining, inbreeding, population isolation, and, in some cases, prescribed fire. Prairie succeeds to shrubland or forest without periodic fire, grazing, or mowing; thus, the species is also threatened at sites where such disturbances are not applied. We, other agencies, and private organizations (e.g., The Nature Conservancy) protect and manage some Dakota skipper sites. Although proper management is always necessary to ensure its persistence, even at protected sites, it is secure at some sites owned by these entities. The species is also secure at some sites where private landowners manage native prairie in ways that conserve Dakota skipper. Recent surveys in at least parts of the species' range have led us to revise our view of the imminence of threats to Dakota skipper. In January 2007, for example, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources proposed revising the status of Dakota skipper in the state from threatened to endangered because it “appears to be rapidly disappearing from remnant habitat.” In addition, approximately half of the inhabited sites are privately owned with little or no protection. Ongoing threats on these sites include invasive species, overgrazing, and herbicide applications. A few private sites are protected from conversion by easements, but these do not prevent adverse effects from overgrazing. The threats are such that the species warrants listing; the threats are moderate in magnitude and, based on

the above new information, are imminent. Therefore, we changed the listing priority number from an 11 to an 8 for the Dakota skipper to reflect the increase in immediacy of threats to remnant habitat, particularly on private lands.

Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle (

Cicindela albissima

)—The Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle occurs only at the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, approximately 7 miles west of Kanab, Kane County, in south-central Utah. It is restricted to a small part of the dune field, situated at an elevation of about 1,820 m (6,000 ft). The beetle's habitat is being adversely affected by ongoing recreational off-road vehicle use that is destroying and degrading the beetle's habitat, especially the interdunal swales used by the larvae. The continued survival of the beetle depends on the preservation of its habitat. The two agencies that manage the dune field, the Utah Department of Parks and Recreation and the Bureau of Land Management, have restricted recreational off-road vehicle use in some areas, which reduces impacts. However, the protected areas may not be of sufficient size to enable the population to increase in size. The beetle's population is also vulnerable to overcollecting by professional and hobby tiger-beetle collectors. Because the taxon was recently elevated to a full species based on genetic research, we changed the listing priority from a 9 to an 8. The imminence and magnitude of the threats remain the same (imminent and moderate to low magnitude).

Stephan's riffle beetle (

Heterelmis stephani

)—The following summary is based on information from our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The Stephan's riffle beetle is an endemic riffle beetle found in limited spring environments within the Santa Rita Mountains, Pima County, Arizona. The beetle is known from Bog Spring and Sylvester Spring in Madera Canyon, within the Coronado National Forest. These springs are typical isolated, mid-elevation, permanently saturated, spring-fed aquatic climax communities commonly referred to as ciénegas. Threats are largely from habitat modification (from recreational activities in the springs and changes in water chemistry due to catastrophic natural disasters such as fires or floods); we consider them to be of moderate to low magnitude due to the lack of focused studies to evaluate the permanence of threats or the likelihood of persistence of the species in areas that are unaffected. Furthermore, because the threats are currently occurring, they are best characterized as imminent. Due to moderate to low magnitude of imminent threats, we changed the LPN from a 5 to an 8 for Stephan's riffle beetle.

Crustaceans

Typhlatya monae

(troglobitic groundwater shrimp)—

Typhlatya monae

is a subterranean small shrimp known from Puerto Rico, Barbuda, and Dominican Republic. It is classified as a troglobite, or obligatory cave organism, of which its most extraordinary feature is the reduction or loss of vision and pigmentation. It feeds on organic waste material and debris, such as bat guano.

Little is known concerning the status of

Typhlatya monae

in either Barbuda or Dominican Republic. Although in Puerto Rico this species was previously found at Mona Island, currently

Typhlatya monae

is known from only three caves within the Guánica Commonwealth Forest in the municipalities of Guánica, Yauco, and Guayanilla. However, the species may still be found in the reef deposit aquifers in Mona Island that have not yet been surveyed. In 1995, close to 2,000 individuals were estimated; over 95 percent of these were observed in only one cave. Although no systematic censuses have been conducted since 1995, we have recently documented the presence of the species in all three caves and obtained information regarding another cave in which the species may occur from Puerto Rico Commonwealth Forest personnel.

Changes in groundwater quality, collection of rare animals, predation, limited distribution of the species, limited availability of appropriate habitat (i.e., underground aquifers within cave formations), potential reduction of food sources (e.g., mortality or reduction in bat populations), and low population numbers potentially threaten populations of

Typhlatya monae.

However, because the known range of

Typhlatya monae

is within protected lands, and because we have received new information of known management activities within the Guánica Commonwealth Forest or Mona Island (activities are managed such that some of the threats to this species no longer exist; e.g. the caves are closed to visitors), we now consider the magnitude of the remaining threats (possible extraction of ground-water in Mona and vulnerability to catastrophic events) moderate to low. Therefore, we changed the LPN from a 5 to an 11 for this species.

Flowering plants

Abronia alpina

(Ramshaw Meadows sand-verbena)—

Abronia alpina

is a small perennial herb, 2.5 to 15.2 centimeters (1 to 6 inches) across which forms compact mats with lavender-pink, trumpet-shaped, and generally fragment flowers.

Abronia alpina

is known from one main population center in Ramshaw Meadow on the Kern Plateau of the Sierra Nevada, California, and from one subpopulation found in adjacent Templeton Meadow. The total estimated area occupied is approximately 6 hectares (15 acres). The population fluctuates from year to year without any clear trends. Population estimates from 1985-1994 range from a low of 69,652 plants in 1986 to 132,215 plants in 1987. Surveys conducted since 1994 indicate that no significant changes have occurred in population size or location, although, the 2003 survey showed population numbers to be at the low end of the range. The population was last monitored in 2006.

The threats currently facing

Abronia alpina

include natural and human habitat alteration, hydrologic changes to the water table, and recreational use within meadow habitats. Lodgepole pine encroachment has altered the meadow and becoming established within

A. alpina

habitat. Lodgepole pine encroachment may alter soil characteristics by increasing organic matter levels, decreasing porosity, and moderating diurnal temperature fluctuations thus reducing the competitive ability of

A. alpina

to persist in an environment more hospitable to other plant species. The Ramshaw Meadow ecosystem is subject to potential alteration by lowering of the water table due to downcutting of the South Fork of the Kern River (SFKR). The SFKR flows through Ramshaw Meadow, at times coming within 15 m (50 ft) of

A. alpina

habitat, particularly in the vicinity of five subpopulations. The habitat occupied by

A. alpina

directly borders the meadow system supported by the SFKR. Drying out of the meadow system could potentially affect

A. alpina

pollinators and/or seed dispersal agents. Established hiker, packstock, and cattle trails pass through

A. alpina

subpopulations. Two main hiker trails pass through Ramshaw Meadow, but were rerouted out of

A. alpina

subpopulations where feasible, in 1988 and 1997. Remnants of cattle trails that pass through subpopulations in several places receive occasional incidental use by horses and sometimes hikers. Cattle use, however, currently, is not a threat due to the 2001 implementation of a ten-year

moratorium on the Templeton allotment which prohibits cattle from all

A. alpina

locations. In 2007, the U.S. Forest Service in cooperation with the Service drafted a Conservation Agreement for

A. alpina

that would provide protective measures via increased management of recreation in the area, habitat management, and research on

A. alpina.

Approval and finalization of this Agreement is anticipated in Fiscal Year 2008. The Service is funding studies to determine appropriate conservation measures. As a result of rerouting hiking trails, curtailing grazing, and development of a Conservation Agreement between the U.S. Forest Service and the Service the threats facing

Abronia alpina

have been reduced. Because the population is stable and the threats have been reduced, we changed the LPN for

A. alpina

from an 8 to an 11, reflecting nonimminent threats that are moderate to low in magnitude.

Bidens campylotheca

ssp.

waihoiensis

(Kookoolau)—Kookoolau is an erect, perennial found in wet

Acacia-Metrosideros

(koa-ohia) forest on Maui, Hawaii.

Bidens campylotheca

ssp.

waihoiensis

is known from 1 and possibly 2 populations, 1 of 200 individuals, and the second of possibly as many as 300 individuals. It is threatened by feral pigs and cattle, which eat this plant and degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that outcompete and displace it. Conservation measures such as strategic fences and control of nonnative plants benefit the plants in Kipahulu Valley; however, the individuals in Waihoi Valley are still affected by these threats. Therefore, to reflect the fact that the threats are ongoing, we have changed the LPN for this species from a 6 to a 3.

Chamaecrista lineata

var.

keyensis

(Big Pine partridge pea)—This pea is endemic to the lower Florida Keys, and restricted to pine rocklands, hardwood hammock edges, and roadsides and firebreaks within these ecosystems. Historically, it was known from Big Pine, No Name, Ramrod, and Cudjoe Keys (Monroe County, Florida). It presently occurs on Big Pine, plus two very small populations found on Cudjoe and lower Sugarloaf Keys in 2005. It is fairly well distributed in Big Pine Key pine rocklands, which encompass approximately 580 hectares (1,433 acres). Roughly 90 percent of its current range is within the Service's National Key Deer Refuge. In late 2005, it occurred within 37.2 percent of 541 plots sampled throughout the publicly owned pine rocklands on Big Pine Key. Frequency of occurrence was twice as great and density over 3 times greater in the less fragmented, more fire-prone northern portion of Big Pine Key than the southern part. Pine rockland communities are maintained by relatively frequent fires. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine rockland and the pea is eventually shaded out. The National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR) has a prescribed fire program, though with many constraints on implementing fire. Absence of fire is the greatest of the short-term and deterministic threats.

Hurricanes are also a threat. Hurricane Wilma (October 2005) resulted in a storm surge that covered most of Big Pine Key with sea water. In plots sampled after Wilma, frequency of occurrence decreased to less than a third and density decreased to less than half that found in plots sampled before Wilma.

