[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69993-70060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28050]



[[Page 69993]]

Vol. 77

Wednesday,

No. 225

November 21, 2012

Part III





Department of the Interior





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





Fish and Wildlife Service





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





50 CFR Part 17





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

Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 69994]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0050; MO-4500030113]


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 determine that 
species should be removed from candidate status. Additional material 
that we relied on is available in the Species Assessment and Listing 
Priority Assignment Forms (species assessment forms) for each candidate 
species.
    Overall, this CNOR recognizes two new candidates, changes the LPN 
for nine candidates, and removes three 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 192.
    This document also includes our findings on resubmitted petitions 
and describes our progress in revising the Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) during the period October 1, 
2011, through September 30, 2012.
    We request additional status information that may be available for 
the 192 candidate species identified in this CNOR.

DATES: We will accept information on any of the species in this 
Candidate Notice of Review at any time.

ADDRESSES: This notice is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cnor.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 
Office of Communications and Candidate Conservation, Arlington, VA (see 
address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or on our Web site 
(http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp). Please 
submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions of a 
general nature on this notice to the Arlington, VA, address listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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, Office of 
Communications and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 
(telephone 703-358-2171). Persons who use a telecommunications device 
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service 
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We request additional status information 
that may be available for any of the candidate species identified in 
this CNOR. We will consider this information to monitor changes in the 
status or LPN of candidate species and to manage candidates as we 
prepare listing documents and future revisions to the notice of review. 
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 under Request 
for Information in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. General information we 
receive will be available at the Office of Communications and Candidate 
Conservation, Arlington, VA (see address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Candidate Notice of Review

Background

    The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.) (ESA), 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 
ESA, an endangered species is any species which is in danger of 
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a 
threatened species is any species which is likely to become an 
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range. Through the Federal rulemaking 
process, we add species that meet these definitions to the List of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of 
Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 CFR 17.12. As part of this 
program, we maintain a list of species that we regard as candidates for 
listing. A candidate species is one for which we have on file 
sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to 
support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened, but for which 
preparation and publication of a proposal is precluded by higher-
priority listing actions. We may identify a species as a candidate for 
listing after we have conducted an evaluation of its status on our own 
initiative, or after we have made a positive finding on a petition to 
list a species, in particular we have found that listing is warranted 
but precluded by other higher priority listing actions (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 request input from interested parties to help us 
identify

[[Page 69995]]

those candidate species that may not require protection under the ESA 
or additional species that may require the ESA's protections; and to 
request 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 under Request for Information or visit our Web site, 
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cca.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 
October 26, 2011 (76 FR 66370). CNORs published since 1994 are 
available on our Web site, http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/cnor.html. For copies of CNORs published prior to 1994, please contact 
the Office of Communications and Candidate Conservation (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 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). Section 4(h)(3) of the ESA 
(16 U.S.C. 1533(h)(3)) requires the Secretary to establish guidelines 
for such a priority-ranking guidance system. 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. For all 
candidate species, the threats are of sufficiently high magnitude to 
put them in danger of extinction, or make them likely to become in 
danger of extinction in the foreseeable future. But for species with 
higher magnitude threats, the threats have a greater likelihood of 
bringing about extinction or are expected to bring about extinction on 
a shorter timescale (once the threats are imminent) than for species 
with lower magnitude threats. Because we do not routinely quantify how 
likely or how soon extinction would be expected to occur absent 
listing, we must evaluate factors that contribute to the likelihood and 
time scale for extinction. We therefore consider information such as: 
The number of populations or extent of range of the species affected by 
the threat(s) or both; 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; the severity of the effects and the 
rapidity with which they have caused or are likely to cause mortality 
to individuals and accompanying declines in population levels; whether 
the effects are likely to be permanent; and the extent to which any 
ongoing conservation efforts reduce the severity of the threat.
    As used in our priority-ranking system, immediacy of threat is 
categorized as either ``imminent'' or ``nonimminent'' and 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 
genera that have more than one species); and subspecies and distinct 
population segments of vertebrate species (DPS).
    The result of the ranking system is that we assign each candidate a 
listing priority number of 1 to 12. For example, if the threats are 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 
(i.e., a species that is the only member of its genus would be assigned 
to the LPN 1 category, a full species to LPN 2, and a subspecies or DPS 
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 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 1983 guidance is available on our Web site at: 
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/48fr43098-43105.pdf. 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 immediacy 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 previous CNOR on October 26, 2011 (76 FR 
66370), 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 ESA. Some of these findings and determinations 
have been completed and published in the Federal Register, while work 
on others is still under way (see Preclusion and Expeditious Progress, 
below, for details).
    Based on our review of the best available scientific and commercial 
information, with this CNOR we identify 2 new candidate species (see 
New Candidates, below), change the LPN for 9 candidates (see Listing 
Priority Changes in Candidates, below) and determine that a listing 
proposal is not warranted for 3 species and thus remove them from 
candidate status (see Candidate Removals, below). Combined with the 
other decisions published separately from this CNOR, a total of 192 
species (including 69 plant and 123 animal species) are now candidates 
awaiting preparation of rules proposing

[[Page 69996]]

their listing. These 192 species, along with the 94 species currently 
proposed for listing (including 6 species proposed for listing due to 
similarity in appearance), are included in Table 1.
    Table 2 lists the changes from the previous CNOR, and includes 47 
species identified in the previous CNOR as either proposed for listing 
or classified as candidates that are no longer in those categories. 
This includes 41 species for which we published a final listing rule, 1 
species for which we published a withdrawal of a proposed rule, 2 
candidate species for which we published separate not-warranted 
findings and removed from candidate status, plus the 3 species in this 
notice that we have determined do not meet the definition of an 
endangered or threatened species and therefore do not warrant listing. 
We have removed these species from candidate status in this CNOR.

New Candidates

    Below we present a brief summary of one new mammal (Pe[ntilde]asco 
least chipmunk), and one new fish (Cumberland arrow darter), that are 
additions to this year's CNOR. Complete information, including 
references, can be found in the species assessment forms. You may 
obtain a copy of these forms from the Regional Office having the lead 
for the species, or from our Web site http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp. For these 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 two other species--San Francisco Bay-
Delta longfin smelt DPS and Arapahoe snowfly--were identified as 
candidates earlier this year as a result of separate petition findings 
published in the Federal Register.

Mammals

    Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk (Tamias minimus atristriatus)--The 
Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk is endemic to the White Mountains, Otero 
and Lincoln Counties, and the Sacramento Mountains, Otero County, New 
Mexico. The Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk historically had a broad 
distribution throughout the Sacramento Mountains within ponderosa pine 
forests. The last verification of persistence of the Sacramento 
Mountains population of Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk was in 1966, and 
the subspecies appears to be extirpated from the Sacramento Mountains. 
The only remaining known distribution of the least chipmunk is 
restricted to open, high elevation, talus slopes within a subalpine 
grassland, located in the Sierra Blanca area, White Mountains, Lincoln 
and Otero Counties, New Mexico.
    The Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk faces threats from present or 
threatened destruction, modification, and curtailment of its habitat 
from the alteration or loss of mature ponderosa pine forests in one of 
the two historically-occupied areas. The documented decline in occupied 
localities, in conjunction with the small numbers of individuals 
captured, are linked to widespread habitat alteration. Moreover, the 
highly-fragmented nature of its current distribution is a significant 
contributor to the vulnerability of this subspecies and increases the 
likelihood of very small, isolated populations being extirpated. As a 
result of this fragmentation, even if suitable habitat exists (or is 
restored) in the Sacramento Mountains, the likelihood of recolonization 
of historical habitat or population expansion from the White Mountains 
is extremely remote. Considering the magnitude and imminence of these 
threats to the subspecies and its habitat, and the vulnerability of the 
White Mountains population, we conclude that the least chipmunk is in 
danger of extinction throughout all of its known range now or in the 
foreseeable future.
    The remaining population of Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk in the 
White Mountains is particularly susceptible to extinction as a result 
of small, reduced population sizes and its isolation. Because of the 
reduced population size and lack of contiguous habitat adjacent to the 
extant White Mountains population, even a small impact on the White 
Mountains could have a very large impact on the status of the species 
as a whole. As a result of its restricted range, apparent small 
population size, and fragmented historical habitat, the one known 
remaining extant population in the White Mountains is inherently 
vulnerable to extinction due to effects of small, population sizes. 
These impacts are likely to be seen in the population at some point in 
the foreseeable future, but do not appear to be affecting this 
population currently. Therefore, we conclude the threats to this 
population are of high magnitude, but not imminent. Therefore, we 
assign an LPN of 6 to the subspecies.

Fish

    Cumberland arrow darter (Etheostoma sagitta sagitta)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files. The Cumberland arrow 
darter is a brightly colored darter with a total length of 116 
millimeters (4.6 inches). It is restricted to the upper Cumberland 
River basin in southeastern Kentucky and northeastern Tennessee. The 
Cumberland arrow darter typically inhabits small, headwater streams 
(first to third order) but is sometimes observed in larger streams or 
small rivers. Its preferred habitat consists of pools or transitional 
areas between riffles and pools (runs and glides) in moderate to high 
gradient streams with bedrock, boulder, and cobble substrates. 
Cumberland arrow darters feed on a variety of aquatic invertebrates, 
but adults feed predominantly on larval mayflies (order Ephemeroptera), 
specifically the families Heptageniidae and Baetidae. Rangewide surveys 
from 2010 to 2012 revealed that the Cumberland arrow darter has been 
extirpated from portions of its range. During these efforts, the 
subspecies was observed at 60 of 101 historical streams and 72 of 123 
historical sites.
    The subspecies' habitat and range have been degraded and limited by 
water pollution from surface coal mining and gas exploration 
activities; removal of riparian vegetation; stream channelization; 
increased siltation associated with poor mining, logging, and 
agricultural practices; and deforestation of watersheds. The magnitude 
of these threats is most severe in the eastern half of the range, where 
resource extraction activities are more common and public ownership is 
sparse. The threat magnitude is lower in the western half of the range 
where resource extraction activities are less severe and a larger 
proportion of the range is in public ownership. Since the species and 
its life cycle and habitat requirements are fairly evenly distributed 
across its range, overall, the magnitude of the threats is moderate. We 
also consider these threats to be imminent because the threats are 
ongoing and will continue for the foreseeable future. Consequently, we 
assigned an LPN of 9 to the Cumberland arrow darter.
    Longfin smelt, San Francisco Bay-Delta DPS (Spirinchus 
thaleichthys)--We previously announced candidate status for this DPS, 
and described the reasons and data on which the finding was based, in a 
separate warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding published on 
April 2, 2012 (77 FR 19756).

