[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-2463]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 3, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Department of the Interior





_______________________________________________________________________



Fish and Wildlife Service



_______________________________________________________________________



50 CFR Part 17



Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Emergency Rule and 
Proposed Rule to List the Pacific Pocket Mouse
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC39

 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Emergency Rule to 
List the Pacific Pocket Mouse as Endangered

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Emergency rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) exercises its 
emergency authority to determine the Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus 
longimembris pacificus) to be an endangered species pursuant to the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Prior to 1993, this 
species had not been observed in over 20 years. The Pacific pocket 
mouse was rediscovered on the Dana Point Headlands, Orange County, 
California, during July 1993. No more than 39 individuals are known to 
exist despite relatively intensive, recent surveys in all of the 
remaining, undisturbed locales where the species historically occurred.
    The only known existing Pacific pocket mouse population is 
imminently threatened by a land development project and depredation by 
feral and/or domestic cats. Because of the need to make Federal 
funding, protection, and other measures immediately available to 
protect this species and its habitat, the Service finds that an 
emergency rule action is justified. This emergency rule provides 
Federal protection pursuant to the Act for this species for a period of 
240 days. A proposed rule to list the Pacific pocket mouse as 
endangered is published concurrently with this emergency rule in this 
same Federal Register separate part.

DATES: This emergency rule is effective on January 31, 1994, and 
expires on September 28, 1994.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection 
by appointment during normal business hours at the Carlsbad Field 
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, 
Carlsbad, California 92008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail Kobetich, Field Supervisor, 
Carlsbad Field Office, at the above address (telephone 619 431-9440; 
facsimile 619 431-9624).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus) is 1 
of 19 recognized subspecies of the little pocket mouse (Perognathus 
longimembris) (Hall 1981), a species that is widely distributed 
throughout arid regions of the western United States and northwestern 
Mexico. It is the smallest member of the family Heteromyidae, which 
consists of spiny pocket mice (Heteromys and Liomys), pocket mice 
(Perognathus and Chaetodipus), kangaroo rats (Dipodomys), and kangaroo 
mice (Microdipodops). Virtually all members of this family are 
nocturnal, granivorous, and have external, deep, fur-lined cheek 
pouches (Ingles 1965; P. Brylski, consulting mammalogist, pers. comm., 
1993).
    The little pocket mouse is about 110 to 148 millimeters (mm) (4.3 
to 6 inches (in)) long from nose to tip of tail. Its body pelage is 
spineless, bristle-free, and predominately brown, pinkish buff, or 
ochraceous buff above and light brown, pale tawny, buff, or whitish 
below. Two small patches of lighter hairs typically exist at the base 
of the ear. The tail can be either distinctly or indistinctly 
bicolored. The soles of the hind feet are hairy (Hall 1981).
    The Pacific pocket mouse is the smallest subspecies of the little 
pocket mouse, ranging from about 110 to 126 mm (4.3 to 4.9 in) long 
from nose to tip of tail. The tail, hind foot, and skull lengths and 
the size of skull structures are also the smallest of all little pocket 
mouse subspecies.
    The Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), 
which occurs mostly northeast of and more interior than the Pacific 
pocket mouse, is the only other subspecies of little pocket mouse in 
cismontane southern California, is 125 to 145 mm (4.9 to 5.7 in) in 
total length, and has a longer tail, hind foot, and skull than the 
Pacific pocket mouse. The nasal bones in the skull of the Los Angeles 
pocket mouse are also considerably larger than those of the Pacific 
pocket mouse (Huey 1939).
    The Pacific pocket mouse was originally described by Mearns (1898) 
as a distinct species, Perognathus pacificus, based on the type 
specimen from San Diego County, California. von Bloeker (1931a,b) later 
recognized the Pacific pocket mouse as a distinct species, but 
subsequently concluded that the morphology of P. pacificus was not 
sufficiently distinct from P. longimembris to maintain the Pacific 
pocket mouse as a distinct species. von Bloeker reduced P. pacificus to 
P. longimembris pacificus. von Bloeker also described a second coastal 
subspecies, P. longimembris cantwelli, from El Segundo in Los Angeles 
County, California (von Bloeker 1932). After an analysis of 331 
specimens of the little pocket mouse, Huey (1939) recognized P. l. 
