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

[FWS-R9-ES-2008-0115; MO-9221050083 - B2]

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 1 new candidate, changes the LPN for 11 candidates, and removes 2 species from candidate status. Combined with other decisions for individual species that were published separately from this CNOR in the past year, the current number of species that are candidates for listing is 251.

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 30, 2007, through September 30, 2008.

We request additional status information that may be available for the 251 candidate species identified in this CNOR.

DATES:

We will accept information on this Candidate Notice of Review at any time.

ADDRESSES:

This notice is available on the Internet at

http://www.regulations.gov

, and

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

. 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 Branch of Candidate Conservation, Arlington, VA (see address below), or on our Internet website (

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

). Please submit any new information materials, comments, or questions of a general nature on this notice to the Arlington, VA, address listed below. Please submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions pertaining to a particular species to the address of the Endangered Species Coordinator in the appropriate Regional Office listed in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

The Endangered Species Coordinator(s) in the appropriate Regional Office(s) or Chief, Branch of Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 (telephone 703-358-2105; 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:

Information Solicited

We request additional status information that may be available for any of the 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 to consider including as candidates as we prepare future updates of this notice.

You may submit your information concerning this notice in general or for any of the species included in this notice by one of the methods listed in the

ADDRESSES

section.

Species-specific information and materials we receive will be available for public inspection by appointment, during normal business hours, at the appropriate Regional Office listed below in

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

. General information we receive will be available at the Branch of Candidate Conservation, Arlington, VA (see address above).

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. A species may be indentified by us as a candidate for listing based on an evaluation of its status that we conducted on our own initiative, or as a result of making a finding on a petition to list a species that listing is warranted but precluded by other higher priority listing action (see the Petition Findings section, below).

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 website,

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 December 6, 2007 (72 FR 69033). CNORs published since 1994 are available on our Internet website,

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

. For copies of CNORs published prior to 1994, please contact the Branch of Candidate Conservation (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, immediacy 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 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 that are intrinsically vulnerable to certain types of threats but are 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 rather than their entire 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., a species that is the only member of a genus would be assigned to the LPN 1 category, a full species to LPN 2, and a subspecies, DPS, or a species for which listing is appropriate in a significant portion of its range would be assigned 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 website 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 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 December 6, 2007 (72 FR 69033), 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 since publication of the last CNOR, 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 1 new candidate species (see

New Candidates

, below), change the LPN for 11 candidates (see

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

, below) and determine that listing proposals are not warranted for 2 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 251 species (including 109 plant and 142 animal species) are now candidates awaiting preparation of rules proposing their listing. These 251 species, along with the 50 species currently proposed for listing, are included in Table 1.

Table 2 lists the changes from the previous CNOR, and includes three species identified in the previous CNOR as either proposed for listing or classified as candidates that are no longer in those categories. This includes one species for which we published a final rule to list, plus the two species that we have determined do not warrant preparation of a rule to propose listing and therefore have been removed from candidate status in this CNOR.

New Candidates

Below we present a brief summary of one new plant candidate,

Sphaeralcea gierischii

(Gierisch mallow), which we are recognizing in this CNOR. Complete information, including references, can be found in the species assessment form. You may obtain a copy of this form from the Regional Office having the lead for the species (Region 2), or from our Internet website (

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

). For this 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., it met our definition of a candidate species). We also note below that four other species, Gunnison's prairie dog (specifically in the portion of its range in montane portions of central and south central Colorado and north central New Mexico), Rio Grande cutthroat trout, northern Mexican garter snake, and Jollyville Plateau salamander, were identified as candidates earlier this year as a result of separate petition findings published in the

Federal Register

.

Mammals

Gunnison's prairie dog (

Cynomys gunnisoni

) - In a separate warranted but precluded 12-month petition finding published on February 5, 2008 (73 FR 6660), we previously announced candidate status for the Gunnison's prairie dog in the montane portion of its range, located in central and south-central Colorado and north-central New Mexico. As described in that notice, we determined that the montane portion of the range, which comprises approximately 40 percent of the total range of the species, is a significant portion of the range where listing the species is warranted. In that notice we assigned the population an LPN of 2. In this CNOR, we are making a technical correction to the LPN, changing it to a 3. This correction makes the LPN for Gunnison's prairie dog consistent with the clear intent of our 1983 LPN guidance (48 FR 43098). Under our LPN guidance, among listable entities facing threats of the same magnitude and imminence, a species that is the only member of a genus has highest priority (e.g. LPN 1), a full species (in a genus with more than one species) has the next highest priority (e.g. LPN 2), and a subspecies or DPS are in the following priority category (e.g. LPN 3). To be consistent with this approach, when we make a finding that listing is warranted but precluded for a species in a significant portion of its range (rather than throughout its entire range), we assign it to the same LPN category as a subspecies or DPS (e.g. LPN 3).

Reptiles

Northern Mexican gartersnake (

Thamnophis eques megalops

) - We previously announced candidate status for this species in a separate warranted but precluded 12-month petition finding published on November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71787).

Amphibians

Jollyville Plateau salamander (

Eurycea tonkawae

) - We previously announced candidate status for this species in a separate warranted but precluded 12-month petition finding published on December 13, 2007 (72 FR 71039).

Fish

Rio Grande cutthroat trout (

Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis

) - We previously announced candidate status for this subspecies in a separate warranted but precluded 12-month petition finding published on May 14, 2008 (73 FR 27899).

Flowering Plants

Sphaeralcea gierischii

(Gierisch mallow) - The following information is based on information contained in our files, including site visits by species experts. There are nine known populations of this species on a combined total of approximately 59.5 acres (ac) (24.12 hectares (ha)) in Arizona and Utah. Seven populations are found on approximately 55 ac (22.3 ha) managed by the Bureau of Land Management in Arizona. One population occurs on approximately 2 ac (0.81 ha) on land managed by the Arizona State Land Department. One population occurs on approximately 2.5 ac (1.01 ha) in Utah. The primary threat to the species in Arizona is ongoing gypsum mining and associated activities. The primary threat to the species in Utah is potential impacts from off-road vehicle use. The threats are high in magnitude, since survival of the species is threatened throughout its entire range in Arizona by gypsum mining, with the two largest populations in active mining operations. Loss of those two populations would significantly reduce the total number of individuals throughout the range, threatening the long-term viability of this species. The threats are imminent, since they are ongoing in Arizona. Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.

Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

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

Mammals

Gunnison's prairie dog (

Cynomys gunnisoni

) (montane population) - See above summary under “

New Candidates

”.

Birds

Red knot (

Calidris canutus rufa

) - The following summary is based on information containted in our files and information provided by petitioners. Four petitions to emergency list the red knot have been received: one on August 9, 2004, two others on August 5, 2005, and the latest on February 27, 2008. The

rufa

subspecies is one of six recognized subspecies of red knot and one of three subspecies occurring in North America (hereafter all mention of red knot in this CNOR refers strictly to the

rufa

subspecies). This subspecies makes one of the longest distance migrations known in the animal kingdom, as it travels between breeding areas in the central Canadian Arctic and wintering areas that are primarily in southern South America along the coast of Chile and Argentina. They migrate along the Atlantic coast of the United States, where they may be found from Maine to Florida.

The Delaware Bay area (in Delaware and New Jersey) is the largest known spring migration stopover area, with far fewer migrants congregating elsewhere along the Atlantic coast. The concentration in the Delaware Bay area occurs from the middle of May to early June, corresponding to the spawning season of horseshoe crabs. The knots feed on horseshoe crab eggs, rebuilding energy reserves needed to complete migrations to the Arctic and arrive on the breeding grounds in good condition. In the past, horseshoe crab eggs at Delaware Bay were so numerous that a knot could eat enough in two to three weeks to double its weight.

Surveys at wintering areas and at Delaware Bay during spring migration indicate a substantial decline in the red knot in recent years. At the Delaware

Bay area, peak counts between 1982 and 1998 were as high as 95,360 knots. Counts may vary considerably between years. Some of the fluctuations can be attributed to predator-prey cycles in the breeding grounds, and counts show that knots rebound from such reductions. Research shows that since 1998, a high proportion of red knots leaving the Delaware Bay failed to achieve threshold departure masses needed to fly to breeding grounds and survive an initial few days of snow cover, and this corresponded to reduced annual survival rates. Recently, peak counts at the Delaware Bay area have been lower than in the past and do not show a rebound. The peaks were 13,315 in 2004; 15,345 in 2005; 13,455 in 2006; and 12,375 in 2007. Counts in recent years at the principal wintering areas in South America also are substantially lower than in the past and do not show a rebound.

The primary factor threatening the red knot is destruction and modification of its habitat, particularly the reduction in key food resources resulting from reductions in horseshoe crabs, which are harvested primarily for use as bait and secondarily to support a biomedical industry. Commercial harvest increased substantially in the 1990s. Since 1999, a series of timing restrictions and substantially lower harvest quotas have been adopted by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), as well as New Jersey and Delaware. In May 2006, the ASMFC adopted restrictions effective from October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2008, including a prohibition on harvest and landing of horseshoe crabs in New Jersey and Delaware from January 1 through June 7, harvest of males only from June 8 through December 31, and harvest limited to no more than 100,000 horseshoe crabs per state per year. The ASMFC also adopted other restrictions applicable to Maryland and Virginia. New Jersey established regulations in 2006 which superseded ASMFC restrictions; resulting in a moratorium on all horseshoe crab harvest in New Jersey from May 15, 2006 through June 7, 2008. In March 2008, New Jersey passed legislation imposing an open-ended moratorium on horseshoe crab harvest or landing within the State until such time as the red knot has fully recovered. In February 2007, Delaware imposed a 2-year moratorium, effective January 1, 2007, on harvest of horseshoe crabs within Delaware lands or waters. In June 2007, following litigation by two businesses involved in the harvesting and sale of horseshoe crabs, Delaware's moratorium was overturned. Consequently Delaware developed regulations allowing for a male-only horseshoe crab harvest, consistent with restrictions adopted by ASMFC. The reductions in commercial harvest since 1999 are substantial: 726,660 horseshoe crab landings for bait were reported in 1999 in Delaware and New Jersey, compared to 173,177 in 2004 and a preliminary 2007 report of 76,663 crabs landed for bait in Delaware and no horseshoe crabs landed in New Jersey as a result of the State-imposed harvest moratorium. However, we do not know whether horseshoe crab populations will rebuild or how long a lag time there may be in increased availability of eggs, as the species needs 8-10 years to reach sexual maturity, and other key information for estimating population response is lacking. A survey in Delaware Bay showed horseshoe crab spawning activity was stable or slightly declining from 1999 to 2004. Updated spawning information following implementation of additional harvest restrictions shows that female horseshoe crab spawning activity in Delaware Bay has been stable for the overall period of 1999 to 2007 and male horseshoe crab spawning increased during that period. Thus, despite additional harvest regulations, numbers of spawning females have not yet shown an increase.