Insects

    Arapahoe snowfly (Capnia arapahoe)--We previously announced 
candidate status for this species, and

[[Page 69997]]

described the reasons and data on which the finding was based, in a 
separate warranted-but-precluded 12-month petition finding published on 
May 10, 2012 (77 FR 27386).

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 immediacy of the 
threats. 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.

Reptiles

    Sonoran desert tortoise (Gopherus morafkai)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files. Sonoran desert 
tortoises are most closely associated with Sonoran and Mojave Desert 
scrub vegetation types, but may also be found in other habitat types 
within their distribution and elevation range. They occur most commonly 
on rocky, steep slopes and bajadas in paloverde-mixed cacti 
associations. Washes and valley bottoms may be used in dispersal and, 
in some areas, as all or part of home ranges. Most Sonoran desert 
tortoises in Arizona occur between 904 to 4,198 feet (275 to 1280 
meters) in elevation. The Sonoran desert tortoise is distributed south 
and east of the Colorado River in Arizona in all counties except for 
Navajo, Apache, Coconino, and Greenlee Counties, south to the Rio Yaqui 
in southern Sonora, Mexico.
    Threats known to affect Sonoran desert tortoises include nonnative 
plant species invasions and altered fire regimes; urban and 
agricultural development, and human population growth; barriers to 
dispersal and genetic exchange; off-highway vehicles; roads and 
highways; historical ironwood and mesquite tree harvest in Mexico; 
improper livestock grazing (predominantly in Mexico); undocumented 
human immigration and interdiction activities; illegal collection; 
predation from feral dogs; human depredation and vandalism; drought; 
and climate change. Threats to the Sonoran desert tortoise differ 
geographically in type and scope, and are highly synergistic in their 
effects. However, in their totality, these threats are high in 
magnitude because of the large amount of habitat that is likely to be 
affected and the irreversible nature of the effect of these threats in 
sensitive habitats that are slow to rebound. While some threats are 
ongoing, the more significant ones are not. Thus, overall, the threats 
are nonimminent. Recent phylogenetic research confirmed what has been 
suspected for decades within the scientific community that the Sonoran 
desert tortoise is a distinct species. Therefore, we changed the LPN 
from a 6 to a 5, reflecting that this entity is now a full species and 
no longer a DPS.
    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, are the primary 
threats to the Sonoyta mud turtle. The Sonoyta mud turtle may also be 
vulnerable to aerial spraying of pesticides on nearby agricultural 
fields. 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 in the 
Southwest. Due to continued drought and irrigated agriculture in the 
region, we expect surface water in the Rio Sonoyta to further dwindle 
in the foreseeable future but not as imminently as previously believed 
since National Park Service staff have implemented several actions to 
stabilize the water levels at Quitobaquito Springs. However, surface 
water use will have a significant impact on the survival of this 
subspecies. Based on a change in the timing of the threat from the 
reduction of surface water to nonimminent (i.e., expected to occur in 
foreseeable future), we are changing the LPN for Sonoyta mud turtle 
from a 3 to a 6.

Amphibians

    Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis)--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 Black Warrior waterdog is a salamander that inhabits streams above 
the Fall Line within the Black Warrior River Basin in Alabama. There is 
very little specific locality information available on the historical 
distribution of the Black Warrior waterdog because little attention was 
given to this species between its description in 1937 and the 1980s. 
During this time, there were a total of only 11 known historical 
records from 4 Alabama counties. Two of these sites have now been 
inundated by impoundments. Extensive survey work was conducted in the 
1990s to look for additional populations. As a result of that work, the 
species was documented at 14 sites in 5 counties.
    Water-quality degradation is the biggest threat to the continued 
existence of the Black Warrior waterdog. Most streams that have been 
surveyed for the waterdog showed evidence of pollution and many 
appeared biologically depauperate. Sources of point and nonpoint 
pollution in the Black Warrior River Basin have been numerous and 
widespread. Pollution is generated from inadequately treated effluent 
from industrial plants, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment plants, 
poultry operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface mining represents 
another threat to the biological integrity of waterdog habitat. Runoff 
from old, abandoned coal mines generates pollution through 
acidification, increased mineralization, and sediment loading. The 
North River, Locust Fork, and Mulberry Fork, all streams that this 
species inhabits, are on the Environmental Protection Agency's list of 
impaired waters. An additional threat to the Black Warrior waterdog is 
the creation of large impoundments that have flooded thousands of 
square hectares of its habitat. These impoundments are likely marginal 
or unsuitable habitat for the salamander. Suitable habitat for the 
Black Warrior waterdog is limited, and available data indicate extant 
populations are small and their viability is questionable. This 
situation is pervasive and problematic; water quality issues are 
persistent and regulatory mechanisms are not ameliorating these ongoing 
threats. The most current survey information indicates all populations 
except one may have decreased below detectable limits indicating the 
threats have increased in their severity and effects on the species. 
Based on this updated information, the threats are now of high 
magnitude overall. Water quality degradation in the Black Warrior Basin 
is ongoing, therefore, the threats are imminent. We have changed the 
LPN from an 8 to a 2 for this species.

Snails

    Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. The Page springsnail is 
known from a complex of springs located within an approximately 0.93-mi 
(1.5-km) stretch along the west side of Oak

[[Page 69998]]

Creek around the community of Page Springs, and within springs located 
along Spring Creek, tributary to Oak Creek, Yavapai County, Arizona.
    The primary threat to the Page springsnail has been modification of 
habitat by domestic use, agriculture, ranching, fish hatchery 
operations, recreation, and groundwater withdrawal. Many of the springs 
where the species occurs have been subjected to some level of 
modification. However, the immediacy of the threat of groundwater 
withdrawal is uncertain, due to conflicting information regarding 
immediacy. Based on recent survey data, it appears that the Page 
springsnail is abundant within natural habitats and persists in 
modified habitats, albeit at reduced densities. Arizona Game and Fish 
Department (AGFD) management plans for the Bubbling Ponds and Page 
Springs fish hatcheries include commitments to replace lost habitat and 
to monitor remaining populations of invertebrates such as the Page 
springsnail. The candidate conservation agreement with assurances 
(CCAA) for the Page springsnail has resulted in the implementation of 
conservation measures such as restoration and creation of spring 
ecosystems, including springs on AGFD properties. The implementation of 
the CCAA has resulted in measurable benefits to the species and its 
habitats. Additionally, the National Park Service has expressed an 
interest in restoring natural springhead integrity to Shea Springs, a 
site historically occupied by Page springsnail.
    Accordingly, we find that ongoing implementation of the CCAA 
continues to substantially reduce the magnitude and immediacy of 
threats to, and to appreciably improve the conservation status of, the 
species. Therefore, we are changing the LPN for the Page springsnail 
from an 8 to an 11.

Insects

    Nevares Spring naucorid bug (Ambrysus funebris)--The Nevares Spring 
naucorid bug is an aquatic insect that has a distribution that is 
limited to the Travertine-Nevares Springs Complex within Death Valley 
National Park, Inyo County, California. Surveys indicate that it is a 
rare species within the aquatic invertebrate community. The Travertine 
and Nevares Springs areas have eight water collection facilities that 
provide water for commercial and domestic uses. Information pertaining 
to the historical distribution of the Nevares Spring naucorid bug prior 
to the development of the local water collection systems is not 
available. However, several of the aquatic habitats where the insect 
occurred have been eliminated or substantially reduced in size. It is 
likely that the species occupied a large area of habitat where suitable 
micro-habitat features were present. The widespread loss of aquatic 
habitat within the Travertine-Nevares Springs Complex since the water 
collection systems were installed suggests the species has experienced 
major reductions in abundance and distribution as springbrook 
environments were eliminated or reduced in extent. The adverse effects 
of water diversion activities are most pronounced during the summer 
months, when aquatic habitats and the species that occupy those 
habitats are most restricted, and therefore vulnerable to perturbation. 
In addition, as the human population in southwestern Nevada grows, the 
demand for ground water and the application for permits to pump more 
ground water from the underground aquifer that supplies water to desert 
springs, seeps, and streams in Death Valley National Park will grow. 
This would likely reduce the quantity of water supplies to desert 
seeps, springs, and streams and reduce the habitat available to the 
Nevares Spring naucorid bug.
    Nonnative mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) may prey on and compete 
with Nevares Spring naucorid bugs for food resources. Crayfish 
(Procambarus sp.) are in close proximity to the naucorid bug's range, 
and if ever introduced into the same habitat, could pose an immediate 
threat to the species. The presence of nonnative plants may also reduce 
water availability or alter microhabitat features. Climate change will 
likely affect the species because increasing temperatures will likely 
result in greater evaporation rates and increasingly arid conditions, 
which may result in decreased recharge rates into the groundwater 
system. In previous years, magnitude of threats was classified as high 
and immediacy of threats was classified as nonimminent for this 
species, resulting in an LPN of 5. However, the primary threats to this 
species are ongoing, and, thus, to ensure consistency in the 
application of our listing priority process, we have changed the 
immediacy of threats from nonimminent to imminent, resulting in an LPN 
of 2 (high magnitude and imminent threats) for the Nevares Spring 
naucorid bug.
    Stephan's riffle beetle (Heterelmis stephani)--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 
Stephan's riffle beetle is an endemic riffle beetle historically found 
in limited spring environments within the Santa Rita Mountains, Pima 
County, Arizona. In the most recent surveys conducted in 1993, the 
beetle was only documented in Sylvester Spring in Madera Canyon, within 
the Coronado National Forest. Suspected potential threats to that 
spring are largely from habitat modification, and potential changes in 
water quality and quantity due to catastrophic natural events and 
climate change. The threats are of low to moderate magnitude based on 
our current knowledge that the effects of these threats are unlikely to 
be permanent as they stem from occasional natural events that do not 
result in permanent water quality degradation. Additionally, there is a 
higher likelihood that the species will persist in areas that are 
unaffected by the threats; it is unlikely that all areas of the spring 
would be simultaneously be affected. Threats from habitat modification 
have already occurred and are no longer ongoing, and the threats from 
climate change are expected to occur over many years. Therefore, the 
threats are nonimminent. Thus, we are changing the LPN for the 
Stephan's riffle beetle from an 8 to an 11.