The magnitude of threats to the Big Pine partridge pea is moderate. Partridge pea has a very limited distribution that is somewhat fragmented and fire limitation, salt water storm surges (direct mortality, as well as slash pine mortality, associated with hurricanes), and pollinator limitation, constitute significant threats. Additionally, threats from storm surges associated with hurricanes are exacerbated by sea level rise. Big Pine partridge pea exists as one relatively large population (possibly fragmented into a metapopulation) on Big Pine Key and two very small, isolated populations on two other keys. However, population size is on the order of several hundred thousand, and the majority occurs on the NKDR. Over the long run, partridge pea receives protective measures only on NKDR and the Terrestris Preserve. The immediacy of threats is imminent as the probability of intense hurricanes has increased in recent years, and increasingly sea levels have exacerbated the threat. Additionally, storm surges have complicated efforts to conduct prescribed fires. If the frequency of prescribed fire does not increase, the imminence of threats due to fire suppression will continue to increase. Because the threats are moderate rather than high in magnitude due to some protection from threats provided by the NKDR and Terrestris Preserve, we changed the LPN from a 6 to a 9 for the Big Pine partridge pea.

Chamaesyce deltoidea

ssp.

serpyllum

(Wedge spurge)—New survey results were obtained in March 2006. Wedge spurge is a small, prostrate herb. It has always been restricted to Big Pine Key in Monroe County, Florida. Most of the range falls within the National Key Deer Refuge. It is restricted to pinelands on limestone rock (pine rockland), at sites with exposed rock or gravel, low understory cover, and low hardwood density. Pine rocklands encompass approximately 580 hectares (1,433 acres) on Big Pine Key. It is not widely dispersed within the limited range. In late 2005, it occurred within 7.4 percent of 541 plots sampled throughout the publicly owned pine rocklands on Big Pine Key. Hurricane Wilma (October 2005) resulted in a storm surge that covered most of Big Pine Key with sea-water. Before and after Wilma, it occurred in 9.3 of 332 sample plots and 4.3 percent of 209 sample plots, respectively, and density decreased significantly within plots. Occupied plots had become restricted to the higher, middle portion of Big Pine Key. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine rockland and spurge is eventually shaded out.

The magnitude of threats to the wedge spurge is moderate. Wedge spurge has a narrow distribution composed of few occurrences, and threats result from lack of fire, hurricanes, sea level rise, and invasive exotic plants. Additionally, threats from storm surges associated with hurricanes are exacerbated by sea-level rise. Wedge spurge exists essentially as a single (fragmented) population on Big Pine Key, which over the long run is protected only on NKDR and the Terrestris Preserve. However, population size is on the order of several hundred thousand, and the majority occurs on the NKDR. The National Key Deer Refuge has a prescribed fire program, though with many constraints on implementing fire.

The threats to the wedge spurge are imminent. The best available information indicates that this plant is intrinsically vulnerable to extinction because it is a narrow endemic. Moreover, the threats of hurricanes and shading due to lack of fire are ongoing. However, because the threats are moderate rather than high in magnitude due to some protection from threats provided by the NKDR and Terrestris Preserve, we changed the LPN from a 6 to a 9 for the wedge spurge.

Cordia rupicola

(no common name)—

Cordia rupicola,

a small shrub, has been described from southwestern Puerto Rico (Peñuelas and Guánica), Vieques Island, and Anegada Island (British Virgin Islands).

Cordia rupicola

is restricted to subtropical dry forest life zone overlying a limestone substrate. At present time, less than 20 individuals of

C. rupicola

are currently known from four sites in Puerto Rico; only a few individuals are located in protected lands managed for conservation by the

Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources or the Service. The area that contains 83 percent of the known population is located in a privately-owned property and is threatened by habitat destruction or modification. While the population on Anegada Island is currently stable, this population is threatened by potential residential and commercial development. Both populations are also vulnerable to natural (e.g., hurricanes) or manmade (e.g., human-induced fires) threats. All sites are located in a xeric environment vulnerable to human-induced fires which could destroy entire populations. For these reasons, the magnitude of the current threats is high. While hurricanes and fire do occur, the rate of occurrence is such that they do not pose an imminent threat. The threats this species faces are ones that will arise in the future if conservation measures are not implemented and long-term impacts are not averted. For these reasons, the threats to the species as a whole are nonimminent, and therefore, we changed the LPN from a 2 to a 5 for this species.

Dalea carthagenensis floridana

(Florida prairie-clover)—

Dalea carthagenensis floridana

occurs in Big Cypress National Preserve in Monroe and Collier Counties, Florida. It is also known from small populations in Miami-Dade County. There are a total of nine extant occurrences, most of which are on conservation land. Existing occurrences are extremely small and may not be viable, especially those in Miami-Dade County. Remaining habitats are fragmented. This plant is threatened by habitat loss and habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and threats from exotic plants. Damage to plants by off-road vehicles is a serious threat within the Big Cypress National Preserve; the threat from illegal mountain biking at the R. Hardy Matheson Preserve has been reduced. This species is being parasitized by the introduced insect lobate lac scale at some localities (e.g., R. Hardy Matheson Preserve), but we do not know the extent of this threat. This plant is vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges. Due to its restricted range and the small sizes of most isolated occurrences, this species is vulnerable to environmental (catastrophic hurricanes), demographic (potential episodes of poor reproduction), and genetic (potential inbreeding depression) threats. After a thorough review of the species status and threats, the magnitude of threats is high and threats are imminent because of the limited number of occurrences and the small number of individual plants at each occurrence. In addition, even though many sites are on conservation lands, these plants still face significant ongoing threats. Therefore, we have changed the LPN from 9 to 3 for this subspecies.

Echinomastus erectocentrus

var.

acunensis

(Acuna cactus)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on October 30, 2002. The Acuna cactus is known from six sites on well-drained gravel ridges and knolls on granite soils in Sonoran Desert scrub association at 1300-2000 feet elevation.

Habitat destruction has been a threat in the past and is a potential future threat to this species. New roads and illegal activities have not yet directly affected the cactus populations at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, but areas in close proximity to these known populations have been altered. Cactus populations located in the Florence area have not been monitored, and these populations may be in danger of habitat loss due to recent urban growth in the area. Urban development near Ajo, Arizona, as well as that near Sonoyta, Mexico, is a significant threat to the Acuna cactus. Populations of the Acuna cactus within the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument have shown a 50-percent mortality rate in recent years. The reason(s) for the mortality are not known, but continuing drought conditions are thought to play a role. The Arizona Plant Law and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora provide some protection for the Acuna cactus. However, illegal collection is a primary threat to this cactus variety and has been documented on the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in the past. The threats continue to be of a high magnitude. The threats are now imminent, as evidenced by the continued decline of the species, most likely from effects from the on-going drought. Conditions in 2006 worsened, and the drought is prevalent throughout the range of this variety. For this reason, we believe that the main threat, drought, is on-going and is a significant threat to the long-term viability of this variety. Thus, we changed the LPN from a 6 to a 3 for this cactus variety.

Geranium hanaense

(Nohoanu)—This species is a decumbent shrub found in bogs on Maui, Hawaii. This species is known from two adjacent bogs totaling 300 to 500 individuals.

Geranium hanaense

is threatened by pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that outcompete and displace it. However, feral pigs have been fenced out of and removed from both bogs in which this species currently occurs, and a control program has reduced nonnative plants in all fenced areas. Given that the threats to the only known populations of this species are currently being managed and the populations are routinely monitored, this changes the overall magnitude of these threats to moderate. The threats are imminent, however, because the fences must be routinely monitored and nonnative plants must continually be controlled. Therefore, we have changed the LPN for this species from a 5 to an 8.

Helianthus verticillatus

(whorled sunflower)—The following information is based on information contained in our files. The whorled sunflower is found in moist, prairie-like openings in woodlands and along adjacent creeks. Despite extensive surveys throughout its range, only five populations are known for this species from seven sites. There are two populations documented for Cherokee County, Alabama; one in Floyd County, Georgia; and one each in Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee. This species appears to have restricted ecological requirements and is dependent upon the maintenance of prairie-like openings for its survival. Active management of habitat is needed to keep competition and shading under control. Much of its habitat has been degraded or destroyed for agricultural, silvicultural, and residential purposes; timber harvest remains a potential threat for the Alabama populations. We changed the priority number from an 11 to a 5 to reflect a high magnitude of threat based on current information. The 11 was assigned previously because the magnitude of threat was then moderate since information at that time indicated that the Georgia site, which is permanently protected, was the largest population, had thousands of plants, and was thriving. New information indicates that this Georgia site actually only harbors 15 to 20 individuals and that plants at this site appear to have low fitness as indicated by their shorter stature and the absence of flowering in this population. The remaining four populations are all on private land with no protection at this time. However, the threats are still nonimminent though since efforts are actively underway to obtain protection for these sites and habitat conversion and timber harvesting are not currently affecting the species.

Phacelia stellaris

(Brand's phacelia)—

Phacelia stellaris

is an annual plant in the Hydrophyllaceae (water-leaf family). Plants are spreading to erect, 6 to 25 cm (2.5 to 10 in) tall.

Phacelia stellaris

was historically found in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties and in coastal northern Baja California, Mexico. Approximately 50 percent of the linear extent of the coastal occurrences of this species has been lost, presumably to urbanization and habitat degradation. The last documentation of the range of the species in Mexico was in 1975. In the United States, four of the five known extant occurrences are from coastal San Diego County, California, in the following areas: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Silver Strand in the City of San Diego, within a few hundred yards of the Mexican border at Lichty Mesa, and the recently rediscovered population at Coronado Island on Naval Air Station North Island. The only other known extant occurrence is in western Riverside County, southwest of Fairmont Park. Potential threats to the U.S. occurrences include: The anticipated Border Fence project, development or agricultural activities, trampling from humans and equestrian traffic, disturbances from management actions, and invasive nonnative plants. Three of the five populations are very small (tens to low-hundreds) and small populations are considered subject to random events and genetic constraints. This species faces high magnitude threats, but the efforts of land managers and other regulatory mechanisms have resulted in the threats being nonimminent. Therefore, because overall, the threats are nonimminent, we changed the LPN for this species from a 2 to a 5.