The numbers of red knots at key wintering areas in South America remained relatively steady from 2005 to 2007, giving optimism that the declining trend may have ceased or slowed. In 2008, however, counts of red knots within principal wintering areas showed an all-time low of only 14,800 red knots. Counts of red knots within the principal wintering areas in Chile and Argentina declined by nearly 75 percent from 1985 to 2007 and declined by an additional 15 percent in the past year (2007 to 2008). Thus, in recent years the number of knots in these survey areas has been much lower than in the past and the trend in the abundance is not improving despite a nearly tenfold reduction in horseshoe crab landings since the late 1990s.

Other identified threat factors include habitat destruction due to beach erosion and various shoreline protection and stabilization projects that are affecting areas used by migrating knots for foraging, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, human disturbance, and competition with other species for limited food resources. Also, the concentration of red knots in the Delaware Bay areas and at a relatively small number of wintering areas makes the species vulnerable to potential large-scale events in those areas such as oil spills or severe weather in those areas. Overall, we conclude that the threats, in particular the modification of habitat through harvesting of horseshoe crabs, severe enough that it puts the viability of the knot at substantial risk and is therefore of a high magnitude. The threats are currently occurring, and therefore imminent because of continuing suppressed horseshoe-crab-egg forage conditions for red knot within the Delaware Bay stopover. To help ensure consistency in the application of our listing priority process, we changed the LPN from a 6 to a 3 for this subspecies because threats are imminent.

Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition received on October 5, 1995. Additional information can be found in the 12-month finding published on June 7, 1998 (63 FR 31400). This species occurs in Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Biologists estimate that the occupied range has declined by 92 percent since the 1800s.

The most serious threat to the lesser prairie-chicken is the present and threatened destruction, modification, and curtailment of its habitat and range. This includes loss of habitat from conversion of native rangelands to introduced forages and cultivation; conversion of suitable restored habitat in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) to cropland; cumulative habitat degradation caused by severe grazing; and energy development, including wind, oil, and gas development. The magnitude of threats to the species from wind energy development and conversion of CRP lands to croplands has increased recently, both in terms of ongoing activity and potential activity expected in the next few years. Additional threats are woody plant invasion of open prairies due to fire suppression, herbicide use (including resumption of herbicide use in shinnery oak habitat), and habitat fragmentation caused by structural and transportation developments. Many of these threats may exacerbate the normal effects of periodic drought on lesser- prairie-chicken populations. In many cases, the remaining suitable habitat has become fragmented by the spatial arrangement of these various activities. The increasing level of habitat fragmentation means that (1) some of the remaining habitat patches may become smaller than necessary to meet the requirements of individuals and populations; (2) necessary habitat heterogeneity may be lost to areas of homogeneous habitat structure; (3) areas between habitat patches may harbor higher levels of

predators or brood parasites; and (4) the probability of recolonization of habitat that becomes unoccupied decreases as the distance between suitable habitat patches expands. Based on our most recent assessment, we find that ongoing threats to the lesser prairie-chicken have increased in terms of the amount of habitat involved and that the overall magnitude of threats to the lesser prairie-chicken throughout its range is high because the threats put the viability of the lesser prairie chicken at substantial risk. The threats are ongoing and thus, imminent. Consequently, we changed the LPN from an 8 to a 2 for this species.

Amphibians

Georgetown salamander (

Eurycea naufragia

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Georgetown salamander is known from spring outlets along five tributaries to the San Gabriel River and one cave in the City of Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas. The Georgetown salamander has a very limited distribution and depends on a constant supply of clean water from the Northern Segment of the Edwards Aquifer for its survival.

Primary threats to this species are degradation of water quality due to expanding urbanization. Increased impervious cover by development increases the quantity and velocity of runoff that leads to erosion and greater pollution transport. Pollutants and contaminants that enter the Edwards Aquifer are discharged from spring outlets in salamander habitat and have serious morphological and physiological effects to the species. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) adopted the Edwards Rules in 1995 and 1997, which require a number of water-quality-protection measures for new development occurring in the recharge and contributing zones of the Edwards Aquifer. New developments are still obligated to comply with regulations that were applicable at the time when project applications for development were first filed. However, Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code permits “grandfathering” of state regulations. Grandfathering allows developments to be exempted from any new local or state requirements for water-quality controls and impervious-cover limits if the developments were planned prior to the implementation of such regulations. As a result of the grandfathering law, very few developments have followed these ordinances. In addition, it is significant that even if they were followed with every new development, these ordinances do not span the entire watershed for the Edwards Aquifer. The TCEQ has developed voluntary water quality protection measures for development in the Edwards Aquifer region of Texas; however, it is unknown if these measures will be implemented throughout a large portion of the watershed or if they will be effective in maintaining or improving water quality.

Development occurring outside the TCEQ's jurisdiction can have negative consequences on water quality and thus affect the species. Water-quality impacts threaten the continued existence of the Georgetown salamander by altering physical aquatic habitats and the food sources of the salamander. The threats are imminent because urbanization is ongoing, and continues to expand over the Northern Segment of the Edwards Aquifer. However, Williamson County and the Williamson County Conservation Fund are currently actively working to protect habitat and acquire land within the contributing watershed for the Georgetown salamander. Also, they are planning to conduct monitoring and data-collecting activities in an effort that is expected to lead to the development of a conservation strategy for this species. Although this species still meets our definition of a candidate, these conservation actions reduce the magnitude of the threat to the Georgetown salamander to a moderate level by reducing the amount of development occurring in the portion of the watershed that affects the species. Thus, we have changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8 for this species.

Fishes

Headwater chub (

Gila nigra

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the 12-month finding on a petition to list the species, which was published May 3, 2006 (71 FR 26007). The range of the headwater chub has been reduced by approximately 60 percent. Seventeen streams (125 miles (200 kilometers) of stream) are thought to be occupied out of 20 streams (312 miles (500 kilometers) of stream) formerly occupied in the Gila River Basin in Arizona and New Mexico. Recent surveys have documented one new population. All remaining populations are fragmented and isolated and threatened by a combination of factors.

Headwater chub are threatened by introductions of nonnative fish that prey on them and/or compete with them for food. These nonnative fish are difficult to eliminate and, therefore, pose an ongoing threat. Habitat destruction and modification has occurred and continues to occur as a result of dewatering, impoundment, channelization, and channel changes caused by alteration of riparian vegetation and watershed degradation from mining, grazing, roads, water pollution, urban and suburban development, groundwater pumping, and other human actions. Existing regulatory mechanisms do not appear to be adequate for addressing the impact of nonnative fish and also have not removed or eliminated the threats that continue to be posed in relation to habitat destruction or modification. The fragmented nature and rarity of existing populations makes them vulnerable to other natural or manmade factors, such as drought and wildfire.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department has created the Arizona Statewide Conservation Agreement for Roundtail Chub (

G. robusta

), Headwater Chub, Flannelmouth Sucker (

Catostomus latipinnis

), Little Colorado River Sucker (

Catostomus

spp.), Bluehead Sucker (

C. discobolus

), and Zuni Bluehead Sucker (

C. discobolus yarrowi

), which is now final. The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish recently listed the headwater chub as endangered and created a recovery plan for the species, Colorado River Basin Chubs (Roundtail Chub, Gila Chub (

G. intermedia

), and Headwater Chub) Recovery Plan, which was approved by the New Mexico State Game Commission on November 16, 2006. Both the Arizona Agreement and the New Mexico Recovery Plan recommend preservation and enhancement of extant populations and restoration of historical headwater-chub populations. The recovery and conservation actions prescribed by Arizona and New Mexico plans, which we believe will reduce and remove threats to this species, will require further discussions and authorizations before they can be implemented, but several of the actions are being planned. Although threats are ongoing, new information indicates long-term persistence and stability of existing populations. Surveys conducted in 2006-2007 found a new population and determined that the Fossil Creek population is now stable-secure. Currently 10 of the 17 extant populations are considered stable based on abundance and evidence of recruitment. Based on our assessment, threats (e.g., nonnative species, habitat loss from land uses) remain imminent but are now of a moderate magnitude because the threat of nonnative species and habitat destruction appear to be of

a lower magnitude than previously thought because all populations are continuing to persist, and have persisted over approximately 15 years of surveys on average, and some populations such as the upper Gila River are now considered stable. Thus we changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8 for this species.

Clams

Texas hornshell (

Popenaias popei

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and information provided by the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. No new information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Texas hornshell is a freshwater mussel found in the Black River in New Mexico, and the Rio Grande and the Devils River in Texas. Until March 2008, the only known extant populations were in New Mexico's Black River and one locality in the Rio Grande near Laredo, Texas. In March 2008, two new localities were confirmed in Texas - one in the Devils River and one in the mainstem Rio Grande in the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River segment downstream of Big Bend National Park.