pacificus to include the two subspecies described by von Bloeker 
(1932).
    Although a taxonomic review of P. longimembris may be appropriate, 
Williams (in litt., 1993) indicated that ``the Pacific pocket mouse is 
distinct.''
    The Pacific pocket mouse occurs within about 3 kilometers (km) (2 
miles (mi)) of the immediate coast of southern California from Marina 
del Rey and El Segundo in Los Angeles County south to the vicinity of 
the Mexican border in San Diego County (Hall 1981, Williams 1986, 
Erickson 1993) and below 180 meters (m) (600 feet (ft)) in elevation 
(Erickson 1993). Although the range map in Hall (1981) suggests that 
the range of the Pacific pocket mouse may extend into northwestern Baja 
California, Mexico, this subspecies has never been recorded outside of 
California (Erickson 1993).
    The Pacific pocket mouse occurs on fine-grain, sandy substrates in 
the immediate vicinity of the Pacific Ocean (Mearns 1898, von Bloeker 
1931a, Grinnell 1933, Bailey 1939). The Pacific pocket mouse inhabits 
coastal strand, coastal dunes, river alluvium, and coastal sage scrub 
growing on marine terraces (Grinnell 1933, Meserve 1972, Erickson 
1993). Brylski (1993) detected the only known extant population on the 
Dana Point Headlands on loose sand substrates in a coastal sage scrub 
community dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasiculatum) and 
California sage (Artemisia californica).
    The Pacific pocket mouse is likely facultatively or partially 
fossorial, relatively sedentary, and able to become torpid, estivate, 
or hibernate in response to adverse environmental conditions (Ingles 
1965, Vaughan 1978, Zeiner et al. 1990).
    While active above ground, little pocket mice have ranged up to 320 
m (1,000 ft) from their burrows in a 24-hour period (Burt and 
Grossenheider 1976). Little pocket mouse home ranges vary in size from 
0.12 to 0.56 hectares (0.30 to 1.4 acres), and populations range in 
density from 1 to 5.5 individuals per hectare (0.4 to 2.2 individuals 
per acre) (Chew and Butterworth 1964).
    Pacific pocket mice primarily eat the seeds of grasses and forbs, 
but occasionally eat leafy material and soil-dwelling insects (von 
Bloeker 1931a; Meserve 1976a; Jameson and Peeters 1988; P. Brylski, 
pers. comm., 1993).
    The little pocket mouse has a high metabolic rate (Bartholomew and 
Cade 1957), continually needs food supplies while active, and loses 
heat rapidly. It has limited capacity to store food. Little pocket mice 
may stay in their burrows continuously for up to 5 months in winter, 
alternating between periods of dormancy and feeding on stored seeds or 
hibernation in winter under adverse conditions (Bartholomew and Cade 
1957, Ingles 1965, Kenagy 1973, Whitaker 1980).
    Little pocket mice live up to 7.5 years in captivity and 3 to 5 
years in the wild (Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Whitaker 1980). 
Pregnant and lactating females have been found from April through June, 
and immatures have been reported from June through September (Erickson 
1993). Burt and Grossenheider (1976) previously reported that the 
little pocket mouse produces one or two litters (ranging in size from 
three to seven young) in a year.
    The Pacific pocket mouse is historically known from eight 
populations. Approximately 80 percent of all Pacific pocket mouse 
records are from 1931 or 1932 (Erickson 1993). The following summarizes 
the historical distribution of the Pacific pocket mouse by county:
    Los Angeles County. The Pacific pocket mouse historically was 
detected in three areas: Marina del Rey/El Segundo, Wilmington, and 
Clifton. No records of the Pacific pocket mouse exist in Los Angeles 
County since 1938 (P. Brylski, in litt., 1993; D. Erickson, consulting 
biologist, in litt., 1993; Erickson 1993).
    Orange County. The Pacific pocket mouse has been found at two 
locales in Orange County: Dana Point and the San Joaquin Hills. The 
species was found on ``Spyglass Hill'' in the San Joaquin Hills from 
1968 to 1971 (Erickson 1993). G.G. Cantwell previously collected 10 
specimens at the Dana Point Headlands in 1932.
    San Diego County. The Pacific pocket mouse has been detected at 
three general locales in San Diego County: the San Onofre area, Santa 
Margarita River Estuary, and the lower Tijuana River Valley. Another 
report of a single Pacific pocket mouse in suitable habitat from Lux 
Canyon, Encinitas, in June 1989 is now considered probable by the 
observer (Erickson 1993).
    The only known extant population of the Pacific pocket mouse was 
rediscovered in July 1993 on the Dana Point Headlands in Orange County, 
California. Between 25 to 39 individual Pacific pocket mice were 
detected during trapping surveys conducted into August 1993 (Brylski 
1993). This was the first time the Pacific pocket mouse had been 
collected at this site since 1971 (Erickson 1993). Numerous small-
mammal survey and trapping efforts within its historical range (D. 
Erickson, in litt., 1993; Erickson 1993) have failed to locate any 
additional populations. The remaining site is imminently threatened by 
a development that is expected to receive final approval in the very 
near future.