Flowering Plants

    Astragalus anserinus (Goose Creek milkvetch)--The following summary 
is based on information in our files and in the petition received on 
February 3, 2004. The majority (over 80 percent) of Goose Creek 
milkvetch sites in Idaho, Utah, and Nevada occur on Federal lands 
managed by the Bureau of Land Management. The rest of the sites occur 
as small populations on private and State lands in Utah and on private 
land in Idaho and Nevada. Goose Creek milkvetch occurs in a variety of 
habitats, but is typically associated with dry, tuffaceous soils (made 
up of rock consisting of smaller kinds of volcanic detritus) from the 
Salt Lake Formation. The species grows on steep or flat sites, with 
soil textures ranging from silty to sandy to somewhat gravelly. The 
species tolerates some level of disturbance, based on its occurrence on 
steep slopes where downhill movement of soil is common.
    The primary threat to Goose Creek milkvetch is habitat degradation 
and modification resulting from an altered wildfire regime, fire 
suppression activities, and rehabilitation efforts to recover lands 
that have burned. Other factors that also appear to threaten Goose 
Creek milkvetch include livestock use; invasive, nonnative species; and 
the inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms to address these threats. 
Climate change effects to Goose

[[Page 69999]]

Creek drainage habitats are possible, but we are unable to predict the 
specific impacts of this change to Goose Creek milkvetch at this time.
    We originally assigned the species an LPN of 5 based on high 
magnitude threats that were capable of destroying entire populations, 
but that were nonimminent, or not currently ongoing. However, our 
recent review reveals that the threats have increased and are now 
imminent, or currently occurring, largely a result of land management 
actions taken since fires initially altered the habitat. We now 
consider the threats associated with livestock grazing and invasive 
species to be imminent throughout a large portion of the species' 
range. The increased magnitude and immediacy of threats leaves the 
species and its small populations more vulnerable to stochastic events. 
Additionally, surveys have not identified new populations that would 
significantly increase the range or extent of the species. Therefore, 
we are changing the LPN for Goose Creek milkvetch from a 5 to a 2.
    Calochortus persistens (Siskiyou mariposa lily)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition 
we received on September 10, 2001. The Siskiyou mariposa lily is a 
narrow endemic that is restricted to three disjunct ridge tops in the 
Klamath-Siskiyou Range near the California-Oregon border. The 
southernmost occurrence of this species is composed of nine separate 
sites on approximately 17.6 hectares (ha) (43.4 acres (ac)) of Klamath 
National Forest and privately owned lands that stretch for 10 
kilometers (km) (6 miles (mi)) along the Gunsight-Humbug Ridge, 
Siskiyou County, California. In 2007, a new occurrence was confirmed in 
the locality of Cottonwood Peak and Little Cottonwood Peak, Siskiyou 
County, where several populations are distributed over 164 ha (405 ac) 
on three individual mountain peaks in the Klamath National Forest and 
on private lands. The northernmost occurrence consists of not more than 
five Siskiyou mariposa lily plants that were discovered in 1998, on 
Bald Mountain, west of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon.
    Major threats include competition and shading by native and 
nonnative species fostered by suppression of wildfire; increased fuel 
loading and subsequent risk of wildfire; fragmentation by roads, fire 
breaks, tree plantations, and radio-tower facilities; maintenance and 
construction around radio towers and telephone relay stations located 
on Gunsight Peak and Mahogany Point; and soil disturbance, direct 
damage, and exotic weed and grass species introduction as a result of 
heavy recreational use and construction of fire breaks. Dyer's woad 
(Isatis tinctoria), an invasive, nonnative plant that may prevent 
germination of Siskiyou mariposa lily seedlings, affects 75 percent of 
the known lily habitat on Gunsight-Humbug Ridge, the southernmost 
California occurrence. U.S. Forest Service staff and the Klamath-
Siskiyou Wildlands Center cite competition with dyer's woad as a 
significant and chronic threat to the survival of Siskiyou mariposa 
lily.
    The combination of restricted range, extremely low numbers (five 
plants) in one of three disjunct populations, poor competitive ability, 
short seed dispersal distance, slow growth rates, low seed production, 
apparently poor survival rates in some years, herbivory, habitat 
disturbance, and competition from exotic plants threaten the continued 
existence of this species. However, because efforts are underway to 
reduce the threat of dyer's woad where it is found and because there is 
no evidence of a decline in the populations of any of the three C. 
persistens occurrences since the time this species was added to the 
list of candidate species, we now classify the magnitude of existing 
threats as moderate rather than high. As the threats of competition 
from exotic plants are not anticipated to overwhelm a large portion of 
the species' range in the immediate future, the threats are 
nonimminent. Therefore, we have changed the LPN from a 5 to an 11 to 
this species.
    Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower)--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 whorled 
sunflower is found in moist, prairie-like openings in woodlands and 
along adjacent creeks. Despite extensive surveys throughout its range, 
only four populations are known for this species. There is one 
population (consisting of two subpopulations) documented in Cherokee 
County, Alabama; one population in Floyd County, Georgia; and one 
population each in Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee.
    This species appears to have restricted ecological requirements and 
is dependent upon the maintenance of prairie-like openings for its 
survival. Active management of habitat is needed to keep competition 
and shading under control. Much of its habitat has been degraded or 
destroyed for agricultural, silvicultural, and residential purposes. 
Populations near roadsides or powerlines are threatened by herbicide 
usage in association with right-of-way maintenance. The majority of the 
Georgia population is protected due to its location within a 
conservation easement; however, only 15 to 20 plants are estimated to 
occur at this site. The remaining three populations are not formally 
protected, but efforts have been taken to abate threats associated with 
highway right-of-way maintenance at one Alabama subpopulation. However, 
timber growth, following a 2001 timber harvest that benefitted the 
plants, now threatens the other Alabama subpopulation. Last year, this 
species was assigned an LPN of 8 based on imminent threats of moderate 
magnitude. However this year, we have evidence that one Alabama 
subpopulation is facing new threats from shading by trees, and 
additional information on the variable reproductive fitness of the 
species. Because small population size poses a threat to all known 
populations of H. verticillatus, threats associated with land uses 
affect all populations except for the one in Georgia, and the 
reproductive fitness of the Georgia population is apparently 
diminished, we currently consider threats to be of high magnitude, and 
have changed the LPN to 2 for this species.

Candidate Removals

    As summarized below, we have evaluated the threats to the following 
species and considered factors that, individually and in combination, 
currently or potentially could pose a risk to these species and their 
habitats. After a review of the best available scientific and 
commercial data, we conclude that listing these species under the 
Endangered Species Act is not warranted because these species are not 
likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future 
throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges. Therefore, we 
find that proposing a rule to list them is not warranted, and we no 
longer consider them to be candidate species for listing. We will 
continue to monitor the status of these species and to accept 
additional information and comments concerning this finding. We will 
reconsider our determination 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

    Elongate mud meadows springsnail (Pyrgulopsis notidicola)--The 
following summary is based on information

[[Page 70000]]

contained in our files. Pyrgulopsis notidicola, a freshwater snail, 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 species is currently known to 
occupy four separate stretches of thermal (between 45 and 32 [deg] 
Celsius, 113 and 90 [deg] Fahrenheit) aquatic habitat. The first 
stretch is the largest at approximately 600 m (1,968 ft) long and 2 m 
(6.7 ft) wide. The other stretches where Pyrgulopsis notidicola occurs 
are less than 6 m (19.7 ft) long and 0.5 m (1.6 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 primary threat to Pyrgulopsis notidicola identified when the 
species was elevated to candidate status was associated with the 
pattern and amount of recreational use in Soldier Meadow, particularly 
bathing and camping in the immediate vicinity of the only spring known 
to contain the species at that time. However, management actions 
implemented by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have greatly reduced 
recreation impacts in Soldier Meadow and thus have appreciably reduced 
the threat of habitat destruction or modification for Pyrgulopsis 
notidicola. BLM constructed a designated central campground to preclude 
dispersed camping in sensitive habitats. Established walkways were also 
constructed to direct foot traffic away from sensitive habitats, 
including springs occupied by Pyrgulopsis notidicola. BLM implemented a 
campground host system during periods of peak recreation use, and the 
site steward interacts with recreationists, directing them to 
designated camping and bathing areas. Educational signs that provide 
information on the need to protect sensitive species like Pyrgulopsis 
notidicola and their habitats were also installed. In addition, BLM has 
increased on-site presence of staff, including law enforcement staff, 
within the area. Another conservation action implemented was 
construction of a 1,215-ha (3,000-ac) exclosure fence to exclude 
livestock, wild horses, and burros from the majority of the hot 
springs, including Pyrgulopsis notidicola habitat. Some of these 
conservation actions began before Pyrgulopsis notidicola became a 
candidate, but most have been implemented since that time.
    Only one population was known at the time Pyrgulopsis notidicola 
was designated as a candidate in 2002. Since then, three additional 
populations have been discovered, indicating the species is more widely 
distributed and abundant than previously thought. As a result, the 
species is less vulnerable to stochastic events than previously 
thought.
    Because conservation actions implemented in Soldier Meadow have 
greatly reduced threats to Pyrgulopsis notidicola and are likely to 
stay in place for the foreseeable future, and because the population 
status of the species is more secure than originally thought as a 
result of the discovery of three additional populations, we conclude 
that Pyrgulopsis notidicola no longer meets the definition of an 
endangered or threatened species under section 3 of the ESA. There are 
no portions of its range where threats remain, therefore, it is not 
threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range. 
Therefore, we find that listing of Pyrgulopsis notidicola throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range is no longer warranted, and 
we have removed it from candidate status.

Flowering Plants

    Castilleja christii (Christ's paintbrush)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition we 
received on January 2, 2001. Castilleja christii occurs as a single 
population within an approximately 85-ha (220-ac) area of subalpine 
meadow and sagebrush habitats found near the summit of Mount Harrison, 
Cassia County, Idaho, between 2,621 and 2,804 meters (8,600 to 9,200 
feet (ft)). This endemic species is considered a hemiparasite that 
grows in association with native host plants found in its subalpine-
meadow and sagebrush habitats. The species is subject to annual 
population fluctuations likely resulting from a variety of factors, 
such as biological interactions, anthropogenic disturbances, and 
environmental effects. The most recent population estimate, conducted 
in 2005, used distance sampling to estimate the overall population size 
for C. christii of 1,267,580 plants, with lower and upper confidence 
limits of 819,126 and 1,716,033 plants, respectively. The overall C. 
christii population is currently stable throughout a large portion of 
its range.
    Castilleja christii was previously threatened by destruction, 
modification, and curtailment of its habitat by the effects from the 
nonnative smooth brome (Bromus inermis), recreation-based impacts, and 
inadequate regulatory mechanisms. It was also thought that 
hybridization with nearby Castilleja spp. may be affecting C. christii. 
The U.S. Forest Service has successfully implemented numerous 
conservation actions that have ameliorated most of the previously known 
threats and established long-term monitoring programs to document their 
effectiveness on conservation actions. There is a long-term commitment 
by the Forest Service, through a 2005 Candidate Conservation Agreement 
and 2012 Memorandum of Agreement with the Service, to continue to 
implement conservation actions for C. christii. Furthermore, recent 
research by Boise State University has demonstrated that hybridization 
is not a factor affecting C. christii. Finally, the species' estimated 
population is much larger--by as much as two orders of magnitude --than 
earlier estimates had indicated. Therefore, we find that this species 
is no longer warranted for listing throughout all or a portion of its 
range. The species no longer meets our definition of a threatened or 
endangered species, and we have removed it from candidate status.
    Narthecium americanum (bog asphodel)--Over the last 20 years 
frequent monitoring activities, studies, and increases in regulatory 
protections have improved our understanding and outlook for the status 
of Narthecium americanum. Based on our current review of the best 
available information, we have determined that the species is less 
imperiled than previously believed and therefore does not warrant 
listing as threatened or endangered.
    The historical range of Narthecium americanum included three 
counties in the Pinelands Area of New Jersey and one county each in 
Delaware and South Carolina. The Delaware and South Carolina 
occurrences are documented by a single sample in each state collected 
in 1895 and 1922, respectively. The species' current range includes the 
same three New Jersey counties. The species' distribution consists of 
18 occurrences covering approximately 80 ac. The relatively broad 
distribution of the species reduces the risk or loss of the species 
from stochastic, habitat-modifying events. While some historical 
locations have been lost on the periphery of the species' range due to 
habitat loss, other new locations have been found.
    There are no manmade or natural threats affecting Narthecium 
americanum to the level that the species meets the definition of 
threatened or