The primary threats to this species are habitat alterations such as stream bank channelization, impoundments, and diversions for agriculture and flood control; contamination of water by oil and gas activity; alterations in the natural riverine hydrology; and increased sedimentation from prolonged overgrazing and loss of native vegetation. Although riverine habitats throughout the species' known occupied range are under constant threat from these ongoing or potential activities, numerous conservation actions to benefit the species are underway in New Mexico, including the completion of a state recovery plan for the species and the drafting of a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances, and are beginning in Texas. We changed the LPN from a 2 to an 8 based on our conclusion that these conservation actions have reduced the magnitude of threats from high to moderate. This change in the magnitude of threat is due to the discovery of previously unknown locations where the species persists, as well as the implementation of recovery planning and conservation actions that are underway in New Mexico, and are beginning in Texas. The threats are still occurring, and thus remain imminent.

Slabside pearlymussel (

Lexingtonia dolabelloides

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files. The slabside pearlymussel 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.

Habitat destruction and alteration (e.g., impoundments, sedimentation, and pollutants) are the chief factors contributing to the decline of this species, which has been extirpated from numerous regional streams and is no longer found in Kentucky. The slabside pearlymussel was historically known from at least 32 streams, but is currently restricted to no more than 10 isolated stream segments. Current status information for most of the 10 populations deemed to be extant is available from recent periodic sampling efforts (sometimes annually) and other field studies. Comprehensive surveys have taken place in the Middle and North Forks Holston River, Paint Rock River, and Duck River in the past several years. Based on recent information, the overall population of the slabside pearlymussel is declining rangewide. Of the five streams in which the species remains in good numbers (e.g., Clinch, North and Middle Forks Holston, Paint Rock, Duck Rivers), the Middle and upper North Fork Holston Rivers have undergone drastic recent declines, while the Clinch population has been in a longer-term decline. Most of the remaining five populations (e.g., Powell River, Big Moccasin Creek, Hiwassee River, Elk River, Bear Creek) have doubtful viability, and several if not all of them may be on the verge of extirpation.

The threats remain high in magnitude, since all populations of this species are severely affected in numerous ways (impoundments, sedimentation, small population size, isolation of populations, gravel mining, municipal pollutants, agricultural runoff, nutrient enrichment, and coal processing pollution) which result 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 because the threats are imminent and high in magnitude.

Snails

Fat-whorled pondsnail (

Stagnicola bonnevillensis

) - The fat-whorled pondsnail, also known as the Bonneville pondsnail, occupies four spring pools north of the Great Salt Lake in Box Elder County, Utah. The number of individuals is unknown, and the total known occupied habitat is less than 1 hectare (2.45 acres). The primary threat has been chemical contamination of the groundwater. Significant actions are under way to remediate this threat, including implementation of a Corrective Action Plan to characterize and remediate groundwater contamination and implementation of a site management plan. Also, a groundwater model and risk assessment is being developed. The CAP is being implemented, and conservation measures are currently being monitored for effectiveness. Because these efforts have been under way for a sufficient period to reduce the threat from contamination, the magnitude of threats is reduced from moderate to low, and the threat is now nonimminent. Therefore, we have changed the listing priority from an 8 to an 11 for this species.

Elongate mud meadows springsnail (

Pyrgulopsis notidicola

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

Pyrgulopsis notidicola

is endemic to Soldier Meadow, which is located at the northern extreme of the western arm of the Black Rock Desert in the transition zone between the Basin and Range Physiographic Province and the Columbia Plateau Province, Humboldt County, Nevada. The type locality, and the only known location of the species, occurs in a stretch of thermal (between 45° and 32° Celsius, 113° and 90° Fahrenheit) aquatic habitat that is approximately 600 m (1,968 ft) long and 2 m (6.7 ft) wide.

Pyrgulopsis notidicola

occurs only in shallow, flowing water on gravel substrate. The species does not occur in deep water (i.e., impoundments) where water velocity is low, gravel substrate is absent, and sediment levels are high.

The species and its habitat are threatened by recreational use in the areas where it occurs, as well as by the ongoing impacts of past water diversions and livestock grazing and current off-highway vehicle travel. Conservation measures implemented recently by the Bureau of Land Management include the installation of fencing to exclude livestock, wild horses, burros and other large mammals; closing of access roads to spring, riparian, and wetland areas and the limiting of vehicles to designated routes; the establishment of a designated campground away from the habitats of sensitive species; the installation of educational signage; and increased staff presence, including law enforcement and a volunteer site steward during the 6-month period of peak visitor use. These conservation measures have reduced the magnitude of threats to the

species to moderate; all remaining threats are nonimminent and involve long-term changes to the habitat for the species resulting from past impacts. Therefore, we have changed the LPN from 2 to 11.

Insects

Mardon skipper (

Polites mardon

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on December 24, 2002. The Mardon skipper is a northwestern butterfly with a remarkably disjunct range. Currently this species is known from four widely separated regions: south Puget Sound region, southern Washington Cascades, Siskiyou Mountains of southern Oregon, and coastal northwestern California/southern Oregon. The number of documented locations for the species has increased from fewer than 10 in 1997 to more than 100 rangewide in 2008. New site locations have been documented in each year that targeted surveys have been conducted since 1999. In the past 8 years, significant local populations have been located in the Washington Cascades and in Southern Oregon, with a few local sites supporting populations of hundreds of Mardon skippers.

The Mardon skipper spends its entire life cycle in one location, often on the same grassland patch. The dispersal ability of Mardon skipper is restricted. Threats to the Mardon skipper include direct impacts to individuals and local populations by off-road vehicle use, livestock grazing, and pesticide drift. Habitat destruction or modification through conifer encroachment, invasive nonnative plants, roadside maintenance, and grassland/meadow management activities such as prescribed burning and mowing are also threats. However, these threats have been substantially reduced due to protections provided by State and Federal special status species programs. The magnitude of the threats is moderate because current regulatory mechanisms associated with State and Federal special status species programs afford a relatively high level of protection from additional habitat loss or destruction across most of the species' range. Threats are imminent because all sites within the species' range currently have one or more identified threats that are resulting in direct impacts to individuals within the populations, or a gradual loss or degradation of the species' habitats. Mardon skippers face a variety of threats that may occur at any time at any of the locations. Low numbers of individuals have been found at most of the known locations. Only a few locations are known to harbor greater than 100 individuals, and specific locations could easily be lost by changes in vegetation composition or from the threat of wildfire. The great distances between the known locations for the species would not allow for dispersal of the species between populations; thus, loss of any population could lead to extirpation of the species at any of these locations. However, the discovery of new populations and the wide geographic range for the Mardon skipper provides a buffer against threats that could destroy all existing habitat simultaneously or jeopardize the continued existence of the species.

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 to reflect the fact that the threats are imminent. At the same time, for the reasons described above, the threats are now moderate in magnitude. Therefore, we changed the listing priority number from a 5 to an 8 for the Mardon skipper.

Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle (

Cicindela albissima

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition received April 25, 1994. 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 dunes 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, and off-road vehicle use continues outside of the protected areas. Ongoing monitoring and research has documented that conservation measures have failed to lessen population declines. The beetle's population is also vulnerable to over-collecting by professional and hobby tiger beetle collectors. The taxon was previously recognized as a full species, resulting in a change in the listing priority from a 9 to an 8, based on imminent threats of a low to moderate magnitude. The magnitude of the threat from off-road vehicle use is now high, since this threat results in direct mortality to adult beetles, reduces available prey, and disturbs and desiccates the microhabitat of the larvae, and in tandem with drought, continues to cause steady declines in the tiger beetle population. The threats continue to be ongoing and are, therefore, imminent. Therefore, we changed the LPN from an 8 to a 2.

Flowering plants

Churchill Narrows buckwheat (

Eriogonum diatomaceum

) - The following information is based on information contained in our files.

Eriogonum diatomaceum

is restricted to chalky, diatomaceous outcrops between 1,311 and 1,390 meters (m) (4,300 and 4,560 feet (ft)) elevation in the Churchill Narrows located in the Pine Nut Mountains, Lyon County, Nevada.

Field surveys during 2005 have shown that the habitat of nearly all the 15 known occurrences of

E. diatomaceum

is subject to exploration and potential development of existing mining claims. Observations in 2003 confirmed that mining activities have had direct and indirect impacts on

E. diatomaceum

in the recent past. Mineral development must continue to be considered a threat of high magnitude because all known populations of

E. diatomaceum

occur within existing mining claims on a substrate with economic potential. However, because previous applications to develop these industrial mineral deposits have been withdrawn, we no longer consider mining to pose an imminent threat to the species. Other threats to the species from trampling and soil disturbance by livestock and other land uses are likely to have localized impacts and to be cumulative over time; we do not consider these activities to pose an imminent threat to the species. Nevertheless, all known populations are small and current regulatory mechanisms in place are inadequate in protecting the species throughout its range.

Eriogonum diatomaceum

is considered threatened by the Nevada Native Plant Society and was added to the Nevada State List of critically endangered and threatened plants. Due to the nonimminent threats of high magnitude, we have changed the LPN from a 2 to a 5 for this species.

Candidate Removals

As summarized below, we have evaluated the threats to the following two species and considered factors that, individually and in combination, currently 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 two 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 it is not warranted, and we no longer consider it to be a 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 our determination for each species in the event that new information indicates that the threats to the species are of a considerably greater magnitude or imminence than identified through assessments of information contained in our files, as summarized here.