Previous Federal Action

    The Pacific pocket mouse was designated by the Service as a 
category 2 candidate species for Federal listing as endangered or 
threatened in 1985 (50 FR 37966). It was retained in this category in 
subsequent notices of review published by the Service in the Federal 
Register in 1989 and 1991 (54 FR 554 and 56 FR 58804, respectively). 
Category 2 comprises taxa for which information now in the possession 
of the Service indicates that proposing to list as endangered or 
threatened is possibly appropriate, but for which conclusive data on 
biological vulnerability and threat are not currently available to 
support proposed rules. The Service made the determination to list this 
species on the basis of new information received in 1993 that resulted 
in the elevation of the Pacific pocket mouse to category 1 status. 
Category 1 comprises taxa for which the Service has on file sufficient 
information to support proposals for endangered or threatened status.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    After a thorough review and consideration of all information 
available, the Service has determined that the Pacific pocket mouse 
should be classified as an endangered species. Procedures found at 
section 4 of the Act and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated to 
implement the listing provisions of the Act were followed. A species 
may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one 
or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors 
and their application to the Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus 
longimembris pacificus) are as follows:
    A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range. Although originally known from 
eight locales, the Pacific pocket mouse now occurs in one site on the 
Dana Point Headlands of Dana Point in Orange County. Although the Dana 
Point Headlands have remained relatively unchanged since the Pacific 
pocket mouse was first detected at this locale, a land development 
project has been approved by the Planning Commission, with final 
approval anticipated in early 1994. This proposed residential and hotel 
complex project would result in the removal of 3.65 acres of the 3.75 
acres of habitat that Brylski (1993) identified as being occupied by 
Pacific pocket mice (EDAW 1993b). Grading that would destroy the only 
known Pacific pocket mouse population may proceed upon final approval 
of the proposed project. This site is also threatened by fuel 
modification for fire protection.
    In Los Angeles County, two of the three historic locales for the 
Pacific pocket mouse (Clifton and Wilmington) have been developed, and 
the third (Marina del Rey/El Segundo) has been substantially altered 
since the species was last detected there. Recent surveys have been 
unsuccessful in relocating the species in the vicinity of Marina del 
Rey or El Segundo. The Hyperion area, which formerly contained 
relatively large expanses of coastal strand and wetland habitats, has 
been extensively developed.
    In Orange County, the development of the Spyglass Hill area began 
in 1972. This development resulted in the destruction of the formerly 
occupied habitat at that site.
    Although portions of the San Onofre area and the Santa Margarita 
River mouth in San Diego County remain relatively undisturbed, recent 
survey and small mammal trapping efforts at these locations failed to 
detect the presence of the Pacific pocket mouse (P. Brylski, pers. 
comm., 1993; R. Erickson, in litt., 1993; Erickson 1993; R. Zembal, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. comm., 1993). During the 1930s, 
Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base did not exist and the city of 
Oceanside was immediately adjacent to the Santa Margarita River 
estuary. Much of the southern half of the Santa Margarita River estuary 
was destroyed in the early 1940s during the establishment of Camp 
Pendleton Marine Corps Base and the related construction of a boat 
basin and harbor facilities. In addition, the Oceanside area has been 
extensively developed since the Pacific pocket mouse was last recorded 
there in 1931, and little, if any, suitable habitat remains at that 
location.
    Although the lower Tijuana River Valley evidently supported a 
relatively large population of the Pacific pocket mouse in the early 
1930s, this area has been substantially altered and currently provides 
little, if any, suitable habitat. Recent trapping efforts have failed 
to detect the Pacific pocket mouse at this location (Taylor and Tiszler 
1991; R.T. Miller, pers. comm. to Erickson, 1993).
    Another potential site for the Pacific pocket mouse is Lux Canyon 
in Encinitas, San Diego County, where an unverified sighting occurred 
in 1989. However, the majority of Lux Canyon has already been converted 
to urban development and agriculture. The remaining habitat in Lux 
Canyon is highly fragmented and subject to additional urban development 
(F. Roberts, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. comm., 1993).
    Opportunities to find additional populations of the Pacific pocket 
mouse are limited. Less than 400 hectares (1,000 acres) of about 28,000 
hectares (70,000 acres) (1 percent) encompassing the range of the 
Pacific pocket mouse in Los Angeles County are undeveloped (U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, unpublished data, 1993). About 17,600 hectares 
(44,000 acres) of approximately 21,600 hectares (54,000 acres) (81 
percent) encompassing the range of the Pacific pocket mouse in Orange 
County has been converted to urban uses (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, unpublished data, 1993). Land use patterns in coastal San 
Diego County are similar. Oberbauer and Vanderwier (1991) reported that 
72 percent of coastal sage scrub, 94 percent of native grasslands, 88 
percent of coastal mixed chaparral, 88 percent of coastal salt marsh, 
100 percent of coastal strand, and 92 percent of maritime sage scrub 