Phyllostegia floribunda

(no common name)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is an erect subshrub found in mesic to wet forest on the island of Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is known from 10 locations totaling fewer than 270 naturally occurring and outplanted individuals on State, private, and Federal lands.

Phyllostegia floribunda

is threatened by feral pigs that degrade and destroy habitat, and nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. The Park Service, The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii, and the State have outplanted over 170 individuals at Olaa Forest Reserve, Kona Hema, and Waiakea Forest Reserve (greater than 50, 20 individuals, and 100 individuals, respectively). Fences protect approximately seven populations on private, State, and Park Service lands. Nonnative plants have been reduced in these fenced areas. However, no conservation efforts have been implemented for the unfenced populations. Because these threats are of imminent, but only moderate magnitude for the majority of the populations, we changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8.

Sideroxylon reclinatum

ssp.

austrofloridense

(Everglades bully)—Everglades bully occurs on pinelands, pineland/prairie ecotones, and prairies in Everglades National Park and private lands in Miami-Dade County, and Big Cypress National Preserve in Monroe County, Florida. Pine rocklands in Miami-Dade County have largely been destroyed by residential, commercial, and urban development and agriculture. Most remaining suitable habitat for this plant has been negatively altered by human activity. While privately owned pine rocklands are at risk from development, habitat for this plant is, for the most part, protected. The species is threatened by habitat loss and habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and exotic plants. Hydrology has been altered within Long Pine Key at Everglades National Park due to artificial drainage, which lowered ground water, and construction of roads, which either impounded or diverted water. Regional water management intended to restore the Everglades could negatively affect the pinelands of Long Pine Key, where the largest population occurs. At this time, it is not known whether Everglades restoration will have a positive or negative effect. This species may be vulnerable to catastrophic events and natural disturbances, such as hurricanes. Sea level rise will likely be a factor over the long term. After a thorough review of the species status and threats, the magnitude of threats continues to remain moderate to low, particularly since additional populations have recently been documented at Big Cypress National Preserve and on small pinelands in Miami-Dade County. We anticipate that additional occurrences will be found at Everglades National Park. Overall, the threats are nonimminent, particularly since most of the habitat is protected and managed to benefit this species. For the largest population in Everglades National Park, efforts are under way to ameliorate the threats from exotic plants. Therefore, we changed the LPN from a 9 to a 12 for this subspecies.

Solanum nelsonii

(Popolo)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Solanum nelsonii is a sprawling or trailing shrub found in coral rubble or sand in coastal sites. This species is known from populations in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands: Midway (approximately 260 plants), Laysan (approximately 490 plants), Pearl and Hermes (unknown number of individuals), Nihoa (8,000 to 15,000 adult plants); and Molokai (approximately 300 plants), in the main Hawaiian Islands.

Solanum nelsonii

is moderately threatened by ungulates (on Molokai) that degrade and destroy habitat, and that may eat it, and by nonnative plants that outcompete and displace it (Molokai and the northwestern Hawaiian Islands). Ungulate exclusion fences, routine fence monitoring and maintenance, and weed control protect the population of S. nelsonii on Molokai. Limited weed control is conducted in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. In addition,

S. nelsonii

is likely threatened by being eaten by a nonnative grasshopper,

Schistocerca nitens,

in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Currently no control measures are in place for this grasshopper. Because these threats are of moderate magnitude and are imminent for the majority of the populations, we changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8.

Symphyotrichum georgianum

(Georgia aster)—Georgia aster is a relict species of post oak savanna/prairie communities that existed in the southeast prior to widespread fire suppression and extirpation of large native grazing animals. Most remaining populations survive adjacent to roads, utility rights of way and other openings where current land management mimics natural disturbance regimes. Georgia aster currently is known to occur in the States of Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. The species appears to have been extirpated from Florida.

Most of the known populations are small (fewer than 50 stems), and because the species' main mode of reproduction is vegetative, each isolated population may represent only a few genotypes. A key factor impacting the Georgia aster is the present and threatened destruction, modification, and curtailment of its habitat and range as a result of subdivision development, highway expansion/improvement activities, herbicide application, and succession by wood plants due to fire suppression. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms is another factor posing a threat to the species, as approximately 95 percent of the known

surviving populations are estimated to occur on private lands and no state or local laws protect the plants or their habitat. The species is not afforded specific protection on federal lands, where we estimate 5 percent of the populations occur. A third factor impacting the species is direct damage from mowing or herbicide applications conducted as part of maintenance along highways and rights of way; these activities can kill plants, and possibly extirpate populations in local areas.

In previous years, we assigned an LPN of 5 to the Georgia aster, corresponding to a magnitude rating of high and an immediacy rating of nonimminent. However, based on the Service's efforts to achieve greater consistency in the interpretation of magnitude and immediacy, as well as new information regarding the abundance of the species, we are now revising the LPN. With regard to immediacy, the threats described above are currently occurring and are, therefore, imminent. We expect the threats are operating throughout the range of the species. However, the species is still relatively widely distributed, with occurrences in 3 counties in Alabama, 9 counties in North Carolina, 11 counties in South Carolina, and possibly as many as 18 counties in Georgia. Also, recent information indicates the species is more abundant than when we initially identified it as a candidate for listing, with possibly as many as 120 populations, in comparison to approximately 60 when it became a candidate in 1999. Taking into account its distribution and the new information indicating the species is more abundant than previously realized, we have revised the magnitude of threats from “high” to “moderate.” Therefore, we have changed the LPN from a 5 to an 8.

Ferns and Allies

Christella boydiae

(no common name)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is a small-to-medium-sized fern found in mesic to wet forest along streambanks on Oahu and Maui, Hawaii. Historically, this species was also found on the island of Hawaii; however, the species has been extirpated from that island. Currently, this species is known from 4 populations totaling fewer than 200 individuals. Two populations, numbering 162 and 2 individuals respectively, are found within Haleakala National Park on the island of Maui, where they are fenced and managed. The other two populations, numbering 5 and 9 individuals respectively, are located on State and private lands in the Koolau Mountains of Oahu. This species is threatened by feral pigs that degrade and/or destroy habitat and that may eat this plant, nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients, and man-made stream diversion. Feral pigs have been fenced out of the two populations on Maui, and nonnative plants have been reduced in the fenced areas. No conservation efforts are under way to alleviate threats to the two populations on Oahu. The two managed populations constitute 92 percent of the currently known populations. Therefore, the magnitude of the threats acting upon the currently extant populations is considered moderate, while the threats from feral pig activities and nonnative plants are ongoing, and therefore imminent. Thus, we changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8 for this species.

Taxonomic Changes in Candidates

Mammals

Mazama pocket gopher (

Thomomys mazama

ssp. c

ouchi, douglasii, glacialis, louiei, melanops, pugetensis, tacomensis, tumuli, yelmensis

)—Based on mitochondrial DNA analysis, we are including an additional subspecies of Mazama pocket gopher (Brush Prairie pocket gopher,

T. Mazama douglasii)

, in our candidate list. See summary below under “

Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species

” for additional information.

Insects

Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle (Cicindela albissima)—Based on recently genetic research, this taxon was recently elevated to a full species. See summary above under “

Summary of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

” for additional information.

Candidate Removals

As summarized below, we have evaluated the threats to the following four species and considered factors that, individually and in combination, presently or potentially could pose a risk to these species and their habitat. After a review of the best available scientific and commercial data, we conclude that listing these four species under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted because the species are not likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their range. Therefore, for each of these species we find that proposing a rule to list them is not warranted, and we no longer consider them to be candidate species for listing. We will continue to monitor the status of these species, and to accept additional information and comments concerning this finding. We will reconsider this determination in the event that new information indicates that the threats to these species are of a considerably greater magnitude or imminence than identified through assessments of information in our files, as summarized here. The summary below also notes two other species for which we published separate findings removing them from candidate status since the most recent CNOR.

Fish

Fluvial arctic grayling, upper Missouri River DPS (

Thymallus arcticus

)—see

Federal Register

notice published on April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20305).

Insects

Beaver Cave beetle (

Pseudanophthalmus major

)—see

Federal Register

notice published on October 11, 2006 (71 FR 59711).

Surprising cave beetle (

Pseudanophthalmus inexpectatus Barr

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The surprising cave beetle is a small (4 mm), eyeless, reddish-brown, troglobitic insect that belongs to the ground beetle family Carabidae. The species is predatory, feeding upon other small cave invertebrates such as spiders, mites, and millipedes.

We made the surprising cave beetle a candidate for listing on October 30, 2001. The species was originally described from two caves in Mammoth Cave National Park (MCNP), Kentucky—the historic entrance of Mammoth Cave (or Crevice Pit) and White Cave. Subsequent to this discovery, it was later found in Great Onyx Cave in MCNP. Since 2001, when we identified it as a candidate, we have found that the surprising cave beetle is more common and widespread than previously believed. In 2002, the species was discovered in a previously unnamed cave (now called Surprising Cave) within MCNP. This discovery was notable because it represented a northern range extension for the species and was made in a cave system that many speculate is completely separate from those located south of the Green River.

In 2006, the species was discovered in a fifth cave (Saucer Cave) within MCNP. Thus, we now know that the distribution of the species includes at least five areas within MCNP. In addition, over the past 6 years a total of

10 individuals have been observed during routine surveys for other cave biota. Because the surprising cave beetle is small, cryptic, and difficult to locate within the cave environment, the collection of 10 individuals is a significant accomplishment for a

Pseudanophthalmus

survey, especially when the surprising cave beetle was not the target organism. Many of the caves in MCNP have not been adequately surveyed for

Pseudanophthalmus

or other small cave organisms, and based on the information now available, we believe the species is more common within these habitats than first believed.