Snails

Ogden mountainsnail (formerly considered to be

Oreohelix peripherica wasatchensis

) - The Ogden mountainsnail was previously thought to be a subspecies occurring at a single site near the mouth of Ogden Canyon in Weber County, Utah. The subspecies was considered to be vulnerable to extirpation from stochastic or human-caused events due to its restricted range, its proximity to an expanding residential area, and impacts from relatively heavy recreational use. Recent molecular phylogenetic studies have clarified that what was previously classified as

Oreohelix peripherica wasatchensis

is actually two distinct clades (i.e., taxa descending from a common ancestor) rather than being a separate subspecies: one clade is part of a different species,

O. strigosa

, and the other is part of a different subspecies,

O. p. peripherica

Because

O. p. wasatchensis

is no longer recognized as a valid subspecies, it is not a listable entity under the Act. Therefore, we find that listing

O. p. wasatchensis

is not warranted, and we have removed it from candidate status.

Both

O. strigosa

and

O. p. peripherica

are widespread and abundant. Our assessment shows that threats to the clades of these taxa at the Ogden Canyon site are not affecting the overall status of

O. strigosa

or

O. p. peripherica

such that either taxon is likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Consequently, we find that listing is not warranted for either

O. strigosa

or

O. p. peripherica

.

Flowering Plants

Indigofera trita subsp.

scabra

(formerly

Indigofera mucronata

var.

keyensis

) (Florida indigo or Asian indigo) - 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. In 2007 we became aware of new information regarding this plant's taxonomic status. We now believe the most appropriate name for Florida indigo is

I. trita

subsp.

scabra

. The current understanding is that this plant is widespread, ranging widely from south Florida and the Caribbean to Asia and Africa. We have only general information on this plant's status outside of the United States. In Florida, this plant occurs in coastal rock barrens, ecotone rock barren areas, and scraped areas mimicking rock barren habitat. Based upon available data, there are 12 occurrences of Florida indigo on eight islands in the upper and middle Florida Keys, in Monroe County; half of the original occurrences in the Keys are now extirpated, as are historic occurrences on mainland Florida in Collier and Miami-Dade Counties. Most occurrences in Florida are small; total population size is probably close to 3,000 individuals. In the United States, Florida indigo is threatened by habitat loss, even on public lands, as well as habitat loss and degradation from exotic plants on all sites. Shading by hardwoods is a problem at approximately half of the sites. Planned restoration activities, illegal dumping, and trespass have also been identified as threats. Florida indigo is vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges; however, these factors may also work to maintain coastal rock barren habitat in the long-term. Sea level rise is considered a long-term threat that will continue.

Although threats remain in Florida, the Florida indigo is now considered to be a taxon that is widely distributed. We are not aware of threats elsewhere in its considerable range; the species does not warrant listing throughout its entire range. We have analyzed whether the Florida population is a significant portion of the range. Based on our evaluation of this population's low level of contribution toward the resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the species as a whole, we conclude that the Florida population of the Florida indigo is not a significant portion of the range. Based on findings and analysis in our updated assessment, we conclude that listing this species under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The species no longer meets our definition of a candidate, and we have removed it 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 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 these annual findings 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 (9

th

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.

In this CNOR we continue to incorporate information that addresses the courts' concerns. 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 specific information in our discussion on preclusion (see below). In preparing this CNOR, we reviewed the current status of, and threats to, the 174 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.

Through this CNOR we are making the first 90-day petition finding and 12-month petition finding for

Eriogonum corymbosum

var.

nilesii

(Las Vegas buckwheat) and the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (

Zapus hudsonius luteus

). We added these species to the candidate list in the last CNOR (published December 6, 2007) and subsequently received petitions for listing. We have not published separate substantial 90-day and warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition findings, but are making those findings in this CNOR.

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. 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 October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008. We will continue to monitor the status of all candidate species, including petitioned species, as new information becomes available to 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 website:

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 and final promulgation of a regulation implementing each of the petitioned actions for which we have made a warranted-but-precluded finding, 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. 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 of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) or to change the status of a species from threatened to endangered; annual determinations on prior warranted-but- precluded petition findings as required under section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act; critical habitat 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 that requires a relatively uncomplicated analysis to $305,000 for another species that is wide-ranging and requires 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 (for example, 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, 105

th

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, 107

th

Congress, 1st Session, June 19, 2001). In FY 2002 and each year until 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. In FY 2007, we were able to use some of the critical habitat subcap funds to fund proposed listing determinations for high-priority candidate species; however, in FY 2008 we were unable to do this because of all of the critical habitat subcap funds were needed to

address our workload for designating critical habitat.

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, represent the resources we must take into consideration when we make 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 instead 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 [that is, for a lower-ranking species] unwise.” Taking into account the information presented above, in FY 2008, the outer parameter within which “expeditious progress” must be measured is that amount of progress that could be achieved by spending $8,206,940, which was the amount available in the Listing Program appropriation that was not within the critical habitat subcap (because all of the funds within the subcap were needed in order to complete court-mandated critical habitat actions).

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. The $8,206,940 was used to fund work in the following categories: 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 listing program management functions; and high-priority listing actions. The allocations for each specific listing action are identified in the Service's FY 2008 Allocation Table (part of our administrative record).

Our decision that a proposed rule to list any of the petitioned candidate species is warranted but precluded includes consideration of its listing priority. In accordance with guidance we published on September 21, 1983, we assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to 12, depending on the magnitude of threats (high vs. moderate to low), immediacy of threats (imminent or nonimminent), and taxonomic status of the species (in order of priority: monotypic genus (a species that is the sole member of a genus); species; or part of a species (subspecies, distinct population segment, or significant portion of the range)). The lower the listing priority number, the higher the listing priority (that is, a species with an LPN of 1 would have the highest listing priority). 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 candidate species facing high-magnitude, imminent threats (i.e., LPNs of 1-3).

In FY 2007, we had more than 120 species with an LPN of 2. Therefore, we further ranked the candidate species with an LPN of 2 by using the following extinction-risk type criteria: International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (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, comprised a list of approximately 40 candidate species. These 40 candidate species have had the highest priority to receive funding to work on a proposed listing determination. As we work on proposed listing rules for these 40 candidates, we are applying the ranking criteria to the next group of candidates with an LPN of 2 and 3 to determine the next set of highest priority candidate species.

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 a species with an LPN of 2. In addition, available staff resources are also a factor in determining which high-priority species will receive funding. Finally, proposed rules for reclassification of threatened species to endangered are lower priority, since as listed species, they are already afforded 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 highest priority candidate species which are listed in the tables below as having received funding in FY2008 for listing activities.

As explained above, a determination that listing is warranted but precluded must also demonstrate that expeditious progress is being made to add and remove qualified species to and from the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. (Although we do not discuss it in detail here, we are also making expeditious progress in removing species from the list under the Recovery program, which is funded by a separate line item in the budget 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. Given that limitation, we find that we made expeditious progress in FY 2008 in the Listing Program. This progress included preparing and publishing the following determinations:

FY 2008 Completed Listing Actions

Publication Date

Title

Actions

FR Pages

10/09/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Black-Footed Albatross (Phoebastria nigripes) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

72 FR 57278-57283

10/09/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Giant Palouse Earthworm as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial

72 FR 57273-57276

10/23/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Mountain Whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni) in the Big Lost River, ID, as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial

72 FR 59983-9989

10/23/2007

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Summer-Run Kokanee Population in Issaquah Creek, WA, as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial

72 FR 59979-59983

11/08/2007

Response to Court on Significant Portion of the Range, and Evaluation of Distinct Population Segments, for the Queen Charlotte Goshawk

Response to Court

72 FR 63123-63140

12/13/2007

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Jollyville Plateau salamander (Eurycea tonkawae) as Endangered With Critical Habitat

Notice of 12-month Petition Finding, Warranted but Precluded

72 FR 1039-71054

1/08/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Pygmy Rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 1312-1313

1/10/2008

90-Day Finding on Petition To List the Amargosa River Population of the Mojave Fringe-Toed Lizard (Uma scoparia) as Threatened or Endangered With Critical Habitat

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 1855-1861

1/24/2008

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Siskiyou Mountains Salamander (Plethodon stormi) and Scott Bar Salamander (Plethodon asupak) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 12-month Petition Finding, Not Warranted

73 FR 4379-4418

2/05/2008

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

Notice of 12-month Petition Finding, Warranted but Precluded

73 FR 6660-6684

02/07/2008

12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Bonneville Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of Review

73 FR 7236-7237

02/19/2008

Listing Phyllostegia hispida (No Common Name) as Endangered Throughout Its Range

Proposed Listing, Endangered

73 FR 9078-9085

02/26/2008

Initiation of Status Review for the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of Status Review

73 FR 10218-10219

03/11/2008

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

Notice 12-month petition finding, Not warranted

73 FR 12929-12941

03/20/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the U.S. Population of Coaster Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) as Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 14950-14955

04/29/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Western Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus phaios) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 23170-23172

04/29/2008

90-Day Finding on Petitions To List the Mono Basin Area Population of the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 23173-23175

05/06/2008

Petition To List the San Francisco Bay-Delta Population of the Longfin Smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys) as Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 24611-24915

05/06/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition to List Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Lake Sammamish, Washington, as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 24915-24922

05/06/2008

12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the White-tailed Prairie Dog (Cynomys leucurus) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of Status Review

73 FR 24910-24911

05/15/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Ashy Storm-Petrel (Oceanodroma homochroa) as Threatened or Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 28080-28084

05/15/2008

Determination of Threatened Status for the Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Throughout Its Range; Final Rule

Final Listing, Threatened

73 FR 28211-28303

05/15/2008

Special Rule for the Polar Bear; Interim Final Rule

Interim Final Special Rule

73 FR 28305-28318

05/28/2008

Initiation of Status Review for the Northern Mexican Gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops)