habitats in San Diego County had been converted to urban and 
agricultural uses by 1988.
    An additional 16 hectares (41 acres) of suitable habitat for the 
Pacific pocket mouse occurs on the Dana Point Headlands. However, 13 
hectares (32 acres) of this habitat would be eliminated by the same 
project that threatens the only known occupied habitat (EDAW 1993b). 
Additional potential habitat occurs on Pelican Hill in the San Joaquin 
Hills and along the coastal bluffs in Crystal Cove State Park. Over 50 
percent of the Pelican Hill site was graded in March 1993 with the 
remainder approved for development (F. Roberts, pers. comm., 1993).
    Within the remaining undeveloped range of the Pacific pocket mouse, 
areas that contain suitable habitat for the species represent less than 
10 percent of the remaining habitat. This is exemplified by the 
situation in Orange County, where identified suitable habitat for the 
Pacific pocket mouse is restricted to less than 60 hectares (150 acres) 
(F. Roberts, pers. comm., 1993).
    B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes. Not known to be applicable.
    C. Disease or predation. Disease is not known to be a factor 
affecting this species at this time.
    The proliferation of non-native populations of the red fox (Vulpes 
vulpes) in coastal southern California is well documented (Lewis et al. 
1993). Erickson (1993) has speculated that the red fox ``may have 
hastened the demise of the Pacific pocket mouse in the El Segundo 
area,'' where the species apparently was well-represented historically.
    Feral and domestic cats are known to be predators of native rodents 
(Hubbs 1951, George 1974). Pearson (1964) concluded that the removal of 
4,200 mice from a 14 hectare (35 acre) test plot was accomplished 
largely by 6 cats over an 8-month period. Feral and/or domestic cats 
are threatening the only known population of the Pacific pocket mouse. 
A resident living immediately adjacent to the only known population has 
reported that domestic cats had recently and repeatedly brought home a 
number of ``tiny gray mice'' (P. Brylski, in litt., 1993). Of all 
rodent captures at Dana Point Headlands reported by Brylski (1993), 81 
percent were Pacific pocket mice.
    D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Existing 
regulatory mechanisms that may provide some protection for the Pacific 
pocket mouse include: (1) The Federal Endangered Species Act (Act) in 
those cases where the pocket mouse occurs in habitat occupied by a 
listed species; (2) the California Natural Community Conservation 
Planning Program; (3) the California Environmental Quality Act; (4) 
land acquisition and management by Federal, State, or local agencies or 
by private groups and organizations; and (5) local laws and 
regulations.
    The Pacific pocket mouse is currently classified as a candidate for 
Federal listing under the Act and as a Species of Special Concern ``Of 
Highest Priority'' by the California Department of Fish and Game 
(Department). However, Federal candidate species and Department Species 
of Special Concern have no local status and are afforded no protection 
under the Federal or California Endangered Species Acts.
    The only known population of the Pacific pocket mouse is found in 
conjunction with a population of coastal California gnatcatchers on the 
Dana Point Headlands (Brylski 1993; EDAW 1993a,b). The coastal 
California gnatcatcher's status as a threatened species gives it 
protection under the Act. However, the legal authority to protect the 
gnatcatcher does not extend to candidate species.
    Under provisions under section 10(a) of the Act, the Service may 
permit the incidental ``take'' of the gnatcatcher during the course of 
an otherwise legal activity as long as the likelihood of that species' 
survival and recovery in the wild is not precluded. If the Service 
authorized take of the gnatcatcher at the Dana Point Headlands pursuant 
to section 10(a), the permitted activities could result in the 
extinction of the Pacific pocket mouse.
    In 1991, the State of California established the Natural 
Communities Conservation Planning Program to address the conservation 
needs of natural ecosystems throughout the State. The initial focus of 
that program is the coastal sage scrub community occupied, in part, by 
the Pacific pocket mouse. At the present time, no plans have been 
completed or implemented, and no protection is currently proposed to 
prevent or reduce impacts to 3.65 of the 3.75 acres of occupied habitat 
on the Dana Point Headlands that are proposed for development.
    In many cases, land-use planning decisions are made on the basis of 
environmental review documents prepared in accordance with the 
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National 
Environmental Policy Act. These Acts have not adequately protected 
Pacific pocket mouse habitat.
    A relocation program proposed to mitigate impacts to the Pacific 
pocket mouse on the Dana Point Headlands (EDAW 1993b) has not been 
fully defined or developed and must be considered highly experimental. 
As part of this proposed mitigation program, ``the Pacific pocket mouse 
will be relocated to suitable on-site or off-site locations that are or 
will be preserved as suitable habitat'' (EDAW 1993b). EDAW (1993b) has 
concluded that the ``implementation of this mitigation will not reduce 
impacts to this species to a level of insignificance.'' The program 
proposed in the Dana Point Headlands to control domestic cat predation 
is also inadequate.
    E. Other natural or man-made factors affecting its continued 
existence. This species is highly susceptible to extinction as a result 
of stochastic environmental or demographic causes because the remaining 
animals are found in one location.
    The Service has determined that listing as endangered is 
appropriate because the remaining location is imminently threatened by 
urban development.