The most significant potential threats to the species (trampling by humans, habitat disturbance, and disruption of energy inputs) are abated by its location within a national park (MCNP) and MCNP's strict control over the majority of the cave system and its habitats. Tours are offered in only two of the five caves where the species is known to occur, and tours take place in areas away from known beetle habitats. Habitat disturbance, vandalism, and entrance manipulation are unlikely to occur because the caves are in isolated, protected locations within a national park. Other potential threats, such as contamination of cave systems through polluted stormwater runoff and toxic chemical spills, are not considered to be significant because of their low probability of occurrence. In addition, we entered into a 15-year Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) for the surprising cave beetle in 2001 with the National Park Service (NPS) at MCNP. The purpose of this CCA is for the Service and NPS to jointly implement conservation measures for the surprising cave beetle in MCNP. Management activities undertaken by MCNP under the CCA increase protection and enhance the status of this species. The Agreement was updated in 2004, and the NPS continues their efforts under this agreement.

Based on findings in our updated assessment of the surprising cave beetle, we conclude that listing this species under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. There is no portion of its range for which we have information that the species might be locally threatened. The current level of threats will not result in the species becoming in danger of extinction nor do we foresee threats increasing at any time in the future. The species no longer meets our definition of a candidate, and we have removed it from candidate status.

Warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle (

Zaitzevia thermae

)—The warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle is an aquatic flightless beetle endemic to Bridger Creek Warm Springs near Bozeman, Montana. This spring is entirely on land managed by the Service's Fish Technology Center (FTC) and is a water source for the FTC. The warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle is not known to drift within a water system with any probability of survival and requires clean water and small rock substrate absent siltation. The beetles feed on small pieces of algae and diatoms that they scrape from the submerged rocks. The warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle requires warm and flowing surface water with surface temperatures of 16 to 29°C (60 to 84°F). Water temperature is likely the most influential factor in the species' biology. The distribution of the species is described as colonies found within three main areas along 50 linear meters (m) (164 linear feet (ft)) of Bridger Creek where a warm spring emerges at or near creek water surface level. A large cement water collection box built around the spring in the early 1900s provides protection to the riffle beetle's spring habitat and it is within this sheltered area where the majority of the warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle population occurs.

A 1994 management plan prepared by the Service for the beetle guided successful implementation of actions to ensure that warm water flow out of the collection box to external seep habitat was not hindered by debris, make necessary repairs, maintain barricades and signs to prevent public disturbance of the beetle's habitat, and monitor water flow and the species to determine if conservation measures should be modified. The 1994 management plan also provided for removal of silt from the bottom of the collection box, if necessary; however, there has been no need to implement silt removal. In 2001, the FTC acquired 40 acres of land adjacent to and uphill from the spring, which provided additional protection of the spring by preventing development and adverse land use on these lands. The area around the spring continues to be protected by a chain-link fence and signs erected by the FTC, limiting foot traffic in the area (the area historically was used for swimming) as required in the 1994 management plan. In 2002, with approval of entomologists from Montana State University (MSU) per the 1994 management plan, the height of the collection box roof was raised an additional 0.6 m (2 ft) to decrease the chance of Bridger Creek runoff or flood water contaminating water in the collection box. The purpose of this project was to protect the FTC's water source from potential pathogens, silt, aquatic nuisance species, decreased water temperature, and harmful chemicals, which in turn protects the habitat of the beetle. The project also included alteration to the roof of the water collection box to improve light penetration into the box for the beetles. The actions implemented through this project continue to effectively provide beetle habitat. In July 2006, a new Conservation Agreement and Strategy (CAS) was finalized. The goal of the CAS is to ensure long-term, effective conservation of the warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle and Brown's riffle beetle (

Microcylloepus browni

), another endemic beetle found in warm water seeps downstream of warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle habitat. The CAS formalizes the ongoing cooperative effort of the signatories in conserving the warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle in its native habitat. The signatories to the CAS are: the Service; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; and MSU. Activities under the CAS are overseen by a workgroup of biologists representing the signatories. Under the 2006 CAS, water monitoring now is conducted by the Service according to the more detailed protocols in the CAS monitoring plan, which further ensures that necessary information will be acquired in order to respond appropriately in the event that water pollution or contamination is detected. Most of the conservation efforts described in the CAS are continuations of practices that were already being implemented, and are effective in addressing the potential threats to the warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle. These efforts include continuing to remove debris from the cement box, maintenance of signage and delivery of educational materials, and review of any proposed changes in land and stream uses that might impact the species and its habitat.

We carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by the warm spring zaitzevian riffle beetle (habitat development or other alterations that would alter water flow, temperature or chemistry, and stochastic events such as flooding) and considered factors that, individually and in combination, could pose a risk to the species and its habitat. This species occurs in a single spring, and the area it occupies encompasses approximately 35 m

2

(377 ft

2

), plus small adjacent seeps upstream and downstream where the species occurs in small numbers (approximately 1 m

2

(11 ft

2

) of habitat). All occupied habitat is significant to the species due to its

relatively small area and single location, therefore separate analysis of portions of the range is not applicable to this species. The foreseeable future for this species is linked to threats (habitat sustainability) more strongly than to life cycle timeframes; because the known population is carefully managed through the 2006 Conservation Agreement and Strategy, threats are not expected to increase within the foreseeable future. The FTC has committed to fund the CAS for 5 years, and we have no reason to believe that the FTC will discontinue funding and implementing the CAS into the future. We conclude that listing this species under the Act is not warranted. Because the current population is stable and threats have been addressed, it is not likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. This species no longer meets our definition of a candidate and is removed from candidate status.

Flowering Plants

Erigeron basalticus

(Basalt daisy)—

Erigeron basalticus

is a perennial, herbaceous plant with a taproot and one to several sprawling stems 10 to 15 centimeters (cm) (4 to 6 inches (in)) long.

Erigeron basalticus

grows in crevices in basalt cliffs on canyon walls, at elevations from 380 to 460 m (1,250 to 1,500 ft), along the Yakima River Canyon and Selah Creek, a tributary of the Yakima River, Washington. It is found in microsites that are largely devoid of other vegetation and undergoing primary succession. To date, threats from highway maintenance, rock quarrying, collection, location on private lands, herbicide spray drift, recreational rock climbing, or landslides previously described for this species have not been observed to affect numbers, distribution, or recruitment of

Erigeron basalticus

since the time it was initially surveyed. Overall population numbers have fluctuated within a range, but appear to be relatively stable since 1988. Monitoring of the majority of the known sites in June 2007, by the University of Washington College of Forest Resources, Botanic Gardens Rare Plant Care and Conservation Branch, provided additional data to support the removal of this species from candidacy. In addition to robust numbers counted in nearly all populations, the survey group discovered two previously unknown locations for

E. basalticus

so the species is more abundant than previously realized.

The Bureau of Land Management has no plans to change management on the Areas of Critical Environmental Concern where several subpopulations of

E. basalticus

occur. Activities previously thought to pose potential threats to the species have not materialized and we have no basis for concluding that they would affect the species in the future. Continued surveys indicate subpopulations have been fluctuating in size within a reasonable range over time, and we have no reason to believe that this will change in the future. Further, there is no portion of its range for which we have information that the species might be locally threatened. Based on our updated assessment, we conclude that

E. basalticus

is not likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Therefore we find that listing

E. basalticus

is not warranted and we remove this species from candidate status.

Ferns and Allies

Botrychium lineare

(slender moonwort)—A member of the adder's-tongue family (Ophioglossaceae),

Botrychium lineare

is a small perennial fern. The species is known from 22 sites spread across 8 States (Alaska, Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming) and two Canadian Provinces (Alberta and Yukon Territory), with a total geographic range of more than 107,000 square miles. Over 3,300 miles (5,300 kilometers) separate

B. lineare

sites in Alaska and Minnesota. Seventeen of the 20 known sites in the United States occur on Federal lands, with 3 sites found on private lands.

Review of recent information indicates there is an increase in the number of known locations of

Botrychium lineare

and the geographic range is much larger than we previously understood. Based on increased survey efforts, at least 12 new population sites have been found in 6 states, including 4 new States, and two Canadian provinces since 2003. Population sites are generally small in area and number of individuals, making the species difficult to locate and survey for, or detect in plant surveys. Because

Botrychium

species have few diagnostic features (they are small and have only one leaf),

B. lineare

can be difficult to distinguish from other closely related moonworts. For example, one former

B. lineare

population site in Idaho and two in Nevada described in the May 11, 2005, Candidate Notice of Review (70 FR 24870) are now considered something other than

B. lineare

based on genetic analysis. Some researchers consider

B. lineare

a habitat generalist that may be an opportunistic colonizer since it is found in a variety of natural sites, and several extant population sites are found in man-made disturbed sites (i.e., roadsides and roadbeds, mine tailings, and along stream banks). Because they are found in a variety of habitat types, describing suitable or a specific habitat type is problematic. We believe that the species is more widespread than currently reported. The disjunct nature of known population sites over a wide geographic range of more than 107,000 square miles suggests that additional undetected

B. lineare

populations will likely be discovered both within and outside of the largely unsurveyed geographic range of the species in the United States and Canada.

Much of the information provided to us regarding potential threats to

Botrychium lineare

is general in nature or there is uncertainty and very little documentation on how potential threats are affecting existing, disjunct populations, individual plants or the various natural and disturbed habitats of the species. Not all known population sites are exposed to potential threats. Where Federal land managers have recognized that threats could be affecting

B. lineare

populations, various conservation measures are being implemented. In total, potential threats are being addressed at 8 of the 20

B. lineare

population sites in the United States (2 Canadian population sites not included). Invasive, nonnative species are reported to occur within 4 populations and adjacent to 10 populations. Conservation measures to reduce the occurrence of invasive species are under way at seven sites in Colorado, Montana, and Oregon. Monitoring to detect presence of additional invasive species is currently conducted at two additional sites in Oregon. Thirteen populations occur adjacent to or near roads; avoidance and minimization measures are in place at four sites in Colorado and one site in South Dakota to reduce the impact of road-related activities. Livestock impacts have been precluded at one site in Washington through an exclosure.