Notice of Status Review

73 FR 30596-30598

06/18/2008

90-Day Finding on aPetition To List the Long-Tailed Duck (Clangula hyemalis) as Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial

73 FR 34686-34692

07/10/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition To Reclassify the Delta Smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) From Threatened to Endangered

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 39639-39643

07/29/2008

90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Tucson Shovel-Nosed Snake (Chionactis occipitalis klauberi) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical Habitat

Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial

73 FR 43905-43910

8/13/2008

Proposed Endangered Status for Reticulated Flatwoods Salamander; Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for Frosted Flatwoods Salamander and Reticulated Flatwoods Salamander

Proposed Critical Habitat, Proposed Listing, Endangered

73 FR 47257-47324

9/9/2008

12-month Finding on a Petition to List the Bonneville Cutthroat Trout as Threatened or Endangered

Notice 12 month petition finding, Not-warranted

73 FR 52235-52256

Our expeditious progress also included work on listing actions, which were funded in FY 2008, but were not completed in FY 2008 (information on the cost of individual actions are part of our administrative record). These actions are listed below. We have completed all work funded in FY 2008 on all actions under a deadline set by a court. Actions in the middle section of the table are being conducted to meet statutory timelines, that is, timelines required under the Act. Actions in the bottom section of the table are high priority listing actions. These actions include work primarily on species with an LPN of 2, and selection of these species is partially based on available staff resources, and when appropriate, include species with a lower priority if they overlap geographically or have the same threats as the species with the high priority. Including these species together in the same proposed rule results in considerable savings in time and funding as compared to preparing separate proposed rules for each of them in the future.

Actions funded in FY 2008 but not completed in 2008

Species

Action

Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement

NONE

NONE

Actions with Statutory Deadlines

Phyllostegia hispida

Final listing

Yellow-billed loon

12-month petition finding

Black-footed albatross

12-month petition finding

Mount Charleston blue butterfly

12-month petition finding

Goose Creek milk-vetch

12-month petition finding

Mojave fringe-toed lizard

12-month petition finding

White-tailed prairie dog

12-month petition finding

Pygmy rabbit (rangewide)

12-month petition finding

Black-tailed prairie dog

90-day petition finding

Lynx (include New Mexico in listing)

90-day petition finding

Wyoming pocket gopher

90-day petition finding

Dusky Tree Vole1

90-day petition finding

Llanero coqui

90-day petition finding

American pika

90-day petition finding

Sacramento Valley Tiger Beetle1

90-day petition finding

Sacramento Mts. checkerspot butterfly

90-day petition finding

206 species

90-day petition finding

475 Southwestern species

90-day petition finding

High Priority Listing Actions

48 Kauai species1 (includes 31 candidate species: 24 with LPN = 2, 3 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN = 5, 2 with LPN = 8)

Proposed listing (completed in October 2008)

21 Oahu candidate species (16 plants, 5 damselflies) (18 with LPN = 2, 3 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN = 9)

Proposed listing

3 southeast aquatic species (Georgia pigtoe, interrupted rocksnail, rough hornsnail)2 (all with LPN = 2)

Proposed listing

Casey's june beetle (LPN = 2)

Proposed listing

Sand dune lizard (LPN = 2)

Proposed listing

2 southwest springsnails (

Pyrgulopsis bernadina

(LPN = 2),

Pyrgulopsis trivialis

(LPN = 2))

Proposed listing

3 southwest springsnails (

Pyrgulopsis chupaderae

(LPN = 2),

Pyrgulopsis gilae

(LPN = 11),

Pyrgulopsis thermalis

(LPN = 11))

Proposed listing

2 mussels (rayed bean (LPN = 2), snuffbox No LPN)

Proposed listing

2 mussels (sheepnose (LPN = 2), spectaclecase (LPN = 4),)

Proposed listing

Ozark hellbender3 (LPN = 3)

Proposed listing

Altamaha spinymussel (LPN = 2)

Proposed listing

4 southeast fish (rush darter (LPN = 2), chucky madtom (LPN = 2), Cumberland darter (LPN = 5), laurel dace (LPN = 5))

Proposed listing

2 Colorado plants (Parachute beardtongue (

Penstemon debilis

) (LPN = 2), Debeque phacelia (

Phacelia submutica

) (LPN = 8))

Proposed listing

Pagosa skyrocket (

Ipomopsis polyantha

) (LPN = 2)

Proposed listing

1 These actions were completed in October 2008.

2 Funds for listing actions for 3 of these species were also provided in FY 2007.

3 We funded a proposed rule for this subspecies with an LPN of 3 ahead of other species with LPN of 2, because the threats to the species were so imminent and of a high magnitude that we considered emergency listing if we were unable to fund work on a proposed listing rule in FY 2008.

We also funded work on resubmitted petitions findings for 174 candidate species (species petitioned prior to the last CNOR). We did not update 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 (see 73 FR 23170, April 29, 2008). We also did not update our resubmitted petition findings for the 66 candidate species for which we are preparing proposed listing determinations; see summaries below regarding publication of these determinations. We also funded revised 12-month petition findings for two candidate species that we are removing from candidate status, which are being published as part of this CNOR (see

Summary of Candidate Removals

). 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.

During FY 2008, we also funded work on resubmitted petition findings for uplisting five listed species, for which petitions were previously received.

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. 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 currently working with our partners to implement voluntary conservation agreements for more than 140 species covering 5 million acres of habitat.

We are actively working to conserve many candidate species. In some instances, the sustained implementation of strategically designed conservation efforts culminates in making listing

unnecessary for species that are proposed or candidates for listing. Recent examples of species for which listing has been unnecessary due to the contributions of conservation efforts include the Cow Head tui chub, Beaver Cave beetle, Surprising Cave beetle, and Sand Mountain blue butterfly.

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 substantially 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 (DPS) 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, the location of this DPS, where surveys are currently ongoing to ascertain its status. The factors that led to the decline of this subspecies and the DPS are poorly understood; however, current threats to this subspecies and the DPS 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. Thus, the threats are high in magnitude. 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 ongoing, and therefore, imminent, and the taxon 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. 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, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).

Threats to this subspecies have not changed over the past year. The primary threats to the subspecies are ongoing 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. Thus, the threats are high in magnitude. The LPN for E

. s. rotensis

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

New England cottontail (

Sylvilagus transitionalis

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and information received in response to our notice published on June 30, 2004, when we announced our 90-day petition finding and initiation of a status review (69 FR 39395). We received the petition on August 30, 2000.

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 occurred in seven states and 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. The area occupied by the cottontail has contracted from approximately 90,000 sq km to 12,180 sq km. Recent surveys indicate that the long term decline in NEC continues. For example, surveys for the species in early 2008 documented the presence of NEC in 7 of the 23 New Hampshire locations that were known to be occupied in 2002 and 2003. Similarly, surveys in Maine found the species present in 12 of 57 sites identified in an extensive survey that spanned the years 2000 to 2004. Unlike the New Hampshire study, several new sites were documented in Maine during 2008. Some have suggested that the decline in NEC occurrences in 2008 may be attributed to persistent snow cover throughout northern New England during the winter of 2007-2008. Similar surveys to assess trends in other states have not been conducted. 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 to protect habitat; and mortality from predation. The magnitude of the threats continues to be high, because they occur rangewide, and have an effect on the survival of the species. They are imminent because they are ongoing. Thus, we retained an LPN of 2 for this species.

Fisher, West Coast DPS (

Martes pennanti

) - The following summary is based on information contained 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. In January of 2008, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife began to implement their fisher recovery goals for the state through a reintroduction effort currently underway in the Olympic National Park.

We lack 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 in portions of the range include: uncharacteristically severe wildfire, changes in forest composition and structure, 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 currently 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 their interactions with the listed threats. The three other areas containing fisher populations appear to be stable or are not rapidly declining based on recent survey and monitoring efforts. Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 6 to this population.

New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (

Zapus hudsonius luteus

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received October 15, 2008. 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, recreation, and beaver removal. 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 9 known extant localities in New Mexico, 2 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 insufficient number of secure populations, and the destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat, continue to pose the most immediate threats to this species. Because the threats affect the survival of 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 continue to assign an LPN of 3 to this subspecies.

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. One subspecies,

T. m. melanops

is found on alpine meadows in Olympic National Park. Another subspecies,

T. m. douglasii

is found in extreme southwest Washington. The other seven subspecies of this pocket gopher are associated with glacial outwash prairies in western Washington. Of these seven subspecies, five are likely still extant (

couchi, glacialis

,

pugetensis, tumuli

, and

yelmensis

) and two (

T. m. louiei

, and

tacomensis

) are likely extinct. Few glacial outwash prairies remain in Washington today. Historically, such prairies were patchily distributed, but the area they occupied totaled approximately 170,000 acres. Now, residential and commercial development, fire regime alteration, and ingrowth of woody vegetation have further reduced their numbers. 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 because the survival of the subspecies is significantly affected by the patchy and isolated distributions of its populations in habitats highly desirable for development and subject to a wide variety of human activities that permanently alter the habitat. Only the Olympic pocket gopher is not threatened with development. 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 ongoing and, therefore, imminent. Gravel pits threaten persistence of one of the remaining subspecies (Roy Prairie (

T. m. glacialis

)), and the largest populations of two other subspecies (Shelton (

T. m. couchi)

and Olympia (

T. m. pugetensis

)) are located on airports with planned development. Yelm pocket gophers are also threatened by proposed development on Fort Lewis, and Tenino pocket gophers (

T. m. tumuli

) are threatened by ongoing development in general. Only the Olympic pocket gopher (

T. m. melanops

) is relatively safe from threats from development due to its more remote location within the Olympic National Park, but this subspecies is still currently affected by invasive plants. 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 contained 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. Dunes and hummocks associated with

Prosopis glandulosa

var.

torreyana

(honey mesquite) are the primary habitat for the Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel and to a lesser extent those dunes and hummocks associated with

Larrea tridentata

(creosote), or other vegetation. Honey mesquite provides a valuable food source for the squirrel and also provides cover and shelter by trapping aeolian sand that form dunes occupied by the Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel. 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 an LPN of 3 because the threats are ongoing and are of a high magnitude as they affect a large portion of its' range and significantly affect this subspecies survival.