[[Page 70001]]

endangered. Approximately 97 percent of N. americanum occurs on public 
land or on private conservation land. Therefore, the historical threats 
of wetland filling, draining, flooding, and conversion to commercial 
cranberry bogs that resulted in the decline of the species are no 
longer occurring. Other manmade threats that we once thought were 
severely affecting the species such as upland development, water 
withdrawal, disturbance from recreational activities such as off-road 
vehicles (ORV), and collection are either adequately regulated 
(development and water withdrawal) or at most having a de minimus 
impact (ORV and collection) on a small number of populations. The 
regulations controlling the manmade threats are expected to stay in 
place, and the de minimus level of impacts are expected to remain 
stable or further decrease. The natural threats of habitat succession, 
deer and waterfowl browsing, and beaver flooding are also not affecting 
N. americanum as we once believed. For example, new information 
suggests that the species is able to persist in closed canopy 
conditions and that greater than 20 percent of the distribution of N. 
americanum is found in cedar forest cover that has remained relatively 
stable for the past 61 years. In addition, wetter microhabitat 
conditions created by deer trails may allow N. americanum to expand and 
colonize into forested areas. Beaver flooding of the species' habitat 
does occur, but only five percent of all N. americanum occurrences are 
negatively influenced by beaver activities. These natural threats are 
not anticipated to increase. And lastly, climate change is not now 
impacting the species, and we are unable to accurately predict if or 
how N. americanum may be impacted by climate change in the future. It 
is possible that future climate conditions in the New Jersey Pinelands 
may cause changes in water table, precipitation, or evapotranspiration 
levels. However, these climate processes may increase or decrease or 
the potential effects may be off-setting. Therefore, based on the best 
available information, we cannot conclude that climate change is a 
threat to N. americanum.
    In summary, Narthecium americanum is secure within its current 
range. There are no manmade or natural threats affecting the species to 
such a degree that N. americanum warrants listing in all or a 
significant portion of its range. The species no longer meets our 
definition of a threatened or endangered species, and we have removed 
it from candidate status.

Petition Findings

    The ESA 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. The CNOR serves several 
purposes as part of the petition process: (1) In some instances (in 
particular, for petitions to list species that the Service has already 
identified as candidates on its own initiative), it serves as the 
petition finding; (2) for candidate species for which the Service has 
made a warranted-but-precluded petition finding, it serves as a 
``resubmitted'' petition finding that the ESA requires the Service to 
make each year; and (3) it documents the Service's compliance with the 
statutory requirement to monitor the status of species for which 
listing is warranted-but-precluded to ascertain if they need emergency 
listing.
    First, the CNOR serves as a petition finding in some instances. 
Under section 4(b)(3)(A), when we receive a listing petition, we must 
determine within 90 days, to the maximum extent practicable, whether 
the petition presents substantial information indicating 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, 
sections 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) of the ESA 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 a regulation 
implementing the petitioned action is precluded by pending proposals to 
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened, and (b) 
expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to the 
Lists. We refer to this third option as a ``warranted-but-precluded 
finding.''
    We define ``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 
5, 1996). 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.
    Therefore, all candidate species identified through our own 
initiative already have received the equivalent of substantial 90-day 
and warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings. Nevertheless, we review 
the status of the newly petitioned candidate species and through this 
CNOR publish 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. On October 5, 
2011, we received a petition to list the Pe[ntilde]asco least chipmunk 
(see summary above under New Candidates) after we had initiated our 
assessment of this species for candidate status. As part of this 
notice, we are making the substantial 90-day and warranted-but-
precluded 12-month findings for this 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 below.
    Second, the CNOR serves as a ``resubmitted'' petition finding. 
Section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA 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 must make a 12-month petition finding in compliance with 
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA 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.
    Third, through undertaking the analysis required to complete the 
CNOR, the Service determines if any candidate species needs emergency 
listing. Section 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the ESA 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

[[Page 70002]]

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 we will make prompt use of the emergency 
listing authority under section 4(b)(7). For example, on August 10, 
2011, we emergency listed the Miami blue butterfly (76 FR 49542). 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 
constitute the Service's system for monitoring and making annual 
findings on the status of petitioned species under sections 
4(b)(3)(C)(i) and 4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the ESA.
    A number of court decisions have elaborated on the nature and 
specificity of information that must be considered in making and 
describing the petition findings in the CNOR. The CNOR published on 
November 9, 2009 (74 FR 57804), describes these court decisions in 
further detail. As with previous CNORs, we continue to incorporate 
information of the nature and specificity required by the courts. For 
example, 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, below, 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 only, and we explain 
the priority system and why the work we have accomplished does preclude 
action on listing candidate species.
    In preparing this CNOR, we reviewed the current status of, and 
threats to, the 172 candidates for which we have received a petition to 
list and the 5 listed species and for which we have received a petition 
to reclassify from threatened to endangered, where we found the 
petitioned action to be warranted but precluded. Included in this work 
is our review of the current status of, and threats to, the Canada lynx 
in New Mexico for which we received a petition to add that State to the 
listed range. We find that the immediate issuance of a proposed rule 
and timely promulgation of a final rule for each of these species has 
been, for the preceding months, and continues to be, precluded by 
higher priority listing actions. Additional information that is the 
basis for this finding is found in the species assessments and our 
administrative record for each species.
    Our review included updating the status of, and threats to, 
petitioned candidate or listed species for which we published findings, 
under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA, 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.
    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, 2011, through September 30, 
2012. 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, and remove species from, the Lists. 
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 ESA.
    In addition to identifying petitioned candidate species in Table 1 
below, we also present brief summaries of why each of these candidates 
warrants listing. More complete information, including references, is 
found in the species assessment forms. You may obtain a copy of these 
forms from the Regional Office having the lead for the species, or from 
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Internet Web site: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/candidateSpecies.jsp. As described above, under 
section 4 of the ESA, we 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 species to 
the Lists of Endangered or Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the 
ESA.

Preclusion and Expeditious Progress

    To make a finding that a particular action is warranted-but-
precluded, the Service must make two findings: (1) That the immediate 
proposal and timely promulgation of a final regulation is precluded by 
pending listing proposals, and (2) that expeditious progress is being 
made to add qualified species to either of the lists and to remove 
species from the lists. 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B)(iii).

Preclusion

    A listing proposal is precluded if the Service does not have 
sufficient resources available to complete the proposal, because there 
are competing demands for those resources, and the relative priority of 
those competing demands is higher. Thus, in any given fiscal year (FY), 
multiple factors dictate whether it will be possible to undertake work 
on a listing proposal regulation or whether promulgation of such a 
proposal is precluded by higher priority listing actions--(1) the 
amount of resources available for completing the listing function, (2) 
the estimated cost of completing the proposed listing, and (3) the 
Service's workload and prioritization of the proposed listing in 
relation to other actions.

Available Resources

    The resources available for listing actions are determined through 
the annual Congressional appropriations process. In FY 1998 and for 
each fiscal year since then, Congress has placed a statutory cap on 
funds that may be expended for the Listing Program. This spending cap 
was designed to prevent the listing function from depleting funds 
needed for other functions under the ESA (for example, recovery 
functions, such as removing species from the Lists), or for other 
Service programs (see House Report 105-163, 105th Congress, 1st 
Session, July 1, 1997). The funds within the spending cap are available 
to support work involving the following listing actions: Proposed and 
final listing rules; 90-day and 12-month findings on petitions to add 
species to the Lists or to change the status of a species from 
threatened to endangered; annual ``resubmitted'' petition findings on 
prior warranted-but-precluded petition findings as required under 
section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA; critical habitat petition findings; 
proposed and final rules designating critical habitat; and litigation-
related, administrative, and program-management functions

[[Page 70003]]