Based on our updated assessment, we have determined that

Botrychium lineare

is not likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. We have no information that indicates that any of the known

B. lineare

populations constitute a significant portion of the range of the species or that there is any portion of its range where the species might be locally threatened.

Botrychium lineare's

known geographic range is much larger than previously understood and it is likely that additional

B. lineare

populations will be discovered both within and outside of the largely unsurveyed geographic range of the species in the United States and Canada. There is also insufficient information to adequately describe suitable habitat for the species, or to fully understand

B. lineare's

biological vulnerability to potential threat factors. Therefore, we find that listing is not warranted and we remove this species from candidate status.

Petition Findings

The Act provides two mechanisms for considering species for listing. One method allows the Secretary, on his own initiative, to identify species for listing under the standards of section 4(a)(1). We implement this through the candidate program, discussed above. The second method for listing a species provides a mechanism for the public to petition us to add a species to the Lists. Under section 4(b)(3)(A), when we receive such a petition, we must determine within 90 days, to the maximum extent practicable, whether the petition presents substantial information that listing may be warranted (a “90-day finding”). If we make a positive 90-day finding, we must promptly commence a status review of the species under section 4(b)(3)(A); we must then make and publish one of three possible findings within 12 months of the receipt of the petition (a “12-month finding”):

1. The petitioned action is not warranted;

2. The petitioned action is warranted (in which case we are required to promptly publish a proposed regulation to implement the petitioned action; once we publish a proposed rule for a species, section 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) govern further procedures regardless of whether we issued the proposal in response to a petition); or

3. The petitioned action is warranted but (a) the immediate proposal of a regulation and final promulgation of regulation implementing the petitioned action is precluded by pending proposals, and (b) expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to the lists of endangered or threatened species. (We refer to this as a “warranted-but-precluded finding.”)

Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that when we make a warranted but precluded finding on a petition, we are to treat such a petition as one that is resubmitted on the date of such a finding. Thus, we are required to publish new 12-month findings on these “resubmitted” petitions on an annual basis.

On December 5, 1996, we made a final decision to redefine “candidate species” to mean those species for which the Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but for which issuance of the proposed rule is precluded (61 FR 64481; December 6, 1996). Therefore, the standard for making a species a candidate through our own initiative is identical to the standard for making a warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding on a petition to list, and we add all petitioned species for which we have made a warranted-but-precluded 12-month finding to the candidate list.

This publication also provides notice of substantial 90-day findings and the warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings pursuant to section 4(b)(3) for candidate species listed on Table 1 that we identified on our own initiative, and that subsequently have been the subject of a petition to list. Even though all candidate species identified through our own initiative already have received the equivalent of substantial 90-day and warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings, we reviewed the status of the newly petitioned candidate species and through this CNOR are publishing specific section 4(b)(3) findings (i.e., substantial 90-day and warranted but precluded 12-month findings) in response to the petitions to list these candidate species. We publish these findings as part of the first CNOR following receipt of the petition.

Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act, once a petition is filed regarding a candidate species, we must make a 12-month petition finding in compliance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act at least once a year, until we publish a proposal to list the species or make a final not-warranted finding. We make this annual finding for petitioned candidate species through the CNOR.

Section 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the Act requires us to “implement a system to monitor effectively the status of all species” for which we have made a warranted-but-precluded 12-month finding, and to “make prompt use of the [emergency listing] authority [under section 4(b)(7)] to prevent a significant risk to the well being of any such species.” The CNOR plays a crucial role in the monitoring system that we have implemented for all candidate species by providing notice that we are actively seeking information regarding the status of those species. We review all new information on candidate species as it becomes available, prepare an annual species assessment form that reflects monitoring results and other new information, and identify any species for which emergency listing may be appropriate. If we determine that emergency listing is appropriate for any candidate, whether it was identified through our own initiative or through the petition process, we will make prompt use of the emergency listing authority under section 4(b)(7). We have been reviewing and will continue to review, at least annually, the status of every candidate, whether or not we have received a petition to list it. Thus, the CNOR and accompanying species assessment forms also constitute the Service's annual finding on the status of petitioned species pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i).

On June 20, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the 1999 CNOR (64 FR 57534; October 25, 1999) did not demonstrate that we fulfilled the second component of the warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition findings for the Gila chub and Chiracahua leopard frog (

Center for Biological Diversity

v.

Norton,

254 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 2001)). The court found that the one-line designation in the table of candidates in the 1999 CNOR, with no further explanation, did not satisfy section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii)'s requirement that the Service publish a finding “together with a description and evaluation of the reasons and data on which the finding is based.” The court suggested that this one-line statement of candidate status also precluded meaningful judicial review.

On June 21, 2004, the United States District Court for Oregon agreed that we can use the CNOR as a vehicle for making petition findings and that our reasoning for why listing is precluded does not need to be based on an assessment at a regional level (as opposed to a national level) (

Center for Biological Diversity

v.

Norton

Civ. No. 03-1111-AA (D. Or.)). However, this court found that our discussion on why listing the candidate species were precluded by other actions lacked specificity; in the list of species that were the subject of listing actions that precluded us from proposing to list candidate species, we did not state the specific action at issue for each species in the list and we did not indicate which actions were court-ordered.

On June 22, 2004, in a similar case, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California also concluded that our determination of preclusion may appropriately be based on a national analysis (

Center for Biological Diversity

v.

Norton

No. CV S-03-1758 GEB/DAD (E.D. Cal.)). This court also found that the Act's

imperative that listing decisions be based solely on science applies only to the determination about whether listing is warranted, not the question of when listing is precluded.

On March 24, 2005, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that we may not consider critical habitat activities in justifying our inability to list candidate species, requiring that we justify both our preclusion findings and our demonstration of expeditious progress by reference to listing proceedings for unlisted species (

California Native Plant Society

v.

Norton

, Civ. No. 03-1540 (JR) (D.D.C.)). The court further found that we must adequately itemize priority listings, explain why certain species are of high priority, and explain why actions on these high-priority species preclude listing species of lower priority. The court approved our reliance on national rather than regional priorities and workload in establishing preclusion and approved our basic explanation that listing candidate species may be precluded by statutorily mandated deadlines, court-ordered actions, higher-priority listing activities, and a limited budget.

We drafted previous CNORs to address the concerns of these courts and continue to incorporate those changes that addressed the courts' concerns in this CNOR. We include a description of the reasons why the listing of every petitioned candidate species is both warranted and precluded at this time. We make our determinations of preclusion on a nationwide basis to ensure that the species most in need of listing will be addressed first and also because we allocate our listing budget on a nationwide basis (see below). Regional priorities can also be discerned from Table 1, which includes the lead region and the LPN for each species. Our preclusion determinations are further based upon our budget for listing activities for unlisted species and we explain the priority system and why the work we have accomplished does preclude action on listing candidate species.

Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(ii) and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), any party with standing may challenge the merits of any not-warranted or warranted-but-precluded petition finding incorporated in this CNOR. The analysis included herein, together with the administrative record for the decision at issue (particularly the supporting species assessment form), will provide an adequate basis for a court to review the petition finding.

Nothing in this document or any of our policies should be construed as in any way modifying the Act's requirement that we make a resubmitted 12-month petition finding for each petitioned candidate within 1 year of the date of publication of this CNOR. If we fail to make any such finding on a timely basis, whether through publication of a new CNOR or some other form of notice, any party with standing may seek judicial review.

In this CNOR, we continue to address the concerns of the courts by including more specific information in our discussion on preclusion (see below). In preparing this CNOR, we reviewed the current status of and threats to the 203 candidates and 5 listed species for which we have received a petition and for which we have found listing or reclassification from threatened to endangered to be warranted but precluded. We find that the immediate issuance of a proposed rule and timely promulgation of a final rule for each of these species has been, for the preceding months, and continues to be, precluded by higher-priority listing actions. Additional information that is the basis for this finding is found in the species assessments and our administrative record for each species.

Our review included updating the status of and threats to petitioned candidate or listed species for which we published findings, pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(B), in the previous CNOR. We have incorporated new information we gathered since the prior finding and, as a result of this review, we are making continued warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings on the petitions for these species.

We have identified the candidate species for which we received petitions by the code “C*” in the category column on the left side of Table 1. As discussed above, the immediate publication of proposed rules to list these species was precluded by our work on higher-priority listing actions, listed below, during the period from September 12, 2006, through September 30, 2007. We will continue to monitor the status of all candidate species, including petitioned species, as new information becomes available. This review will determine if a change in status is warranted, including the need to emergency-list a species under section 4(b)(7) of the Act.

In addition to identifying petitioned candidate species in Table 1 below, we also present brief summaries of why these particular candidates warrant listing. More complete information, including references, is found in the species assessment forms. You may obtain a copy of these forms from the Regional Office having the lead for the species, or from the Fish and Wildlife Service's Internet Web site:

http://endangered.fws.gov/

. As described above, under section 4 of the Act we may identify and propose species for listing based on the factors identified in section 4(a)(1), and section 4 also provides a mechanism for the public to petition us to add a species to the lists of species determined to be threatened species or endangered species under the Act. Below we describe the actions that continue to preclude the immediate proposal of a regulation and final promulgation of a regulation implementing the petitioned action, and we describe the expeditious progress we are making to add qualified species to the lists of endangered or threatened species.

Preclusion and Expeditious Progress

Preclusion is a function of the listing priority of a species in relation to the resources that are available and competing demands for those resources. (As described above in the Summary, the listing priority of a species is represented by the LPN we assign to it.) Thus, in any given fiscal year (FY), multiple factors dictate whether it will be possible to undertake work on a proposed listing regulation or whether promulgation of such a proposal is warranted but precluded by higher-priority listing actions.