Southern Idaho ground squirrel (

Spermophilus brunneus endemicus

) - 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 southern Idaho ground squirrel is endemic to four counties in southwest Idaho; its total known range is approximately 425,630 hectares (1,051,752 acres). Threats to southern Idaho ground squirrels include: habitat degradation and fragmentation; direct killing from shooting, trapping, or poisoning; predation; competition with Columbian ground squirrels; and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Habitat degradation and fragmentation appear to be the primary threats to the species. Nonnative annuals now dominate much of this species' range, have changed the species composition of vegetation used as forage for the southern Idaho ground squirrel, and have altered the fire regime by accelerating the frequency of wildfire. Habitat deterioration, destruction, and fragmentation contribute to the current patchy distribution of southern Idaho ground squirrels. Based on recent genetic work, southern Idaho ground squirrels are subject to more genetic drift and inbreeding than expected.

Two Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances (CCAAs) have been completed for this species in recent years. Both CCAAs include conservation measures that provide additional protection to southern Idaho ground squirrels from recreational shooting and other direct killing on enrolled lands, and also allow the State of Idaho, the Service and BLM to investigate ways of restoring currently degraded habitat. At this time, the acreage enrolled through these two CCAAs is approximately 38,756 hectares (95,767 acres), or 9 percent of the known range. While the ongoing conservation efforts have helped to reduce the magnitude of threats to moderate, habitat degradation remains the primary threat to the species throughout most of its range. This threat is imminent due to the ongoing and increasing prevalence and dominance of nonnative vegetation, and the current patchy distribution of the species. Thus, we assign an LPN of 9 to this subspecies.

Washington ground squirrel (

Spermophilus washingtoni

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and in the petition we received on March 2, 2000. The Washington ground squirrel is endemic to the Deschutes-Columbia Plateau sagebrush-steppe and grassland communities in eastern Oregon and south-central Washington. Although widely abundant historically, recent surveys suggest that its current range has contracted toward the center of its historic range. Approximately two-thirds of the Washington ground squirrel's total historic range has been converted to agricultural and residential uses. The most contiguous, least-disturbed expanse of suitable habitat within the species' range occurs on a site owned by Boeing, Inc. and on the Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility near Boardman, Oregon. In Washington, the largest expanse of known suitable habitat occurs on State and Federal lands.

Agricultural, residential, and wind power, among other forms of development, continue to eliminate Washington ground squirrel habitat in portions of its range. Throughout much of its range, Washington ground squirrels are threatened by the establishment and spread of invasive plant species, particularly cheatgrass, which alters available cover, food quantity and quality, and increases fire intervals. Additional threats include habitat fragmentation, recreational shooting, genetic isolation and drift, and predation. Potential threats include disease, drought, and possible competition with related species in disturbed habitat at the periphery of their range. In Oregon, some threats are being addressed as a result of the State listing of this species, and by implementation of the Threemile Canyon Farms Multi-Species Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA). In Washington, there are currently no formal agreements with private landowners or with State or Federal agencies to protect the Washington ground squirrel. Additionally, no State or Federal management plans have been developed that specifically address the needs of the species or its habitat. Since current and potential threats are widespread and, in some cases, severe, we conclude the magnitude of threats remains high. However, because the CCAA addressed the imminent loss of a large portion of habitat to agriculture, and because there are no other known, large-scale efforts to convert suitable habitat to agriculture, the threats, overall, are not imminent. We, therefore, have kept the LPN at 5 for this species.

Birds

Spotless crake, American Samoa DPS (

Porzana tabuensis

) - 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.

P. tabuensis

is a small, dark, cryptic rail found in wetlands and rank scrub or forest in the Philippines, Australia, Fiji, Tonga, Society Islands, Marquesas, Independent Samoa, and American Samoa (Ofu, Tau). The genus Porzana is widespread in the Pacific, where it is represented by numerous island-endemic and flightless species (many of which are extinct as a result of anthropogenic disturbances) as well as several more cosmopolitan species, including

P. tabuensis

. No subspecies of

P. tabuensis

are recognized. The American Samoa population is the only population of spotless crakes under U.S. jurisdiction. The available information indicates that distinct populations of the spotless crake, a species not noted for long-distance dispersal, are definable. The population of spotless crakes in American Samoa is discrete in relation to the remainder of the species as a whole, which is distributed in widely separated locations. Although the spotless crake (and other rails) have dispersed widely in the Pacific, island rails have tended to reduce or lose their power of flight over evolutionary time and so become isolated (and vulnerable to terrestrial predators such as rats). The population of this species in American Samoa is therefore distinct based on geographic and distributional isolation from spotless crake populations on other islands in the oceanic Pacific, the Philippines, and Australia. The American Samoa population of the spotless crake links the Central and Eastern Pacific portions of the species' range. The loss of this population could cause an increase of roughly 500 miles (805 kilometers) in the disjunction between the central and eastern Polynesian portions of the spotless crake's range, and could result in the isolation of the Marquesas and Society Islands populations by further limiting the potential for even rare genetic exchange. Based on the discreteness and significance of the American Samoa population of the spotless crake, we consider this population to be a distinct vertebrate population segment.

Threats to this population have not changed over the past year. The population in American Samoa is threatened by small population size, limited distribution, predation by nonnative mammals, continued development of wetland habitat, and natural catastrophes such as hurricanes. The co-occurrence of a known predator of ground-nesting birds, the Norway rat (

Rattus norvegicus

), along with the extremely restricted observed distribution and low numbers, indicate that the magnitude of the threats to the American Samoa DPS of the spotless crake continues to be high, because the threats significantly affect the species survival. The threats are ongoing, and therefore imminent. Based on this assessment of existing information about the imminence and high magnitude of these threats, we assigned the spotless crake an LPN of 3.

Yellow-billed cuckoo, western U.S. DPS (

Coccyzus americanus

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on February 9, 1998. See also our 12-month petition finding published on July 25, 2001 (66 FR 38611). We consider the yellow-billed cuckoos that occur in the western United States as a DPS. The area for this DPS is west of the crest of the Rocky Mountains. The yellow-billed cuckoo (

Coccyzus americanus

) is a medium-sized bird that breeds in large blocks of riparian habitats (particularly woodlands with cottonwoods (

Populus fremontii

) and willows (

Salix

sp

.

). Dense understory foliage appears to be an important factor in nest site selection, while cottonwood trees are an important foraging habitat in areas where the species has been studied in California.

The threats currently facing the yellow-billed cuckoo include habitat destruction and modification and pesticide application. Principal causes of riparian habitat losses are conversion to agricultural and other uses, dams and river flow management, stream channelization and stabilization, and livestock grazing. Available breeding habitats for cuckoos have also been substantially reduced in area and quality by groundwater pumping and the replacement of native riparian habitats by invasive nonnative plants, particularly tamarisk. Overuse by livestock has been a major factor in the degradation and modification of riparian habitats in the western United States. The effects include changes in plant community structure and species composition and in relative abundance of species and plant density. These changes are often linked to more widespread changes in watershed hydrology. Livestock grazing in riparian habitats typically results in reduction of plant species diversity and density, especially of palatable broadleaf plants like willows and cottonwood saplings, and is one of the most common causes of riparian degradation. In addition to destruction and degradation of riparian habitats, pesticides may affect cuckoo populations. In areas where riparian habitat borders agricultural lands, e.g., in California's central valley, pesticide use may indirectly affect cuckoos by reducing prey numbers, or by poisoning nestlings if sprayed directly in areas where the birds are nesting. We retained an LPN of 3 for this population of yellow-billed cuckoo; the threats are ongoing and therefore imminent, and they are of a high magnitude, because ongoing habitat degradation could affect the survival of the DPS rangewide.

Friendly ground-dove, American Samoa DPS (

Gallicolumba stairi stairi

) - 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 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. 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 because morphological differences between the two are minimal, we are not recognizing separate subspecies at this time.

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. Predation by nonnative species and natural catastrophes such as hurricanes are the primary threats to the subspecies. Of these, predation by nonnative species is thought to be occurring now and 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. The threats are ongoing and, therefore imminent and the magnitude is moderate because the relative abundance has remained the same for several years. Thus, we assign this subspecies an LPN of 9.

Streaked horned lark (

Eremophila alpestris strigata

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition we received on December 11, 2002. The streaked horned lark occurs in Washington and Oregon, and is thought to be extirpated in British Columbia, Canada. The streaked horned lark nests on the ground in sparsely vegetated sites in short-grass dominated habitats, such as native prairies, coastal dunes, fallow agricultural fields, lightly- to moderately-grazed pastures, seasonal mudflats, airports, and dredged-material formed islands in the Columbia River. In Washington, surveys show that there are approximately 330 remaining breeding birds. In Oregon, the breeding population is estimated to be approximately 400 birds.

The streaked horned lark's breeding habitat continues to be threatened by loss and degradation due to conversion of native grasslands to other uses (such as agriculture, homes, recreational areas, and industry), encroachment of woody vegetation, and invasion of nonnative plant species (e.g., Scot's broom, sod-forming grasses, and beachgrasses). Native prairies have been nearly eliminated throughout the range of the species. Less than 1 to 3 percent of the native grassland and savanna are estimated to remain. Those that remain have been invaded by nonnative sod-forming grasses. Coastal nesting areas have suffered the same fate. A recent purchase of prairie lands in Washington has secured habitat that would have been developed, but its status as suitable lark nesting habitat is unknown.