Reasons for Emergency Determination

    Under section 4(b)(7) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and 50 CFR 424.20, the Secretary may determine a 
species to be endangered or threatened by an emergency rule that shall 
cease 240 days following publication in the Federal Register. The 
reasons why this rule is necessary are discussed below. If at any time 
after this rule has been published the Secretary determines that 
substantial evidence does not exist to warrant such a rule, it shall be 
withdrawn.
    Of the eight known sites historically occupied by the species, all 
but two have been developed or significantly altered through human 
activities. Suitable habitat remains in the Marina del Rey/El Segundo 
portion of Los Angeles County; however, efforts to find the animal in 
this area have not been successful. One other site at San Onofre in San 
Diego County still retains suitable habitat. However, the Pacific 
pocket mouse was never common at this site, and recent surveys have not 
located any individuals.
    The only remaining population (containing no more than 39 animals) 
of the Pacific pocket mouse occurs on the Dana Point Headlands of Dana 
Point, California. As discussed under factors A, C, and D in the 
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species section above, an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the well-being and continued survival of 
the Pacific pocket mouse exists as the result of the imminent, proposed 
destruction of 3.65 of the 3.75 acres of occupied habitat (Brylski 
1993; EDAW 1993a,b). The Pacific pocket mouse is also imminently 
threatened at this location by feral and/or domestic cat depredation.
    For these reasons, the Service finds that the Pacific pocket mouse 
is in imminent danger of extinction throughout all or a significant 
portion of its range and warrants immediate protection under the Act.