The resources available for listing actions are determined through the annual Congressional appropriations process. The appropriation for the Listing Program is available to support work involving the following listing actions: Proposed and final listing rules; 90-day and 12-month findings on petitions to add species to the Lists or to change the status of a species from threatened to endangered; resubmitted petition findings; proposed and final rules designating critical habitat; and litigation-related, administrative, and program management functions (including preparing and allocating budgets, responding to Congressional and public inquiries, and conducting public outreach regarding listing and critical habitat). The work involved in preparing various listing documents can be extensive and may include, but is not limited to: Gathering and assessing the best scientific and commercial data available and conducting analyses used as the basis for our decisions; writing and publishing documents; and obtaining, reviewing, and evaluating public comments and peer review comments on proposed rules and incorporating relevant information into

final rules. The number of listing actions that we can undertake in a given year also is influenced by the complexity of those listing actions; that is, more complex actions generally are more costly. For example, during the past several years, the cost (excluding publication costs) for preparing a 12-month finding, without a proposed rule, has ranged from approximately $11,000 for one species with a restricted range and involving a relatively uncomplicated analysis to $305,000 for another species that is wide-ranging and involving a complex analysis.

We cannot spend more than is appropriated for the Listing Program without violating the Anti-Deficiency Act (see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In addition, in FY 1998 and for each fiscal year since then, Congress has placed a statutory cap on funds which may be expended for the Listing Program, equal to the amount expressly appropriated for that purpose in that fiscal year. This cap was designed to prevent funds appropriated for other functions under the Act (e.g., Recovery funds for removing species from the Lists), or for other Service programs, from being used for Listing Program actions (see House Report 105-163, 105th Congress, 1st Session, July 1, 1997).

Recognizing that designation of critical habitat for species already listed would consume most of the overall Listing Program appropriation, Congress also put a critical habitat subcap in place in FY 2002 and has retained it each subsequent year to ensure that some funds are available for other work in the Listing Program: “The critical habitat designation subcap will ensure that some funding is available to address other listing activities” (House Report No. 107-103, 107th Congress, 1st Session, June 19, 2001). In FY 2002 and each year until last year (FY 2006), the Service has had to use virtually the entire critical habitat subcap to address court-mandated designations of critical habitat, and consequently none of the critical habitat subcap funds have been available for other listing activities.

Thus, through the listing cap, the critical habitat subcap, and the amount of funds needed to address court-mandated critical habitat designations, Congress and the courts have in effect determined the amount of money available for other listing activities. Therefore, the funds in the listing cap, other than those needed to address court-mandated critical habitat for already listed species, set the limits on our determinations of preclusion and expeditious progress.

Congress also recognized that the availability of resources was the key element in deciding whether, when making a 12-month petition finding, we would prepare and issue a listing proposal or make a “warranted but precluded” finding for a given species. The Conference Report accompanying Pub. L. 97-304, which established the current statutory deadlines and the warranted-but-precluded finding, states (in a discussion on 90-day petition findings that by its own terms also covers 12-month findings) that the deadlines were “not intended to allow the Secretary to delay commencing the rulemaking process for any reason other than that the existence of pending or imminent proposals to list species subject to a greater degree of threat would make allocation of resources to such a petition [i.e., for a lower-ranking species] unwise.” Taking into account the information presented above, in FY 2007, the outer parameter within which “expeditious progress” must be measured is that amount of progress that could be achieved by spending $5,193,000, which was the amount available in the Listing Program appropriation that was not within the critical habitat subcap.

Our process is to make our determinations of preclusion on a nationwide basis to ensure that the species most in need of listing will be addressed first and also because we allocate our listing budget on a nationwide basis. However, through court orders and court-approved settlements, Federal district courts have mandated that we must complete certain listing activities with respect to specified species and have established the schedules by which we must complete those activities. The species involved in these court-mandated listing activities are not always those that we have identified as being most in need of listing. As described below, a majority of the $5,193,000 appropriation available in FY 2007 for new listings of species is being consumed by court-mandated listing activities; by ordering or sanctioning these actions, the courts essentially determined that these were the highest priority actions to be undertaken with available funding. Copies of the court orders and settlement agreements referred to below are available from the Service and are part of the administrative record for these resubmitted petition findings.

The FY 2007 appropriation of $5,193,000 for listing activities (that is, the portion of the Listing Program funding not related to critical habitat designations for species that already are listed) was fully allocated to fund work in the following categories of actions in the Listing Program: Compliance with court orders and court-approved settlement agreements requiring that petition findings or listing determinations be completed by a specific date; section 4 (of the Act) listing actions with absolute statutory deadlines; essential litigation-related, administrative, and program management functions; and a few high-priority listing actions. The allocations for each specific listing action were identified in the Service's FY 2007 Allocation Table (part of our administrative record). Although more funds were available in FY 2007 than in previous years to work on listing actions that were not the subject of court orders or court-approved settlement agreements, based on the available funds and their allocation for these purposes, only limited FY 2007 funds were available for work on proposed listing determinations for the following high-priority candidate species: 3 southeastern aquatic species, all with LPN 2 (Georgia pigtoe, interrupted rocksnail, and rough hornsnail); 2 species from the island of Oahu, Hawaii, both with LPN 2 (

Doryopteris takeuchii

and

Melicope hiiakae

); 1 species from the island of Molokai, Hawaii, with LPN 2 (

Phyllostegia hispida

); 31 species from the island of Kauai, Hawaii, including 24 species with LPN 2 and 7 other candidates included in the listing determination package for the sake of efficiency because they overlap geographically and/or have the same threats (Kauai creeper,

Drosophila attigua, Astelia waialealae, Canavalia napaliensis, Chamaesyce eleanoriae, Chamaesyce remyi

var.

kauaiensis, Chamaesyce remyi

var.

remyi, Charpentiera densiflora, Cyanea eleeleensis, Cyanea kuhihewa, Cyrtandra oenobarba, Dubautia imbricata

ssp.

imbricata, Dubautia plantaginea

ssp.

magnifolia, Dubautia waialealae, Geranium kauaiense, Keysseria erici, Keysseria helenae, Labordia helleri, Labordia pumila, Lysimachia daphnoides, Melicope degeneri, Melicope paniculata, Melicope puberula, Myrsine mezii, Pittosporum napaliense, Platydesma rostrata, Pritchardia hardyi, Psychotria grandiflora, Psychotria hobdyi, Schiedea attenuata, Stenogyne kealiae

); and 4 Hawaiian damselflies, all with LPN 2 (

Megalagrion nesiotes, Megalagrion leptodemas, Megalagrion oceanicum, Megalagrion pacificum

).

FY 2007 listing allocation

Allocated

Available

balance

FY07 Appropriation (including space reprogramming)

$5,193,000

$5,193,000

Space reprogramming (program's portion of rent for building space)

216,778

4,976,222

Regional & Washington Offices (staff salaries & benefits and administrative costs)

1,674,012

3,302,210

90-day findings

604,617

2,697,593

12-month findings

830,193

1,867,400

Proposed Listing/Critical Habitat

963,000

904,400

Economic Analysis (for Critical Habitat)

504,400

400,000

Final Listing/CH

300,000

100,000

Attorney Fees/Litigation Expenses

100,000

0

Specific details regarding the individual actions taken using the FY 2007 funding, which precluded our ability to undertake listing proposals for candidate species, except the species noted above, are provided below (information on the cost of individual actions is part of our administrative record).

In addition to being precluded by lack of available funds, work on proposed rules for candidates with lower priority (i.e., those that have LPNs of 4-12) is also precluded by the need to issue proposed rules for higher-priority species facing high-magnitude, imminent threats (i.e., LPNs of 1-3). We currently have more than 120 species with an LPN of 2 (see Table 1).

We further ranked the candidate species with an LPN of 2 by using the following extinction-risk type criteria: IUCN Red list status/rank, Heritage rank (provided by NatureServe), Heritage threat rank (provided by NatureServe), and species currently with fewer than 50 individuals, or 4 or fewer populations. Those species with the highest IUCN rank (critically endangered), the highest Heritage rank (G1), the highest Heritage threat rank (substantial, imminent threats), and currently with fewer than 50 individuals, or fewer than 4 populations comprise a list of approximately 40 candidate species that have the highest priority to receive funding to work on a proposed listing determination. Note, to be more efficient in our listing process, as we work on proposed rules for these species in the next several years, we are preparing multi-species proposals when appropriate, and these may include species with lower priority if they overlap geographically or have the same threats as species with LPN of 2. Finally, proposed rules for reclassification of threatened species to endangered are lower priority, since the listing of the species already affords the protection of the Act and implementing regulations.

Thus, we continue to find that proposals to list the petitioned candidate species included in Table 1 are all warranted but precluded, except for the candidate species listed above.