Wintering habitats are seemingly few, and susceptible to unpredictable conversion to unsuitable over-wintering habitat. Where larks inhabit human-created habitats similar in structure to native prairies (such as airports, military reservations, agricultural fields, and dredge-formed islands), or where they occur adjacent to human habitation, they are subjected to a variety of unintentional human disturbances such as mowing, recreational and military activities, plowing, flooding, and dredge spoil dumping during the nesting season, as well as intentional disturbances such as at the McChord AFB where falcons and dogs are used to haze the birds in order to avoid aircraft collisions. In some areas, landowners have taken steps to improve streaked horned lark nesting habitat.

The magnitude of the threats is high due to small populations with low genetic diversity, and patchy and isolated habitats in areas desirable for development, many of which remain unsecured. The threat of invasive plant species is high and constant, aside from a few restoration sites. The numbers of individuals are low and the numbers of populations are few. Over-wintering birds are concentrated in larger flocks and subject to unpredictable wintering habitat loss (especially in the Willamette Valley, Oregon), potentially affecting a large portion of the population at one time. In Washington, known populations occur on airports and military bases (6 of 13 sites), coastal beaches (4 of 13 sites), and Columbia River islands (3 of 13 sites), where management, training activities, recreation, and dredge spoil dumping continue to negatively impact streaked horned lark breeding and wintering. In Oregon, breeding and wintering sites occur on Columbia River islands, in cultivated grass fields, grazed pastures, fallow fields, roadside shoulders, Christmas tree farms, and wetland mudflats. Such areas continue to be subject to negative impacts such as dredge spoil dumping, development, plowing, mowing, pesticide and herbicide applications, trampling, vehicle traffic, and recreation. Many of these Oregon sites are ephemeral in nature, with the quality of habitat changing from year to year from suitable to unsuitable. Thus the numbers of sites also changes year to year.

The threats are imminent, due to the continued loss of suitable lark habitat, risks to the wintering populations, plans for development on and adjacent to several of its nesting areas, predation, use of falcons and dogs to haze breeding birds at McChord AFB, planned and/or continued expansions of the McChord AFB West Ramp and Olympia Airport, and human disturbance, including annual Air Force military training and fire-bombing on top of lark nesting habitat. We continue to assign an LPN of 3 to this subspecies.

Red knot (

Calidris canutus rufa

) - See above in “

Summary of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

.” The above summary is based on information contained in our files and information provided by petitioners. Four petitions to emergency list the red knot have been received: one on August 9, 2004, two others on August 5, 2005, and the most recent on February 27, 2008.

Kittlitz's murrelet (

Brachyramphus brevirostris

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on May 9, 2001. 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. Other ongoing threats include 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 in 1989. 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. 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.

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. Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.

Xantus's murrelet (

Synthliboramphus hypoleucus

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on April 16, 2002. 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 impacts related to 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. There are three proposed LNG facilities in the Channel Islands; however, these are early in the complex and long-term planning processes, and 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.

The LNG facility off the Coronados Islands was considered to be an imminent threat of high magnitude, which resulted in a previous LPN of 2. The remaining threats to the species are of high magnitude since they have the potential to result in mortality for a large portion of the species' range. However, the threats are nonimminent since they are not currently occurring at most of the murrelet nesting sites. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 5 for this species.

Lesser prairie-chicken (

Tympanuchus pallidicinctus

) - See above in “

Summary of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

.” The above summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition received on October 5, 1995. Additional information can be found in the 12-month finding published on June 7, 1998 (63 FR 31400).

Greater sage-grouse, Columbia Basin DPS (

Centrocercus urophasianus

) - For the reasons discussed below, we have not updated our finding with regard to the Columbia Basin DPS of the western subspecies of the greater sage-grouse (

C. u. phaios

) in this notice. The following summary is based on information in our files and a petition, dated May 14, 1999, requesting the listing of the Washington population of western sage grouse. On May 7, 2001, we concluded that listing the Columbia Basin DPS of western sage grouse was warranted but precluded by higher priority listing actions (66 FR 22984); this DPS was historically found in northern Oregon and central Washington. The Service subsequently received two petitions requesting the listing of the entire ranges of what the petitions called the western and eastern subspecies of greater sage-grouse, dated January 24 and July 3, 2002, respectively. The petition involving the western sage-grouse requested listing the subspecies in northern California through Oregon and Washington (including the Columbia Basin DPS, for which we had already concluded listing was warranted but precluded), as well as any western sage-grouse still occurring in parts of Idaho.

In evaluating the two petitions, we communicated with recognized sage-grouse experts, and discovered there was disagreement as to the taxonomic validity of these subspecies of the greater sage-grouse. Due to this disagreement in the scientific community, the we evaluated the available information and concluded that the eastern and western subspecies designations for greater sage-grouse are inappropriate given current taxonomic standards, which also meant they were not listable entities under the Act. We also concluded that the eastern and western populations did not constitute DPSs of the greater sage-grouse. Therefore, we published findings that the petitions did not present substantial information indicating that what the petitions had identified as the western or eastern subspecies may be warranted for listing under the Act (68 FR 6500 and 69 FR 933, respectively). The Institute for Wildlife Protection filed a

court complaint, dated June 6, 2003, challenging the merits of our 90-day finding on the petition to list the western subspecies. On August 10, 2004, a U.S. District Court judge ruled in favor of the Service and dismissed the plaintiff's case. An appeal, dated November 24, 2004, was filed by the Institute for Wildlife Protection. On March 3, 2006, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the 90-day finding to the Service on the grounds that we did not provide an adequate basis for concluding that the petition failed to present substantial information indicating the western sage-grouse may be a valid subspecies. The Court did, however, uphold our conclusion that the petitioned entity (western sage-grouse) does not constitute a DPS of the greater sage-grouse. On April 29, 2008, we published a substantial 90-day petition finding which concluded that the petition presented substantial information indicating that listing the western subspecies of the greater sage-grouse may be warranted, announced that we were initiating a status review, and requested relevant information from the public (73 FR 23170). We will publish an updated finding addressing the Columbia Basin DPS in the

Federal Register

after completing our status review and 12-month petition finding regarding the petition to list the western subspecies of the greater sage-grouse.

Band-rumped storm-petrel, Hawaii DPS (

Oceanodroma castro

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on May 8, 1989. No new information was provided in the second petition received on May 11, 2004. The band-rumped storm-petrel is a small seabird that is found in several areas of the subtropical Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. In the Pacific, there are three widely separated breeding populations - one in Japan, one in Hawaii, and one in the Galapagos. Populations in Japan and the Galapagos are comparatively large and number in the thousands, while the Hawaiian birds represent a small, remnant population of possibly only a few hundred pairs. Band-rumped storm-petrels are most commonly found in close proximity to breeding islands. The three populations in the Pacific are separated by long distances across the ocean where birds are not found. Extensive at-sea surveys of the Pacific have revealed a broad gap in distribution of the band-rumped storm-petrel to the east and west of the Hawaiian Islands, indicating the distribution of birds in the central Pacific around Hawaii is disjunct from other nesting areas. The available information indicates that distinct populations of band-rumped storm-petrels are definable and that the Hawaiian population is distinct based on geographic and distributional isolation from other band-rumped storm-petrel populations in Japan, the Galapagos, and the Atlantic Ocean. A population also can be considered discrete if it is delimited by international boundaries across which exist differences in management control of the species. The Hawaiian population of the band-rumped storm-petrel is the only population within U.S. borders or under U.S. jurisdiction. Loss of the Hawaiian population would cause a significant gap in the distribution of the band-rumped storm-petrel in the Pacific, and could result in the complete isolation of the Galapagos and Japan populations without even occasional genetic exchanges. Therefore, the population is both discrete and significant, and is therefore a DPS.

The band-rumped storm-petrel probably was common on all of the main Hawaiian Islands when Polynesians arrived about 1,500 years ago, based on storm-petrel bones found in middens on the island of Hawaii and in excavation sites on Oahu and Molokai. Nesting colonies of this species in the Hawaiian Islands currently are restricted to remote cliffs on Kauai and Lehua Island and high-elevation lava fields on Hawaii. Vocalizations of the species were heard in Haleakala Crater on Maui as recently as 2006; however, no nesting sites have been located on the island to date. The significant reduction in numbers and range of the band-rumped storm-petrel is due primarily to predation by nonnative predators introduced by humans, including the domestic cat (

Felis catus

), small Indian mongoose (

Herpestes auropunctatus

), common barn owl (

Tyto alba

), black rat (

R. rattus

), Polynesian rat (

Rattus exulans

), and Norway rat (

R. norvegicus

), which occur throughout the main Hawaiian Islands, with the exception of the mongoose, which is not established on Kauai. Attraction of fledglings to artificial lights, which disrupts their night-time navigation, resulting in collisions with building and other objects, and collisions with artificial structures such as communication towers and utility lines are also threats. Erosion of nest sites caused by the actions of nonnative ungulates is a potential threat in some locations. Efforts are underway in some areas to reduce light pollution and mitigate the threat of collisions, but there are no large-scale efforts to control nonnative predators in the Hawaiian Islands. The threats are imminent because they are ongoing, and they are of a high magnitude because they can significantly affect the survival of this DPS. Therefore, we assign this distinct population segment an LPN of 3.