(including preparing and allocating budgets, responding to 
Congressional and public inquiries, and conducting public outreach 
regarding listing and critical habitat).
    We cannot spend more for the Listing Program than the amount of 
funds within the spending cap without violating the Anti-Deficiency Act 
(see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In addition, since FY 2002, the 
Service's budget has included a critical habitat subcap to ensure that 
some funds are available for completing Listing Program actions other 
than critical habitat designations (``The critical habitat designation 
subcap will ensure that some funding is available to address other 
listing activities'' (House Report No. 107-103, 107th Congress, 1st 
Session. June 19, 2001)). In FY 2002 and each year until FY 2006, the 
Service 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 were available 
for other listing activities. In some FYs since 2006, we have been able 
to use some of the critical habitat subcap funds to fund proposed 
listing determinations for high-priority candidate species. In other 
FYs, while we were unable to use any of the critical habitat subcap 
funds to fund proposed listing determinations, we did use some of this 
money to fund the critical habitat portion of some proposed listing 
determinations so that the proposed listing determination and proposed 
critical habitat designation could be combined into one rule, thereby 
being more efficient in our work. In FY 2012, based on the Service's 
workload, we were able to use some of the critical habitat subcap funds 
to fund proposed listing determinations.
    For FY 2012 Congress also put in place two additional subcaps 
within the listing cap: One for listing actions for foreign species and 
one for petition findings. As with the critical habitat subcap, if the 
Service does not need to use all of the funds within the subcap, we are 
able to use the remaining funds for completing proposed or final 
listing determinations. In FY 2012, based on the Service's workload, we 
were able to use some of the funds within the foreign species subcap 
and the petitions subcap to fund proposed listing determinations.
    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. 
Through the listing cap, the three subcaps, and the amount of funds 
needed to complete court-mandated actions within those subcaps, 
Congress and the courts have in effect determined the amount of money 
available for other listing activities nationwide. Therefore, the funds 
in the listing cap--other than those within the subcaps needed to 
comply with court orders or court-approved settlement agreements 
requiring critical habitat actions for already-listed species, listing 
actions for foreign species, and petition findings--set the framework 
within which we make our determinations of preclusion and expeditious 
progress.
    For FY 2012, on December 23, 2011, Congress passed a Consolidated 
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 112-74) which provided funding through the 
end of the fiscal year. In particular, it included a spending cap of 
$20,902,000 for the Listing Program. Of that, no more than $7,472,000 
was available for determinations of critical habitat for already listed 
species. In addition, no more than $1,500,000 could be used for listing 
actions for foreign species and no more than $1,500,000 could be used 
to make 90-day or 12-month findings on petitions. The Service thus had 
$10,430,000 available to work on proposed and final listing 
determinations for domestic species. In addition, if the Service had 
funding available within the critical habitat, foreign species, or 
petition subcaps after those workloads had been completed, it could use 
those funds to work on listing actions other than critical habitat 
designations or foreign species.
    Costs of Listing Actions. 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. The median cost for 
preparing and publishing a 90-day finding is $39,276; for a 12-month 
finding, $100,690; for a proposed rule with critical habitat, $345,000; 
and for a final listing rule with critical habitat, $305,000.
    Prioritizing Listing Actions. The Service's Listing Program 
workload is broadly composed of four types of actions, which the 
Service prioritizes as follows: (1) Compliance with court orders and 
court-approved settlement agreements requiring that petition findings 
or listing or critical habitat determinations be completed by a 
specific date; (2) section 4 (of the Act) listing and critical habitat 
actions with absolute statutory deadlines; (3) essential litigation-
related, administrative, and listing program-management functions; and 
(4) section 4 listing actions that do not have absolute statutory 
deadlines. In FY 2010, the Service received many new petitions and a 
single petition to list 404 species, significantly increasing the 
number of actions within the second category of our workload--actions 
that have absolute statutory deadlines. As a result of the petitions to 
list hundreds of species, we currently have over 460 12-month petition 
findings yet to be initiated and completed.
    To prioritize within each of the four types of actions, we 
developed guidelines for assigning a listing priority number (LPN) for 
each candidate species (48 FR 43098; September 21, 1983). As discussed 
above, under these guidelines, we assign each candidate an LPN of 1 to 
12, depending on the magnitude of threats (high or 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 
or distinct population segment)). 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). A species with a higher 
LPN would generally be precluded from listing by species with lower 
LPNs, unless work on a proposed rule for the species with the higher 
LPN can be combined with work on a proposed rule for other high-
priority species.
    Finally, proposed rules for reclassification of threatened species 
to endangered species are lower priority, because as listed species, 
they are already afforded the protections of the Act and implementing 
regulations. However, for efficiency reasons, we may choose to work on 
a proposed rule to reclassify a species to endangered if we can combine 
this with work that is subject to a court ordered or court-approved 
deadline.
    Since before Congress first established the spending cap for the 
Listing Program in 1998, the Listing Program workload has required 
considerably more resources than the amount of funds Congress has 
allowed for the Listing Program. It is therefore important that we be 
as efficient as possible in our listing process. Therefore, as we 
implement our listing work plan and

[[Page 70004]]

work on proposed rules for the highest priority 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 one of the highest-
priority species. In addition, we take into consideration the 
availability of staff resources when we determine which high-priority 
species will receive funding to minimize the amount of time and 
resources required to complete each listing action.
    Listing Program Workload. Each FY we determine, based on the amount 
of funding Congress has made available within the Listing Program 
spending cap, specifically which actions we will have the resources to 
work on in that FY. We then prepare Allocation Tables that identify the 
actions that we are funding for that FY, and how much we estimate it 
will cost to complete each action; these Allocation Tables are part of 
our record for this notice and the listing program. Our Allocation 
Table for FY 2012, which incorporated the Service's approach to 
prioritizing its workload, was adopted as part of a settlement 
agreement in a case before the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia (Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No.10-
377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (``MDL Litigation''), Document 31-1 (D. 
D.C. May 10, 2011) (``MDL Settlement Agreement'')). The requirements of 
paragraphs 1 through 7 of that settlement agreement, combined with the 
work plan attached to the agreement as Exhibit B, reflected the 
Service's Allocation Tables for FY 2011 and FY 2012. In addition, 
paragraphs 2 through 7 of the agreement require the Service to take 
numerous other actions through FY 2017--in particular, complete either 
a proposed listing rule or a not-warranted finding for all 251 species 
designated as ``candidates'' in the 2010 candidate notice of review 
(``CNOR'') before the end of FY 2016, and complete final listing 
determinations within one year of proposing to list any of those 
species. Paragraph 10 of that settlement agreement sets forth the 
Service's conclusion that ``fulfilling the commitments set forth in 
this Agreement, along with other commitments required by court orders 
or court-approved settlement agreements already in existence at the 
signing of this Settlement Agreement (listed in Exhibit A), will 
require substantially all of the resources in the Listing Program.'' As 
part of the same lawsuit, the court also approved a separate settlement 
agreement with the other plaintiff in the case; that settlement 
agreement requires the Service to complete additional actions in 
specific fiscal years -- including 12-month petition findings for 11 
species, 90-day petition findings for 477 species, and proposed listing 
determinations or not-warranted findings for 39 species.
    These settlement agreements have led to a number of results that 
affect our preclusion analysis. First, the Service has been, and will 
continue to be, limited in the extent to which it can undertake 
additional actions within the Listing Program through FY 2017 beyond 
what is required by the MDL Settlement Agreements. Second, because the 
settlement is court-approved, two broad categories of actions now fall 
within the Service's highest priority (compliance with a court order): 
(1) the Service's entire prioritized workload for FY 2012, as reflected 
in its Allocation Table, and (2) completion, before the end of FY 2016, 
of proposed listings or not-warranted findings for most of the 
candidate species identified in this CNOR (in particular, for those 
candidate species that were included in the 2010 CNOR). Therefore, each 
year, one of the Service's highest priorities is to make steady 
progress towards completing by the end of 2017 proposed and final 
lisiting determinations for the 2010 candidate species--based on its 
LPN prioritization system, preparing multi-species actions when 
appropriate, and taking into consideration the availability of staff 
resources.
    Based on these prioritization factors, we continue to find that 
proposals to list the petitioned candidate species included in Table 1 
are all precluded by higher-priority listing actions including those 
with court-ordered and court-approved settlement agreements and listing 
actions with absolute statutory deadlines.

Expeditious Progress

    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. As with our 
``precluded'' finding, the evaluation of whether progress in adding 
qualified species to the Lists has been expeditious is a function of 
the resources available for listing and the competing demands for those 
funds. (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 in light of the resource available for delisting, 
which is funded by a separate line item in the budget of the Endangered 
Species Program. During FY 2012, we completed delisting rules for two 
species.) As discussed below, given the limited resources available for 
listing, we find that we are making expeditious progress in FY 2012 in 
the Listing Program.
    We provide below tables cataloguing the work of the Service's 
Listing Program in FY 2012. This work includes all three of the steps 
necessary for adding species to the Lists: (1) Identifying species that 
warrant listing, (2) undertaking the evaluation of the best available 
scientific information about those species and the threats they face, 
and preparing proposed and final listing rules, and (3) adding species 
to the Lists by publishing proposed and final listing rules that 
include a summary of the data on which the rule is based and show the 
relationship of that data to the rule. After taking into consideration 
the limited resources available for listing, the competing demands for 
those funds, and the completed work catalogued in the tables below, we 
find that we are making expeditious progress to add qualified species 
to the Lists in FY 2012.
    First, we are making expeditious progress in the third and final 
step: listing qualified species. In FY 2012, we resolved the status of 
44 species that we determined, or had previously determined, qualified 
for listing. Moreover, for 43 of those 44 species, the resolution was 
to add them to the Lists, most with concurrent designations of critical 
habitat. We also proposed to list an additional 85 qualified species, 
most with concurrent critical habitat proposals.
    Second, we are making expeditious progress in the second step: 
working towards adding qualified species to the Lists. In FY 2012, we 
worked on developing proposed listing rules for 39 species (most of 
them with concurrent critical habitat proposals). Although we have not 
yet completed those actions, we are making expeditious progress towards 
doing so.
    Third, we are making expeditious progress in the first step towards 
adding qualified species to the Lists: identifying additional species 
that qualify for listing. In FY 2012, we completed 90-day petition 
findings for 76 species and 12-month petition findings for 53 species. 
Of those 51 species, we determined that listing 9 of the species was 
warranted but precluded. In FY 2012, we also worked on evaluating the 
best available scientific information towards preparing 90-day findings 
for an additional 3 species and 12-month findings for 1 additional 
species.

[[Page 70005]]

    In addition to the work the Service has completed towards adding 
qualified species to the Lists, as we described above, on May 10, 2011, 
the Service filed in the MDL Litigation a settlement agreement that 
incorporated the Service's work plan for FY 2012; the court approved 
that settlement agreement on September 9, 2011. Paragraph 10 of that 
settlement agreement provides, ``The Parties agree that the timetables 
for resolving the status of candidate species outlined in this 
Agreement constitute expeditious progress in adding qualified species 
to the lists of threatened and endangered species.'' The Service also 
filed a second settlement agreement that required even more work in FY 
2012. The Service had already begun in FY 2011 to implement that work 
required by the work plan, and many of these initial actions in our 
work plan include work on proposed rules for candidate species with an 
LPN of 2 or 3. Therefore, both by entering into the first settlement 
agreement and by completing the listing actions required by both 
settlement agreements, the Service is making expeditious progress to 
add qualified species to the lists. As provided for in the settlement 
agreements and the work plan incorporated into the first agreement, the 
Service's progress in FY 2012 included completing and publishing the 
following determinations:

                                      FY 2012 Completed Listing Actions \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Publication date                 Title                     Actions                      FR Pages
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10/4/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 61298-61307
                           Petition to List the Lake    petition finding, Not
                           Sammamish Kokanee            warranted.
                           Population of Oncorhynchus
                           nerka as an Endangered or
                           Threatened Distinct
                           Population Segment.
10/4/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 61307-61321
                           Petition to List Calopogon   petition finding, Not
                           oklahomensis as Threatened   warranted.
                           or Endangered.
10/4/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 61321-61330
                           Petition To List the         petition finding, Not
                           Amargosa River Population    warranted.
                           of the Mojave Fringe-toed
                           Lizard as an Endangered or
                           Threatened Distinct
                           Population Segment.
10/4/2011...............  Endangered Status for the    Proposed Listing        76 FR 61482-61529
                           Alabama Pearlshell, Round    Endangered.
                           Ebonyshell, Southern
                           Sandshell, Southern
                           Kidneyshell, and Choctaw
                           Bean, and Threatened
                           Status for the Tapered
                           Pigtoe, Narrow Pigtoe, and
                           Fuzzy Pigtoe; with
                           Critical Habitat.
10/4/2011...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        76 FR 61532-61554
                           Petition To List 10          Petition Finding,
                           Subspecies of Great Basin    Substantial and Not
                           Butterflies as Threatened    substantial.
                           or Endangered with
                           Critical Habitat.
10/5/2011...............  90[dash]Day Finding on a     Notice of 90-day        76 FR 61826-61853
                           Petition to List 29          Petition Finding,
                           Mollusk Species as           Substantial and Not
                           Threatened or Endangered     substantial.
                           With Critical Habitat.
10/5/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 61856-61894
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-    warranted.
                           Owl as Threatened or
                           Endangered with Critical
                           Habitat.
10/5/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 61896-61931
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Northern Leopard Frog in     warranted.
                           the Western United States
                           as Threatened.
10/6/2011...............  Endangered Status for the    Final Listing           76 FR 61956-61978
                           Ozark Hellbender             Endangered.
                           Salamander.
10/6/2011...............  Red-Crowned Parrot.........  Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62016-62034
                                                        petition finding,
                                                        Warranted but
                                                        precluded.
10/6/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62166-62212
                           Petition to List Texas       petition finding,
                           Fatmucket, Golden Orb,       Warranted but
                           Smooth Pimpleback, Texas     precluded.
                           Pimpleback, and Texas
                           Fawnsfoot as Threatened or
                           Endangered.
10/6/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62214-62258
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Mohave Ground Squirrel as    warranted.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
10/6/2011...............  Partial 90-Day Finding on a  Notice of 90-day        76 FR 62260-62280
                           Petition to List 404         Petition Finding, Not
                           Species in the               substantial.
                           Southeastern United States
                           as Threatened or
                           Endangered With Critical
                           Habitat.
10/7/2011...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62504-62565
                           Petition to List the Black-  petition finding, Not
                           footed Albatross as          warranted.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
10/11/2011..............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62722-62740
                           Petition to List Amoreuxia   petition finding, Not
                           gonzalezii, Astragalus       warranted.
                           hypoxylus, and Erigeron
                           piscaticus as Endangered
                           or Threatened.
10/11/2011..............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 62900-62926
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Tehachapi Slender            warranted.
                           Salamander as Endangered
                           or Threatened.
10/11/2011..............  Endangered Status for the    Final Listing           76 FR 62928-62960
                           Altamaha Spinymussel and     Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
10/11/2011..............  12-Month Finding for a       Notice of 12-month      76 FR 63094-63115
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           California Golden Trout as   warranted.
                           Endangered.
10/12/2011..............  12-Month Petition Finding,   Notice of 12-month      76 FR 63420-63442
                           Proposed Listing of          petition finding,
                           Coqu[iacute] Llanero as      Warranted; Proposed
                           Endangered, and              Listing Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat for Coqu[iacute]
                           Llanero.
10/12/2011..............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 63444-63478
                           Petition to List Northern    petition finding, Not
                           Leatherside Chub as          warranted.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
10/13/2011..............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      76 FR 63720-63762
                           Petition to List a           petition finding,
                           Distinct Population          Warranted but
                           Segment of the Red Tree      precluded.
                           Vole as Endangered or
                           Threatened.
12/19/2011..............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        76 FR 78601-78609
                           Petition To List the         Petition Finding,
                           Western Glacier Stonefly     Substantial.
                           as Endangered With
                           Critical Habitat.
1/3/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 45-52
                           Petition to List Sierra      Petition Finding,
                           Nevada Red Fox as            Substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
1/12/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 1900-1908
                           Petition To List the         Petition Finding,
                           Humboldt Marten as           Substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
1/24/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 3423-3432
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding,
                           `I'iwi as Endangered or      Substantial.
                           Threatened.

[[Page 70006]]

 
2/1/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 4973-4980
                           Petition to List the San     Petition Finding,
                           Bernardino Flying Squirrel   Substantial.
                           as Endangered or
                           Threatened With Critical
                           Habitat.
2/14/2012...............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 8632-8665
                           Status for the Rayed Bean    Endangered.
                           and Snuffbox Mussels
                           Throughout Their Ranges.
2/17/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 9618-9619
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding, Not
                           Thermophilic Ostracod as     substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
3/13/2012...............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 14914-14949
                           Status for the Sheepnose     Endangered.
                           and Spectaclecase Mussels
                           Throughout Their Range.
4/2/2012................  12-month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 19756--19797
                           Petition to List the San     petition finding,
                           Francisco Bay-Delta          Warranted but
                           Population of the Longfin    precluded.
                           Smelt as Endangered or
                           Threatened.
4/6/2012................  Listing of the Miami Blue    Final Listing           77 FR 20948-20986
                           Butterfly as Endangered      Endangered.
                           Throughout Its Range;
                           Listing of the Cassius
                           Blue, Ceraunus Blue, and
                           Nickerbean Blue
                           Butterflies as Threatened
                           Due to Similarity of
                           Appearance to the Miami
                           Blue Butterfly in Coastal
                           South and Central Florida.
4/12/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 21920-21936
                           Petition to List Either      Petition Finding,
                           the Eastern Population or    Substantial.
                           the Southern Rocky
                           Mountain Population of the
                           Boreal Toad as an
                           Endangered or Threatened
                           Distinct Population
                           Segment.
4/17/2012...............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 23060-23092
                           Status for Three Forks       Endangered and
                           Springsnail and Threatened   Threatened.
                           Status for San Bernardino
                           Springsnail Throughout
                           Their Ranges and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat for Both Species.
4/26/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 24908-24915
                           Petition to List Aliciella   Petition Finding, Not
                           formosa (Aztec gilia) as     substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened
                           with Critical Habitat.
5/1/2012................  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 25792-25828
                           Petition To List the         petition finding, Not
                           Sonoran Desert Area Bald     warranted.
                           Eagle as Threatened or
                           Endangered.
5/10/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 27386--27403
                           Petition to List the         petition finding,
                           Arapahoe Snowfly as          Warranted but
                           Threatened or Endangered.    Precluded.
5/10/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 27403--27411
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding,
                           Eastern Diamondback          Substantial.
                           Rattlesnake as Threatened.
5/15/2012...............  Threatened Status for        Proposed Listing        77 FR 28704-28740
                           Eriogonum codium (Umtanum    Threatened.
                           Desert Buckwheat) and
                           Physaria douglasii subsp.
                           tuplashensis (White Bluffs
                           Bladderpod) and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
6/5/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 33143-33155
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding,
                           Southern White-Tailed        Substantial.
                           Ptarmigan and the Mt.
                           Rainier White-Tailed
                           Ptarmigan as Threatened
                           with Critical Habitat.
6/11/2012...............  Listing 38 Species on        Proposed Listing        77 FR 34464-34775
                           Molokai, Lanai, and Maui     Endangered.
                           as Endangered and
                           Designating Critical
                           Habitat on Molokai, Lanai,
                           Maui, and Kahoolawe for
                           135 Species.
6/19/2012...............  Withdrawal of the Proposed   Proposed Listing        77 FR 36871-36899
                           Rule to List Dunes           Withdrawal.
                           Sagebrush Lizard.
6/21/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 37367-37373
                           Petition to List the Black-  Petition Finding,
                           capped Petrel as             Substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
7/5/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 39666-39670
                           Petition to List Maytenus    Petition Finding, Not
                           cymosa as Endangered or      substantial.
                           Threatened.
7/5/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 39670-39674
                           Petition to List a           Petition Finding, Not
                           Distinct Population          substantial.
                           Segment of the American
                           Black Bear in Nevada as
                           Endangered or Threatened.
7/12/2012...............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 41088-41106
                           Status for the Chupadera     Endangered.
                           Springsnail and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
7/18/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 42238-42251
                           Petition to List Six Sand    petition finding, Not
                           Dune Beetles as Endangered   warranted.
                           or Threatened.
7/24/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 43218-43222
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding,
                           Sonoran talussnail as        Substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
7/26/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 43799-43803
                           Petition to List the Gila    Petition Finding,
                           Mayfly as Endangered.        Substantial.
7/26/2012...............  Endangered Status for the    Proposed Listing        77 FR 43905-43939
                           Diamond Darter and           Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
8/7/2012................  90-Day Finding on Petitions  Notice of 90-day        77 FR 47003-47011
                           to List the Two Spring       Petition Finding, Not-
                           Mountains Dark Blue          substantial and
                           Butterflies and Morand's     Substantial.
                           Checkerspot Butterfly as
                           Endangered or Threatened.
8/8/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 47352-47356
                           Petition to List             Petition Finding,
                           Graptopetalum bartramii      Substantial.
                           (Bartram Stonecrop) and
                           Pectis imberbis (Beardless
                           Chinch Weed) as Endangered
                           or Threatened and
                           Designate Critical Habitat.
8/9/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 47583-47587
                           Petition to List Desert      Petition Finding,
                           Massasauga as Endangered     Substantial.
                           or Threatened and to
                           Designate Critical Habitat.
8/15/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 48934-48947
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding,
                           Bicknell's Thrush            Substantial.
                           (Catharus bicknelli) as
                           Endangered or Threatened.
8/16/2012...............  Endangered Status for Six    Proposed Listing and    77 FR 49601-49651
                           West Texas Aquatic           Critical Habitat
                           Invertebrate Species and     Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
8/17/2012...............  Determination of Status for  Proposed Listing and    77 FR 49893-49919
                           the Gierisch Mallow and      Critical Habitat
                           Designation of Critical      Endangered.
                           Habitat.