As explained above, a determination that listing is warranted but precluded must also demonstrate that expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to, and remove qualified species from, the Lists. (We note that in this CNOR we do not discuss specific actions taken on progress towards removing species from the Lists because that work is conducted using appropriations for our Recovery program, a separately budgeted component of the Endangered Species Program. As explained above in our description of the statutory cap on Listing Program funds, the Recovery Program funds and actions supported by them cannot be considered in determining expeditious progress made in the Listing Program.) As with our “precluded” finding, expeditious progress in adding qualified species to the Lists is a function of the resources available and the competing demands for those funds. Our expeditious progress in FY 2007 in the Listing Program, through September 30, 2007, included preparing and publishing the following:

FY 2007 Completed Listing Actions as of 09/30/2007

Publication date

Title

Actions

FR pages

10/11/2006

Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule to List the Cow Head Tui Chub (

Gila biocolor vaccaceps

) as Endangered

Notice of withdrawal, Threats eliminated

71 FR 59700-59711.

10/11/2006

Revised 12-Month Finding for the Beaver Cave Beetle (

Pseudanophthalmus major

)

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

71 FR 59711-59714.

11/14/2006

12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Island Marble Butterfly (

Euchloe ausonides insulanus

) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

71 FR 66292-66298.

11/14/2006

90-Day Finding for a Petition to List the Kennebec River Population of Anadromous Atlantic Salmon as Part of the Endangered Gulf Of Maine Distinct Population Segment

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

71 FR 66298-66301.

11/21/2006

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Columbian Sharp-Tailed Grouse as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

71 FR 67318-67325.

12/5/2006

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Tricolored Blackbird as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

71 FR 70483-70492.

12/6/2006

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Cerulean Warbler (

Dendroica cerulea

) as Threatened with Critical Habitat

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

71 FR 70717-70733.

12/6/2006

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Upper Tidal Potomac River Population of the Northern Water Snake (

Nerodia sipedon

) as an Endangered Distinct Population Segment

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

71 FR 70715-70717.

12/14/2006

90-Day Finding on a Petition to Remove the Uinta Basin Hookless Cactus From the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Pariette Cactus as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 5-year Review, Initiation

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

71 FR 75215-75220.

12/19/2006

Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to List

Penstemon grahamii

(Graham's beardtongue) as Threatened With Critical Habitat

Notice of withdrawal, More abundant than believed, or diminished threats

71 FR 76023-76035.

12/19/2006

90-Day Finding on Petitions to List the Mono Basin Area Population of the Greater Sage-Grouse as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

71 FR 76057-76079.

1/9/2007

12-Month Petition Finding and Proposed Rule To List the Polar Bear (

Ursus maritimus

) as Threatened Throughout Its Range; Proposed Rule

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted

Proposed Listing, Threatened

72 FR 1063-1099.

1/10/2007

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Clarification of Significant Portion of the Range for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx

Clarification of findings

72 FR 1186-1189.

1/12/2007

Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To List

Lepidium papilliferum

(Slickspot Peppergrass)

Notice of withdrawal, More abundant than believed, or diminished threats

72 FR 1621-1644.

2/2/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the American Eel as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

72 FR 4967-4997.

2/13/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Jollyville Plateau Salamander as Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

72 FR 6699-6703.

2/13/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the San Felipe Gambusia as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 6703-6707.

2/14/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition to List

Astragalus debequaeus

(DeBeque milkvetch) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 6998-7005.

2/21/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To Reclassify the Utah Prairie Dog From Threatened to Endangered and Initiation of a 5-Year Review

Notice of 5-year Review, Initiation

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 7843-7852.

3/8/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Monongahela River Basin Population of the Longnose Sucker as Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 10477-10480.

03/29/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Siskiyou Mountains Salamander and Scott Bar Salamander as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

72 FR 14750-14759.

04/24/2007

Revised 12-Month Finding for Upper Missouri River Distinct Population Segment of Fluvial Arctic Grayling

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

72 FR 20305-20314.

05/02/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Sand Mountain Blue Butterfly (

Euphilotes pallescens

ssp.

arenamontana

) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical Habitat

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

72 FR 24253-24263.

05/22/2007

Status of the Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout

Notice of Review

72 FR 28864-28665.

05/30/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Mt. Charleston Blue Butterfly as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

72 FR 29933-29941.

06/05/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Wolverine as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of Review

72 FR 31048-31049.

06/06/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

72 FR 31256-31264.

06/13/2007

12-Month Finding for a Petition To List the Colorado River Cutthroat Trout as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

72 FR 32589-32605.

06/25/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Sierra Nevada Distinct Population Segment of the Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog (

Rana muscosa

)

Notice of amended 12-month petition finding, Warranted but Precluded

72 FR 34657-34661.

07/05/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Casey's June Beetle (

Dinacoma caseyi

) as Endangered With Critical Habitat

Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted but precluded

72 FR 36635-36646.

08/15/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Yellowstone National Park Bison Herd as Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 45717-45722.

08/16/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List

Astragalus anserinus

(Goose Creek milk-vetch) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Substantial

72 FR 46023-46030.

8/28/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Gunnison's Prairie Dog as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of Review

72 FR 49245-49246.

9/11/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Kenk's Amphipod, Virginia Well Amphipod, and the Copepod Acanthocyclops columbiensis as Endangered

Notice of 90-day petition finding, Not substantial

72 FR 51766-51770.

9/18/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List

Sclerocactus brevispinus

(Pariette cactus) as an Endangered or Threatened Species; Taxonomic Change From Sclerocactus glaucus to Sclerocactus brevispinus, S. glaucus, and S. wetlandicus

Notice of 12-month petition finding for uplisting, Warranted but precluded

72 FR 53211-53222.

Our expeditious progress also includes work on listing actions for 68 species for which decisions were not completed as of the end of FY 2007. These actions are listed below; we are conducting work on those actions in the top section of the table under a deadline set by a court, actions in the middle section of the table to meet statutory timelines, that is, timelines required under the Act, and actions in the bottom section of the table are high priority listing actions:

Listing Actions Funded but Not completed in FY2007

Species

Action

Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement

Wolverine

12-month petition finding (remand).

Western sage grouse

90-day petition finding (remand).

Queen Charlotte goshawk

Final listing determination.

Rio Grande cutthroat trout

Candidate assessment (remand).

Statutory Listing Actions

Polar bear

Final listing determination.

Ozark chinquapin

90-day petition finding.

Kokanee

90-day petition finding.

Black-footed albatross

90-day petition finding.

Tucson shovel-nosed snake

90-day petition finding.

Gopher tortoise—Florida population

90-day petition finding.

Sacramento valley tiger beetle

90-day petition finding.

Eagle lake trout

90-day petition finding.

Smooth billed ani

90-day petition finding.

Mojave ground squirrel

90-day petition finding.

Gopher tortoise—eastern population

90-day petition finding.

Bay Springs salamander

90-day petition finding.

Tehachapi slender salamander

90-day petition finding.

Coaster brook trout

90-day petition finding.

Mojave fringe-toed lizard

90-day petition finding.

Evening primrose

90-day petition finding.

Palm Springs pocket mouse

90-day petition finding.

Northern leopard frog

90-day petition finding.

Mountain whitefish—Big Lost River population

90-day petition finding.

Giant Palouse earthworm

90-day petition finding.

Shrike, Island loggerhead

90-day petition finding.

Cactus ferruginous pygmy owl

90-day petition finding.

High Priority Listing Actions

3 Southeastern aquatic species

Proposed listing

2 Oahu plants

Proposed listing

31 Kauai species

Proposed listing

4 Hawaiian damselflies

Proposed listing

Phyllostegia hispida

Proposed listing

We also funded work on resubmitted petitions findings for 203 candidate species and 5 listed species (species petitioned prior to the last CNOR). Note we have not updated our resubmitted petition finding for the Columbia Basin population of the greater sage-grouse in this notice as we are considering new information and will update our findings at a later date. We also have not updated our resubmitted petition findings for the 41 candidate species for which we are preparing proposed listing determinations, which will be published at a later date (see summaries below). As explained above, these resubmitted petition findings are required by statute, and findings for these 203 candidates and 5 listed species are being published as part of this CNOR. We also funded revised 12-month petition findings for 4 candidate species that we are removing from candidate status, which are being published as part of this CNOR (see

Summary of Candidate Removals

). We are also funding work on the next annual review of those resubmitted petition findings, which will be published as part of the next CNOR. Because the majority of these species were already candidate species prior to our receipt of a petition to list them, we had already assessed their status using funds from our Candidate Conservation Program. We also continue to monitor the status of these species through our Candidate Conservation Program. The cost of updating the species assessment forms and publishing the joint publication of the CNOR and resubmitted petition findings is shared between the Listing Program and the Candidate Conservation Program.

We have endeavored to make our listing actions as efficient and timely as possible, given the requirements of the relevant law and regulations, and constraints relating to workload and personnel. We are continually considering ways to streamline processes or achieve economies of scale, such as by batching related actions together. Given our limited budget for implementing section 4 of the Act, these actions described above collectively constitute expeditious progress.

Although we have not been able to resolve the listing status of many of the candidates, several programs in the Service contribute to the conservation of these species. In particular, we have a separate budgeted program, the Candidate Conservation program, which focuses on providing technical expertise for developing conservation strategies and agreements to guide voluntary on-the-ground conservation work for candidate and other at-risk species. The main goal of this program is to address the threats facing candidate species. If sufficiently successful, this eliminates the need to list them, allowing us to remove them from the candidate list. Through this program, we work with our partners (other Federal agencies, State agencies, Tribes, local governments, private landowners, and private conservation organizations) to address the threats to candidate species and other species at risk. We are actively engaged in the conservation of these species and have, to-date, signed more than 100 Candidate Conservation Agreements and 16 Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances. We are implementing these voluntary conservation agreements for more than 140 species covering 5 million acres of habitat.

Through sustained implementation of strategically designed conservation efforts, we are actively working to conserve many candidate species. In some instances, this culminates in making listing unnecessary for species that are proposed or candidates for listing. Recent examples include the Cow Head tui chub, Beaver Cave beetle, Surprising Cave beetle, and Warm Spring zaitzevian riffle beetle.

Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species

For our revised 12-month petition findings for species we are removing from candidate status, see summaries above under

“Summary of Candidate Removals.”

Mammals

Pacific Sheath-tailed Bat, American Samoa DPS (

Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This small bat is a member of the Emballonuridae, an Old World bat family that has an extensive

distribution, primarily in the tropics. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat was once common and widespread in Polynesia and Micronesia and it is the only insectivorous bat recorded from a large part of this area. The species as a whole (

E. semicaudata

) occurred on several of the Caroline Islands (Palau, Chuuk, and Pohnpei), Samoa (Independent and American), the Mariana Islands (Guam and the CNMI), Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. While populations appear to be healthy in some locations, mainly in the Caroline Islands, they have declined drastically in other areas, including Independent and American Samoa, the Mariana Islands, Fiji, and possibly Tonga. Scientists recognize four subspecies:

E. s. rotensis,

endemic to the Mariana Islands (Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI));

E. s. sulcata,

occurring in Chuuk and Pohnpei;

E. s. palauensis,

found in Palau; and

E. s. semicaudata,

occurring in American and Independent Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. This candidate assessment form addresses the distinct population segment of

E. s. semicaudata

that occurs in American Samoa.