Elfin-woods warbler (

Dendroica angelae

) - 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 elfin woods warbler, is a small entirely black and white warbler, and was at first thought to occur only in the high elevation dwarf or elfin forests of Puerto Rico, but it has since been found at lower elevations including shade coffee plantations and secondary forests. The elfin woods warbler has been documented from four locations in Puerto Rico: Luquillo Mountains, Sierra de Cayey, and the Commonwealth forests of Maricao and Toro Negro. However, it has not been recorded again in Toro Negro or Cayey, since Hurricane Hugo in 1989. In 2003 and 2004, surveys for the elfin-woods warbler in the Carite Commonwealth Forest, Toro Negro Forest, Guilarte Forest, Bosque del Pueblo, Maricao Forest and the Caribbean National Forest, only detected the species in the latter two areas. In the Maricao Commonwealth Forest, 778 elfin woods warblers were recorded, and in the Caribbean National Forest, 196 elfin-woods warblers were recorded.

Habitat destruction from expansion of public facilities within the forests, potential construction of additional telecommunication towers and their maintenance, disruption of breeding activities from pedestrians and high human use areas, switching from shade to sun coffee plantations, timber management practices, potential predators, and catastrophic natural events such as hurricanes and forest fires, threaten this species. Although these threats are not imminent because most of the range of the elfins wood warbler is within protected lands, the magnitude of threat to this species is high, because the restricted distribution and low population numbers cause the threats to have a significant impact on the species' survival. Therefore, we assign a listing priority number of 5 to this species.

Reptiles

Sand dune lizard (

Sceloporus arenicolus

) - We have not updated our assessment for this species, as we are currently developing a proposed listing rule.

Eastern massasauga rattlesnake (

Sistrurus catenatus catenatus

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files. No new information was provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The eastern massasauga is one of three recognized subspecies of massasauga, a rattlesnake. It occupies shallow wetlands and adjacent upland habitat in portions of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario.

Although the current range of the eastern massasauga resembles the subspecies' historical range, the geographic distribution has been restricted by the loss of the subspecies from much of the area within the boundaries of that range. Approximately 40 percent of the counties that were historically occupied by the eastern massasauga no longer support the subspecies. This subspecies is currently considered imperiled in every State and province which it occupies. Each State and Canadian province across the range of the eastern massasauga has lost more than 30 percent, and for the majority more than 50 percent, of their historical populations. Furthermore, fewer than 35 percent of the remaining populations are considered secure. Approximately 59 percent of the remaining eastern massasauga populations occur wholly or in part on public land, and Statewide and/or site-specific Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances (CCAAs) are currently being developed for many of these areas in Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In 2004, a Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) with the Lake County Forest Preserve District in Illinois was completed. In 2005, a CCA with the Forest Preserve District of Cook County in Illinois was completed. In 2006, a CCAA with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Natural Areas and Preserves was completed for Rome State Nature Preserve in Ashtabula County. Populations expected to be under CCAs and CCAAs have a high likelihood of persisting and remaining viable. Other populations are likely to suffer additional losses in abundance and genetic diversity and some will likely be extirpated unless threats are removed in the near future. The primary threats to the eastern massasauga are habitat modification, habitat succession, incompatible land management practices, illegal collection for the pet trade, and human persecution. Because of the ongoing effort to protect the subspecies through CCAAs, the threats are moderate overall. Although the CCAAs have decreased the immediacy of some threats in some areas, the majority of the threats are ongoing or are in areas not covered by a CCAA. As a result, overall these threats remain an imminent threat to many remaining populations, particularly those inhabiting private lands. We have kept the LPN at 9 for this subspecies.

Black pine snake (

Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi

) - 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. There are historical records for the black pine snake from one parish in Louisiana, 14 counties in Mississippi, and 3 counties in Alabama west of the Mobile River Delta. Black pine snake surveys and trapping indicate that this species has been extirpated from Louisiana and from four counties in Mississippi. Moreover, the distribution of remaining populations has become highly restricted due to the destruction and fragmentation of the remaining longleaf pine habitat within the range of the subspecies. Most of the known Mississippi populations are concentrated on the DeSoto National Forest. Populations occurring on properties managed by State and other governmental agencies as gopher tortoise mitigation banks or wildlife sanctuaries represent the best opportunities for long-term survival of the subspecies in Alabama. Other factors affecting the black pine snake include vehicular mortality and low reproductive rates, which magnify the threats from destruction and fragmentation of longleaf pine habitat and increase the likelihood of local extinctions. Due to the imminent threats of high magnitude caused by the past destruction of most of the longleaf pine habitat of the black pine snake, and the continuing persistent degradation of what remains, we assigned an LPN of 3 to this subspecies.

Louisiana pine snake (

Pituophis ruthveni

) -The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on July 19, 2000. The Louisiana pine snake historically occurred in the fire-maintained longleaf pine ecosystem within

west-central Louisiana and extreme

east-central Texas. Most of the historical longleaf pine habitat of the Louisiana pine snake has been destroyed or degraded due to logging, fire suppression, roadways, short-rotation silviculture, and grazing. In the absence of recurrent fire, suitable habitat conditions for the Louisiana pine snake and its primary prey, the Baird's pocket gopher (

Geomys breviceps

), are lost due to vegetative succession. The loss and fragmentation of the longleaf pine ecosystem has resulted in extant Louisiana pine snake populations that are isolated and small. Trapping and occurrence data indicate the Louisiana pine snake is currently restricted to seven disjunct populations; five of the populations occur on Federal lands and two occur mainly on private industrial timberlands. Current potentially occupied habitat in Louisiana and Texas is estimated to be approximately 163,000 acres, with 53 percent occurring on public lands and 47 percent in private ownership.

All remnant Louisiana pine snake populations have been affected by habitat loss and all require active habitat management. A Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) was completed in 2003 to maintain and enhance potentially occupied habitat on public lands, and to protect known Louisiana pine snake populations. On Federal lands, signatories of the Louisiana pine snake CCA currently conduct habitat management (i.e., prescribed burning and thinning) that is beneficial to the Louisiana pine snake. This proactive habitat management has likely slowed or reversed the rate of Louisiana pine snake habitat degradation on many portions of Federal lands. The largest extant Louisiana pine snake population exists on private industrial timberlands. Although two conservation areas are managed to benefit Louisiana pine snakes on this property, the majority of the intervening occupied habitat is threatened by land management activities (habitat conversion to short-rotation pine plantations) that decrease habitat quality.

Three of the remnant Louisiana pine snake populations may be vulnerable to decreased demographic viability or other factors associated with low population sizes and demographic isolation. Although these remnant Louisiana pine snake populations are intrinsically vulnerable and thus threatened by these factors, it is not known if they are presently actually facing these threats. Because all extant populations are currently isolated and fragmented by habitat loss in the matrix between populations, there is little potential for dispersal among remnant populations or for the natural re-colonization of vacant habitat patches. Thus, the loss of any remnant population is likely to be permanent. Other factors affecting the Louisiana pine

snake throughout its range include low fecundity, which magnifies

other threats and increases the

likelihood of local extinctions, and

vehicular

mortality, which may significantly affect Louisiana pine snake populations.

While the extent of Louisiana pine snake habitat loss has been great in the past and much of the remaining habitat has been degraded, habitat loss does not represent an imminent threat, primarily because the rate of habitat loss appears to be declining on public lands. However, all populations require active habitat management, and the lack of adequate habitat remains a threat for several populations. The potential threats to a large percentage of extant Louisiana pine snake populations, coupled with the likely permanence of these effects and the species' low fecundity and low population sizes (based on capture rates and occurrence data), lead us to conclude that the threats have significant effect on the survival of the species and therefore remain high in magnitude. Thus, based on nonimminent, high-magnitude threats, we assign a listing priority number of 5 to this species.

Sonoyta mud turtle (

Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale

) - 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 Sonoyta mud turtle occurs in a spring and pond at Quitobaquito Springs on Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona, and in the Rio Sonoyta and Quitovac Spring of Sonora, Mexico. Loss and degradation of stream habitat from water diversion and groundwater pumping, along with its very limited distribution, is the primary threat to the Sonoyta mud turtle. Sonoyta mud turtles are highly aquatic and depend on permanent water for survival. The area of southwest Arizona and northern Sonora where the Sonoyta mud turtle occurs is one of the driest regions of the southwest. Due to continuing drought, irrigated agriculture, and development in the region, surface water in the Rio Sonoyta can be expected to dwindle further and therefore have a significant impact on the survival of this subspecies which may also be vulnerable to aerial spraying of pesticides on nearby agricultural fields. We retained an LPN of 3 for this subspecies because threats are of a high magnitude and continue to date, and therefore, are imminent.

Amphibians

Columbia spotted frog, Great Basin DPS (

Rana luteiventris

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition we received on May 1, 1989. Currently, Columbia spotted frogs appear to be widely distributed throughout southwestern Idaho, eastern Oregon, northeastern and central Nevada but local populations within this general area appear to be small and isolated from each other. Recent work by researchers in Idaho and Nevada has documented the 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. The populations within the Columbia Basin are discrete and significant, and thus are a DPS.

Water development, improper grazing, mining activities and nonnative species have and continue to contribute to the degradation and fragmentation of Columbia spotted frog 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. A 10-year Conservation Agreement/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 habitat to ensure their continued existence throughout their historic range. Additionally, a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances was completed in 2006 for the Owyhee subpopulation at Sam Noble Springs, Idaho. While some threats (habitat modification and fragmentation, nonnative species, inadequate regulatory mechanisms, and climate change) to the species and its habitat occur rangewide but at various intensities, other threats (disease and mining) only impact local populations; overall, the magnitude of the threats is moderate. Based on ongoing, and therefore, imminent threats of moderate magnitude, we assigned a listing priority number of 9 to this Distinct Population Segment of the Columbia spotted frog.

Mountain yellow-legged frog, Sierra Nevada DPS (

Rana muscosa

) - The following summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition received on February 8, 2000. Also see our 12-month petition finding published on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2283) and our amended 12-month petition finding published on June 25, 2007 (72 FR 34657). The mountain yellow-legged frog

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