Critical Habitat

    Critical habitat, as defined by section 3(5)(A) of the Act, means: 
(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a 
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which 
are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the 
conservation of the species, and (II) that may require special 
management considerations or protection, and (ii) specific areas 
outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is 
listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the 
conservation of the species.
    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires that critical habitat be 
designated to the maximum extent prudent and determinable concurrently 
with the determination that a species is endangered or threatened. The 
Service's regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that a designation of 
critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following 
situations exist: (1) The species is threatened by taking or other 
human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected 
to increase the degree of such threat to the species, or (2) such 
designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
    The Service finds that designation of critical habitat is not 
prudent at this time for the Pacific pocket mouse. The only known 
population of this species is found on private lands where Federal 
jurisdiction or involvement in land-use activities is not expected. 
Therefore, the designation of critical habitat within the existing 
range of the Pacific pocket mouse would not appreciably benefit the 
species.

Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or 
threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition, 
recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions 
against certain activities. Recognition through listing encourages and 
results in conservation actions by Federal, State, and private 
agencies, groups, and individuals. The Act provides for possible land 
acquisition, cooperation with the States, and requires that recovery 
actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection required 
of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against certain activities are 
discussed, in part, below.
    Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to 
evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or 
listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical 
habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this 
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR 
part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to 
confer informally with the Service on any action that is likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed species or result in 
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a 
species is subsequently listed, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal 
agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out 
are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of such a species 
or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal 
action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the 
responsible Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the 
Service. The Service does not expect to receive requests for 
consultation from other Federal agencies with respect to this species 
because no Federal involvement is expected for activities occurring 
within habitat currently occupied by the Pacific pocket mouse.
    The Act and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 17.21 set 
forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all 
endangered wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for 
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take 
(including harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 
capture, collect, or attempt any such conduct), import or export, 
transport in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial 
activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce 
any listed species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, 
carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken 
illegally. Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State 
conservation agencies.
    Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances. 
Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. 
Such permits are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the 
propagation or survival of the species, and/or for incidental take in 
connection with otherwise lawful activities.
    Requests for copies of the regulations on listed wildlife and 
inquiries regarding same should be addressed to the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, 
Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 (telephone 503/231-6241; facsimile 503/231-
6243).

National Environmental Policy Act

    The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that an Environmental 
Assessment, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in connection 
with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice outlining the Service's 
reasons for this determination was published in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 48244).

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited herein is available upon 
request from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office 
(see ADDRESSES section).

Author

    The primary authors of this emergency rule are Loren R. Hays and 
Fred M. Roberts, Jr., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field 
Office (see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, effective from January 31, 1994 until September 28, 
1994, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

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


    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.


    2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding the following in alphabetical 
order under ``MAMMALS,'' to the List of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife, to read as follows:


Sec. 17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Species                                                    Vertebrate population                                                  
----------------------------------------------------      Historic range          where endangered or      Status    When listed    Critical    Special 
       Common name             Scientific name                                        threatened                                    habitat      rules  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Mammals                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                      * * * * * * *                                                                     
Mouse, Pacific pocket....  Perognathus longimembris  U.S.A. (CA).............  Entire..................  E                   526           NA         NA
                            pacificus .                                                                                                                 
                                                                      * * * * * * *                                                                     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: January 28, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-2463 Filed 1-31-94; 3:57 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P