[[Page 70007]]

 
8/22/2012...............  Endangered Status for Four   Proposed Listing and    77 FR 50767-50854
                           Central Texas Salamanders    Critical Habitat
                           and Designation of           Endangered.
                           Critical Habitat.
8/28/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 51958-51964
                           Petition to List the Bay     petition finding, Not
                           Skipper as Endangered or     warranted.
                           Threatened.
8/29/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 52293-52300
                           Petition to List Mimulus     Petition Finding,
                           gemmiparus (Rocky Mountain   Substantial.
                           monkeyflower) as
                           Endangered or Threatened
                           and to Designate Critical
                           Habitat.
8/29/2012...............  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 52301-52308
                           Petition to List the         Petition Finding, Not
                           Prince of Wales Flying       substantial.
                           Squirrel as Threatened or
                           Endangered.
8/30/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 52650-52673
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Platte River Caddisfly as    warranted.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
9/4/2012................  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 54293-54329
                           Petition To List Four        petition finding, Not
                           Subspecies of Great Basin    warranted.
                           Butterflies as Endangered
                           or Threatened Species.
9/4/2012................  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 54331-54352
                           Petition to List the         petition finding, Not
                           Mardon Skipper as            warranted.
                           Threatened or Endangered.
9/5/2012................  90-Day Finding on a          Notice of 90-day        77 FR 54548-54553
                           Petition to List the Eagle   Petition Finding,
                           Lake Rainbow Trout as an     Substantial.
                           Endangered or Threatened
                           Species.
9/5/2012................  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 54434-54450
                           Status for Arctostaphylos    Endangered.
                           franciscana (Franciscan
                           manzanita) Throughout Its
                           Range.
9/11/2012...............  Determination of Status for  Proposed Listing        77 FR 55967-56026
                           Texas Golden Gladecress      Endangered,
                           and Neches River Rose-       Threatened.
                           mallow and Designation of
                           Critical Habitat.
9/12/2012...............  Proposed Endangered Status   Proposed Listing        77 FR 56481-56513
                           for the Jemez Mountains      Endangered.
                           Salamander and Proposed
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
9/18/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 57647-57862
                           Petition to List 14          petition finding, Not
                           Aquatic Mollusks as          warranted.
                           Endangered or Threatened.
9/18/2012...............  Endangered Status for 23     Final Listing           77 FR 57921-57948
                           Species on Oahu and          Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat for 124 Species.
9/27/2012...............  Proposed Listing of the      Proposed Listing        77 FR 59517-59540
                           Mount Charleston Blue        Endangered.
                           Butterfly as Endangered
                           and Proposed Listing of
                           Five Blue Butterflies as
                           Threatened Due to
                           Similarity of Appearance.
9/27/2012...............  Endangered Status for        Proposed Listing        77 FR 59487-59515
                           Grotto Sculpin and           Endangered.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
9/27/2012...............  12-Month Finding on a        Notice of 12-month      77 FR 59357-59371
                           Petition to List Spring      petition finding, Not
                           Mountains Acastus            warranted.
                           Checkerspot Butterfly as
                           an Endangered or
                           Threatened Species.
10/2/2012...............  Proposed Threatened Status   Proposed Listing        77 FR 60207-60235
                           for Coral Pink Sand Dunes    Threatened.
                           Tiger Beetle and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
10/2/2012...............  12-Month Petition Finding,   Notice of 12-month      77 FR 60179-60206
                           Listing of the Spring        petition finding,
                           Pygmy Sunfish as             Warranted Proposed
                           Threatened, and              Listing Threatened.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
10/3/2012...............  12-month Finding for the     Notice of 12-month      77 FR 60509-60579
                           Lemmon Fleabane;             petition finding, Not
                           Endangered Status for the    warranted Proposed
                           Acu[ntilde]a Cactus and      Listing Endangered.
                           the Fickeisen Plains
                           Cactus and Designation of
                           Critical Habitat.
10/4/2012...............  Proposed Endangered Species  Proposed Listing        77 FR 60749-60776
                           Status for the Florida       Endangered.
                           Bonneted Bat.
10/4/2012...............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 60777-60802
                           Species Status for           Endangered.
                           Coqu[iacute] Llanero
                           Throughout Its Range and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
10/4/2012...............  Endangered Species Status    Proposed Listing        77 FR 60803-60882
                           for the Fluted Kidneyshell   Endangered.
                           and Slabside Pearlymussel
                           and Designation of
                           Critical Habitat.
10/9/2012...............  12-Month Finding on          Notice of 12-month      77 FR 61375-61377
                           Petitions to List the        petition finding, Not
                           Mexican Gray Wolf as an      warranted.
                           Endangered Subspecies or
                           Distinct Population
                           Segment with Critical
                           Habitat.
10/10/2012..............  Determination of Endangered  Final Listing           77 FR 61663-61719
                           Species Status for the       Endangered and
                           Alabama Pearlshell, Round    Threatened.
                           Ebonyshell, Southern
                           Kidneyshell, and Choctaw
                           Bean, and Threatened
                           Species Status for the
                           Tapered Pigtoe, Narrow
                           Pigtoe, Southern
                           Sandshell, and Fuzzy
                           Pigtoe, and Designation of
                           Critical Habitat.
10/11/2012..............  Endangered Species Status    Proposed Listing        77 FR 61835-61894
                           for Cape Sable               Endangered.
                           Thoroughwort, Florida
                           Semaphore Cactus, and
                           Aboriginal Prickly-apple,
                           and Designation of
                           Critical Habitat for Cape
                           Sable Thoroughwort.
10/11/2012..............  Listing Taylor's             Proposed Listing        77 FR 61937-62058
                           Checkerspot Butterfly and    Endangered and
                           Streaked Horned Lark and     Threatened.
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat.
10/16/2012..............  Proposed Endangered Status   Proposed Listing        77 FR 63439-63536
                           for the Neosho Mucket,       Endangered and
                           Threatened Status for the    Threatened.
                           Rabbitsfoot, and
                           Designation of Critical
                           Habitat for Both Species.
10/17/2012..............  Listing 15 Species on        Proposed Listing        77 FR 63927-64018
                           Hawaii Island as             Endangered.
                           Endangered and Designating
                           Critical Habitat for 3
                           Species.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While some of these actions were published in FY 13, they were all completed and submitted to the Federal
  Register in FY 12.


[[Page 70008]]

    Our expeditious progress also included work on listing actions that 
we funded in previous fiscal years and in FY 2012 but have not yet been 
completed to date. For these species, we have completed the first step, 
and have been working on the second step, necessary for adding species 
to the Lists. These actions are listed below. Actions in the top 
section of the table are being conducted under a deadline set by a 
court through a court order or settlement agreement. Actions in the 
lower section of the table are being conducted to meet statutory 
timelines, that is, timelines required under the Act.

   Actions Funded in Previous FYs and in FY 2012 but not yet Completed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Species                               Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red knot (LPN = 3)...............  Proposed listing.
Gunnison sage-grouse (LPN = 2)...  Proposed listing.
Lesser prairie chicken (LPN = 2).  Proposed listing.
Arizona gartersnakes (northern     Proposed listing.
 Mexican gartersnake (LPN = 3) &
 narrowheaded gartersnake).
Zuni bluehead sucker.............  Proposed listing.
21 Big Island (HI) species \5\     Proposed listing.
 (includes 8 candidate species--6
 plants & 2 animals; 4 with LPN =
 2, 1 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN =
 4, 2 with LPN = 8).
9 Puget trough species (9          Proposed listing.
 subspecies of pocket gopher
 (Thomomys mazama ssp.) (LPN = 3).
Dakota skipper (LPN = 8) and       Proposed listing.
 Poweshiek skipperling (LPN = 2).
Vandenberg monkeyflower..........  Proposed listing.
3 Sierra amphibians (Yosemite      Proposed listing.
 toad, mountain yellow-legged
 frog--Sierra Nevada DPSs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Actions With Statutory Deadlines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ashy storm-petrel................  12-month petition finding.
Alexander Archipelago wolf.......  90-day petition finding.
Sphinx date palm (Phoenix          90-day petition finding
 dactylifera cv. Sphinx).
Black-backed woodpecker..........  90-day petition finding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also funded work on resubmitted petitions findings for 172 
candidate species (species petitioned prior to the last CNOR). In our 
resubmitted petition finding for the Columbia Basin population of the 
greater sage-grouse in this notice, although we completed a new 
analysis of the threats facing the species, we did not include new 
information, as the significance of the Columbia Basin DPS to the 
greater sage-grouse will require further review and we will update our 
finding when we resolve the status of the greater sage-grouse at a 
later date (see 75 FR 13910; March 23, 2010). We also did not include 
an updated assessment form as part of our resubmitted petition findings 
for the 29 candidate species for which we are preparing proposed 
listing determinations. However, for both the Columbia Basin DPS to the 
greater sage-grouse and for the other resubmitted petition findings, in 
the course of preparing proposed listing determinations, we continue to 
monitor new information about their status so that we can make prompt 
use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the well-being of any of these candidate 
species; see summaries below regarding publication of these 
determinations (these species will remain on the candidate list until a 
proposed listing rule is published). We also funded revised 12-month 
petition findings for the candidate species that we are removing from 
candidate status, which are being published as part of this CNOR (see 
Candidate Removals). Because the majority of these petitioned 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, so we 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 2012, we also funded work on resubmitted petition 
findings for uplisting two listed species (Delta smelt and Sclerocactus 
brevispinus (Pariette cactus)), for which we had previously received a 
petition and made a warranted-but-precluded finding.
    Another way that we have been expeditious in making progress to add 
qualified species to the Lists is that 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 ESA, these efforts also contribute 
towards finding that we are making expeditious progress to add 
qualified species to the Lists.
    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, the Candidate 
Conservation Program, which is separately budgeted, 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 142 species 
covering 5.5 million ac of habitat. In some instances, the sustained 
implementation of strategically designed conservation efforts 
culminates in making listing unnecessary for species that are 
candidates for listing or for which listing has been proposed.

[[Page 70009]]

Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species

    Below are updated summaries for petitioned candidates for which we 
published findings, under section 4(b)(3)(B). We are making continued 
warranted-but-precluded 12-month findings on the petitions for these 
species (for our revised 12-month petition findings for species that we 
are removing from candidate status, see summaries above under 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 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
Islands (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: Emballonura s. rotensis, endemic 
to the Mariana Islands (Guam and the 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. The candidate assessment form addresses the distinct 
population segment (DPS) of E. s. semicaudata that occurs in American 
Samoa.
    Emballonura 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 be 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 (CNMI)--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. Emballonura s. rotensis is 
historically known from the Mariana Islands and formerly occurred on 
Guam and in the CNMI on Rota, Aguiguan, Tinian (known from prehistoric 
records only), Saipan, and possibly Anatahan and Maug. Currently, E. s. 
rotensis appears to be extirpated from all but one island in the 
Mariana archipelago. The single remaining population of this subspecies 
occurs on Aguiguan, CNMI.
    Threats to this subspecies have not changed over the past year. The 
primary threats to the subspecies are 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 is believed 
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 (g) in weight, and is one 
of two species within the genus Sylvilagus occurring in New England. 
The NEC is considered a habitat specialist, because it is 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, and 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 
square kilometers (km\2\) to 12,180 km\2\. Surveys indicate that the 
long-term decline in NEC continues. For example, surveys for the 
species in 2009 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 no longer present in 9 of 
the 19 towns identified in an extensive survey that spanned the years 
2000 to 2004. Similar surveys were conducted during the winter of 2010-
2011 in Rhode Island. Rangewide, 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 NEC 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 
NECs from small patches. The range of the NEC has contracted by 75 
percent or more since 1960, and current land uses in the region 
indicate that the rate of change, about 2 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.