E. s. semicaudata

historically occurred in American and Independent Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. It is extant in Fiji and Tonga, but may be extirpated from Vanuatu and Independent Samoa. There is some concern that it is also extirpated from American Samoa, where surveys are currently ongoing to ascertain its status. The factors that have led to the decline of this subspecies are poorly understood; however, current threats to this subspecies include habitat loss, predation by introduced species, and its small population size and distribution, which make the taxon extremely vulnerable to extinction due to typhoons and similar natural catastrophes. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat may also by susceptible to disturbance to roosting caves. The LPN for

E. s. semicaudata

is 3, because the magnitude of the threats is high, the threats are imminent, and the taxon in question is a distinct population segment of a subspecies.

Pacific Sheath-tailed Bat (

Emballonura semicaudata rotensis

), Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This small bat is a member of the Emballonuridae, an Old World bat family that has an extensive distribution, primarily in the tropics. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat was once common and widespread in Polynesia and Micronesia and it is the only insectivorous bat recorded from a large part of this area. The species as a whole (

E. semicaudata

) occurred on several of the Caroline Islands (Palau, Chuuk, and Pohnpei), Samoa (Independent and American), the Mariana Islands (Guam and the CNMI), Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. While populations appear to be healthy in some locations, mainly in the Caroline Islands, they have declined drastically in other areas, including Independent and American Samoa, the Mariana Islands, Fiji, and possibly Tonga. Scientists recognize four subspecies:

E. s. rotensis,

endemic to the Mariana Islands (Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI));

E. s. sulcata,

occurring in Chuuk and Pohnpei;

E. s. palauensis,

found in Palau; and

E. s. semicaudata,

occurring in American and Independent Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. This candidate assessment form addresses the Mariana Islands subspecies.

E. s. rotensis

is historically known from the Mariana Islands and formerly occurred on Guam and in the CNMI on Rota, Aguiguan, Tinian (known from prehistoric records only), Saipan, and possibly Anatahan and Maug. Currently,

E. s. rotensis

appears to be extirpated from all but one island in the Mariana archipelago. The single remaining population of this subspecies occurs on Aguiguan, CNMI.

Threats to this subspecies have not changed over the past year. The primary threats to the subspecies are habitat loss and degradation as a result of feral goat (

Capra hircus

) activity on the island of Aguiguan and the taxon's small population size and limited distribution. Predation by nonnative species and human disturbance are also potential threats to the subspecies. The subspecies may be near the point where stochastic events, such as typhoons, are increasingly likely to affect its continued survival. The disappearance of the remaining population on Aguiguan would result in the extinction of the subspecies. The LPN for

E. s. rotensis

remains at 3 because the magnitude of the threats is high, the threats are imminent, and the taxon in question is a subspecies.

New England cottontail (

Sylvilagus transitionalis

)—The following summary is based on information from our files and information collected during the public comment period on the 90-day petition finding. We received the petition on August 30, 2000. The 90-day finding was published on June 30, 2004 (69 FR 39395).

The New England cottontail (NEC) is a medium to large-sized cottontail rabbit that may reach 1,000 grams in weight, and is one of two species within the genus

Sylvilagus

occurring in New England. New England cottontails are considered habitat specialists, in so far as they are dependent upon early-successional habitats typically described as thickets. The species is the only endemic cottontail in New England. Historically, the NEC ranged from southeastern New York (east of the Hudson River) north through the Champlain Valley, southern Vermont, the southern half of New Hampshire, southern Maine and south throughout Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island. The current range of the NEC has declined substantially and occurrences have become increasingly separated. The species' distribution is fragmented into five apparently isolated metapopulations in about 14 percent of the species' historic range. The area occupied by the cottontail has contracted from approximately 90,000 sq km to 12,180 sq km. It is estimated that less than one third of the occupied sites occur on lands in conservation status and fewer than 10 percent are being managed for early successional forest species.

The primary threat to the New England cottontail is loss of habitat through succession and alteration. Isolation of occupied patches by areas of unsuitable habitat and high predation rates are resulting in local extirpation of New England cottontails from small patches. The range of the New England cottontail has contracted by 75 percent or more since 1960 and current land uses in the region indicate that the rate of change, about two percent range loss per year, will continue. Additional threats include competition for food and habitat with introduced eastern cottontails and large numbers of native white-tailed deer; inadequate regulatory mechanisms in effect to protect the habitat; and mortality from predation. Based on threats of high magnitude that are imminent, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.

Fisher, West Coast DPS (

Martes pennanti

)—The following summary is based on information in our files and in the Service's initial warranted-but-precluded finding published in the

Federal Register

on April 8, 2004 (68 FR 18770). The fisher is a carnivore in the family Mustelidae and is the largest member of the genus Martes. Historically, the West Coast population of the fisher extended south from British Columbia into western Washington and Oregon, and in the North Coast Ranges, Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains, and Sierra Nevada in California. The fisher is believed to be extirpated or reduced

to scattered individuals from the lower mainland of British Columbia through Washington and in the central and northern Sierra Nevada range in California. Native populations of fisher currently occur in the North Coast Ranges of California, the Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains of northern California and southern Oregon, and in isolated populations occurring in the southern Sierra Nevada in California. Descendents of a fisher reintroduction effort also occur in the southern Cascade Range in Oregon. There is a lack of precise empirical data on West Coast DPS fisher numbers. However, there is a lack of detections over much of the fisher's historic range, even with standardized survey and monitoring efforts in California, Oregon, and Washington. There is also a high degree of genetic relatedness within some populations, and populations of native fisher in California are separated by four times the species' maximum dispersal distance. The above listed factors all indicate that the likely extant fisher populations are small and isolated from one another.

Major threats that fragment or remove key elements of fisher habitat include various forest vegetation management practices such as timber harvest and fuels reduction treatments. Other potential major threats include: Stand-replacing fire, Sudden Oak Death Phytophthora, urban and rural development, recreation development, and highways. Major threats to fisher that lead to direct mortality and injury to fisher include: Collisions with vehicles; predation; and viral borne diseases such as rabies, parvovirus, canine distemper, and

Anaplasma phagocytophilum.

Existing regulatory mechanisms on Federal, State, and private lands affect key elements of fisher habitat and do not provide sufficient certainty that conservation efforts will be effective or will be implemented. The magnitude of threats is high as they occur across the range of the DPS resulting in a negative impact on fisher distribution and abundance. However, the threats are nonimminent as the greatest long-term risks to the fisher in its west coast range are the subsequent ramifications of the isolation of small populations, and the three remaining areas containing fisher populations appear to be stable or not rapidly declining based on recent survey and monitoring efforts. Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 6 to this population.

Mazama pocket gopher (

Thomomys mazama

ssp.

couchi, douglasii, glacialis, louiei, melanops, pugetensis, tacomensis, tumuli, yelmensis

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition received December 11, 2002. Since publication of our last CNOR, the Brush Prairie pocket gopher was recently discovered to have been erroneously assigned to another species,

T. talpoides douglasii

(a northern pocket gopher). Mitochondrial DNA analysis determined that it is actually a subspecies of

T. mazama,

thus we are now including this subspecies in our candidate list as

T. m. douglasii.

Seven of these nine subspecies of pocket gopher are associated with glacial outwash prairies in western Washington (

T. m. melanops

is found on alpine meadows in Olympic National Park, and

T. m. douglasii

is found in extreme southwest Washington). Of these seven subspecies, five are likely still extant (

couchi, glacialis, pugetensis, tumuli,

and

yelmensis

); two of the subspecies (

louiei

and

tacomensis

) are likely extinct. Few of these glacial outwash prairies remain in Washington today. Historically, such prairies were patchily distributed, but the area they occupied was approximately 170,000 acres. Now, residential and commercial development, and ingrowth of woody and/or nonnative vegetation (often due to fire-regime alteration) have further reduced their extent of suitable habitats. In addition, development in or adjacent to these prairies has likely increased predation on Mazama pocket gophers by dogs and cats.

The magnitude of threat is high due to populations with patchy and isolated distributions in habitats highly desirable for development and subject to a wide variety of human activities that permanently alter the habitat. The threat of invasive plant species to the quality of a highly specific habitat requirement is high and constant. There are few known populations of each subspecies. A limited dispersal capability and the loss and degradation of additional patches of appropriate habitat will further isolate populations and increase their vulnerability to extinction. Loss of any of the subspecies will reduce the genetic diversity and the likelihood of continued existence of the

Thomomys mazama

subspecies complex in Washington. The threats are imminent as they are ongoing. Gravel pits threaten persistence of one of the subspecies (Roy Prairie), and the largest populations of two other subspecies (Shelton and Olympia) are located on airports with planned development. Yelm pocket gophers are also threatened by proposed development on Fort Lewis, and ongoing development in Olympia. Thus, we assign an LPN of 3 to these subspecies.

Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel (

Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus

)—The following summary is based on information in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel is one of four recognized subspecies of round-tailed ground squirrels. The range of this squirrel is limited to the Coachella Valley region of Riverside County, California. Primary habitat for the Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel is the dunes and hummocks associated with

Prosopis glandulosa

var.

torreyana

(honey mesquite) and to a lesser extent those dunes and hummocks associated with

Larrea tridentata

(creosote), or other vegetation. Rapid growth of desert cities such as Palm Springs and Palm Desert in the Coachella Valley has raised concerns about the conservation of the narrowly distributed Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel. Urban development and drops in the groundwater table have eliminated 90 percent of the honey mesquite in the Coachella Valley. Furthermore, urban development has fragmented habitat occupied by this squirrel thereby isolating populations. The high rate of urban development and associated lowering of the groundwater table that was likely historically responsible for the high losses of honey mesquite sand dune/hummocks habitat continues today. We continue to assign the Palm Springs ground squirrel subspecies a listing priority of 3 because the threats are ongoing and are of a high magnitude as they affect a large portion of its' range.

Southern Idaho ground squirrel (

Spermophilus brunneus endemicus

)—The following summary is based on information contained in our files

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.