[[Page 70010]]

The magnitude of the threats continues to be high, because they occur 
rangewide and have a negative effect on the population size and 
survival of the species. Although conservation measures that address 
the threats to the species are being developed, they are not yet in 
place, and there is not yet any indication that they are having an 
effect on the magnitude of the species. The threats 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 in our files and in the Service's initial 
warranted-but-precluded finding published in the Federal Register on 
April 8, 2004 (69 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. 
Because of a lack of detections with standardized survey efforts over 
much of the fisher's historical range, the fisher is believed to be 
extirpated or reduced to scattered individuals from the lower mainland 
of British Columbia through Washington and northern Oregon and in the 
central and northern Sierra Nevada in California. Extant populations of 
native fisher are isolated to the North Coast and Klamath-Siskiyou 
Mountains of northern California and southwestern Oregon, and the 
southern Sierra Nevada in California. Descendants of a fisher 
reintroduction effort also occur in the southern Cascades in Oregon. 
Two recent reintroduction efforts in Olympic National Park in 
Washington and in the northern Sierra Nevada in California have 
completed the movement and release of fishers to their respective study 
areas. Several years of monitoring are still needed to determine if 
these will become successfully-established populations.
    Estimates of fisher numbers in native populations of the West Coast 
DPS vary widely. A rigorous monitoring program is lacking for the 
native northern California-southwestern Oregon and reintroduced 
southern Oregon Cascades populations, making estimates of fisher 
numbers for these two populations difficult. The fisher monitoring 
program in the southern Sierra Nevada population has provided 
preliminary estimates indicating no decline in the index of abundance 
within the monitored portion of the population. The two populations of 
native fisher in the northern California-southwestern Oregon and 
southern Sierra Nevada are separated by several times greater than the 
species' maximum dispersal distance. The extant fisher populations are 
either small (southern Sierra Nevada and southern Oregon Cascades) and 
isolated from one another or both.
    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: large stand-replacing 
wildfires, changes in forest composition and structure related to the 
effects of climate change, forest and fuels management, and urban and 
rural development. Threats to fishers that lead to direct mortality and 
injury include: collisions with vehicles; predation; rodenticides; and 
viral borne diseases such as rabies, parvovirus, and canine distemper 
virus. Existing regulatory mechanisms on Federal, State, and private 
lands do not provide sufficient protection for the key elements of 
fisher habitat, or the certainty that conservation efforts will be 
implemented or effective. 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. Therefore, we assigned 
an LPN of 6 to this DPS.
    New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Mazama pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama ssp. couchi, douglasii, 
glacialis, louiei, melanops, pugetensis, tacomensis, tumuli, 
yelmensis)--We continue to find that listing these subspecies is 
warranted but precluded as of the date of publication of this notice. 
However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to 
publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month 
finding. In the course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are 
continuing to monitor new information about this species' status so 
that we can make prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in 
the case of an emergency posing a significant risk to the species.
    Canada lynx, within the State of New Mexico (Lynx canadensis)--In 
our finding of December 17, 2009 (74 FR 66937), we determined that 
adding the lynx in New Mexico to the listing of the lynx DPS was 
warranted, because the lynx is now present in the State as a result of 
the Colorado reintroduction effort, and we assigned an LPN of 12 to 
amending the listing of lynx to include New Mexico. We reconfirm that 
assigning an LPN of 12 is appropriate based on nonimminent threats of a 
low magnitude. The threats to the lynx in New Mexico from human-caused 
mortality are low in magnitude, because they do not occur at a level 
that creates a significant threat to the lynx DPS in the contiguous 
United States. We do not consider lynx in New Mexico, or its habitat in 
New Mexico, to be essential to the survival or recovery of the DPS; as 
a result, neither human-caused mortality nor habitat modification in 
New Mexico creates a significant threat to the lynx DPS in the 
contiguous United States. Potential impacts to the habitat in New 
Mexico have not been documented to threaten lynx, either in New Mexico 
or outside of it. The amount of suitable habitat for lynx in New Mexico 
is considered negligible relative to the amount of habitat within the 
listed range, and the majority of lynx habitats within the contiguous 
United States are already protected by the ESA. The threats are also 
nonimminent, because they occur infrequently. Because lynx in the lower 
48 States are already listed as a DPS and conditions affecting the lynx 
in New Mexico are neither imminent nor of sufficient magnitude to pose 
a threat to the lynx DPS throughout the contiguous United States, the 
appropriate LPN for this level of magnitude and immediacy of threats 
for a DPS is 12.
    Gunnison's prairie dog (Cynomys gunnisoni)--Gunnison's prairie dogs 
occur in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. In our February 5, 
2008, 12-month finding (73 FR 6660), we determined that listing the 
Gunnison prairie dog was warranted but precluded, with an LPN of 2, due 
to threats in a significant portion of its range--the montane portion 
of the species' range within Colorado and New Mexico--where the effects 
from plague and other factors threaten those populations. This finding 
was challenged by WildEarth Guardians in

[[Page 70011]]

September of 2008. On September 30, 2010, the Court set aside our 2008 
finding and remanded the matter back to us for further action. The 
Court found that we arbitrarily and capriciously ``determined that 
something other than a species was an endangered or threatened species 
which warranted listing.'' In response to the decision of the Court, we 
will reevaluate the status of the Gunnison's prairie dog and deliver a 
revised 12-month finding to the Federal Register. However, we are 
currently unable to complete a status review due to budget and workload 
limitations. Furthermore, initiating a revised status review for the 
species would be premature at this time because of a significant 
ongoing genetics study initiated by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) 
(formerly the Colorado Division of Wildlife) along with researchers at 
the University of Colorado Boulder addressing Gunnison's prairie dog 
taxonomy. This work will be essential in determining whether or not 
Gunnison's prairie dogs in the montane and prairie portions of the 
species' range constitute two subspecies. We anticipate the analysis of 
these genetic data will likely be completed by late 2012 and we will 
evaluate the information thereafter. It is critical for us to consider 
this potentially significant taxonomic revision in our revised status 
review after the CPW releases its final genetics report. Gunnison's 
prairie dogs will remain a candidate within the montane portion of 
their range until we complete this analysis.
    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 4 counties in 
southwest Idaho; its total known range is approximately 426,000 ha 
(1,050,000 ac). Threats to southern Idaho ground squirrels include: 
habitat degradation and fragmentation; direct killing from shooting, 
trapping, or poisoning; predation; competition with other ground 
squirrel species; and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. 
Habitat degradation and fragmentation appear to be the primary threats 
to the species. Nonnative annuals such as Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) 
and Taeniatherum caput-medusae (medusahead) now dominate much of this 
species' range and have altered the fire regime by accelerating the 
frequency of wildfire. Nonnative annuals provide inconsistent forage 
quality for southern Idaho ground squirrels as compared to native 
vegetation. Habitat deterioration, destruction, and fragmentation 
contribute to the current patchy distribution of southern Idaho ground 
squirrels. Some human-altered landscapes, such as golf courses and row 
crops of alfalfa, provide alternative habitats that maintain high 
densities of southern Idaho ground squirrels. However, high densities 
of ground squirrels in agricultural fields sometimes cause crop damage, 
which results in reduced tolerance of the species by local landowners.
    One programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances 
(CCAA) has been completed for this species; it includes conservation 
measures that minimize ground-disturbing activities, allow for the 
investigation of methods to restore currently degraded habitat, provide 
additional protection to southern Idaho ground squirrels from 
recreational shooting and other direct killing on enrolled lands, and 
allow for the translocation of squirrels to or from enrolled lands, if 
necessary. The acreage enrolled through the CCAA encompasses 
approximately 9 percent of the known range of the species. 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 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 north-central Oregon and south-central 
Washington. Although historically abundant and widespread, 
approximately two-thirds of its total historical range has been 
converted to agricultural and residential uses. The most contiguous, 
least disturbed expanse of suitable habitat within the species' range 
occurs on land in Oregon owned by Boeing, Inc., and on the Naval 
Weapons Systems Training Facility near Boardman, Oregon. In Washington, 
the largest area of suitable habitat occurs on State and Federal lands.
    Agricultural, residential, and wind power development, 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 (Bromus 
tectorum), which alter available cover and food quantity and quality, 
and increase fire frequency. 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 the Washington ground squirrel's range.
    In Oregon, some threats are being addressed as a result of the 
State's listing the species as endangered under the Oregon State 
Endangered Species Act (OESA), and by implementation of the Threemile 
Canyon Farms Multi-Species 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 to specifically 
address the needs of the species. Since current and potential threats 
are widespread, and, in some priority areas, could significantly affect 
the survival of the species, we conclude the magnitude of threats 
remains high. The Washington ground squirrel has both imminent and 
nonimminent threats. At a rangewide scale, we conclude the threats are 
nonimminent based largely on the following: The Threemile Canyon Farms 
Multi-Species CCAA addressed the imminent loss of a large portion of 
habitat to agriculture; there are currently no other large-scale 
efforts to convert suitable habitat to agriculture; and wind power 
project impacts can be minimized through compliance with the OESA and 
the Columbia Basin Ecoregion wind energy siting and permitting 
guidelines. We also consider the potential development of shooting 
ranges on the Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility as nonimminent 
because the proposed action is still under development and we are 
unable to assess its timing and impact, which could be minimized 
through compliance with the OESA. We, therefore, have retained an LPN 
of 5 for this species.
    Red tree vole, north Oregon coast DPS (Arborimus longicaudus)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and in 
our initial warranted-but-precluded finding, published in the Federal 
Register on October 13, 2011 (76 FR 63720). Red tree voles are small, 
mouse-

[[Page 70012]]

sized rodents that live in conifer forests and spend almost all of 
their time in the tree canopy. They are one of the few animals that can 
persist on a diet of conifer needles, which is their principal food. 
Red tree voles are endemic to the humid, coniferous forests of western 
Oregon (generally west of the crest of the Cascade Range) and 
northwestern California (north of the Klamath River). The north Oregon 
coast DPS of the red tree vole comprises that portion of the Oregon 
Coast Range from the Columbia River south to the Siuslaw River. Red 
tree voles demonstrate strong selection for nesting in older conifer 
forests, which are now relatively rare across the DPS; they avoid 
nesting in younger forests.
    Although data are not available to rigorously assess population 
trends, information from retrospective surveys indicates red tree voles 
have declined in the DPS and no longer occur, or are now scarce, in 
areas where they were once relatively abundant. Older forests that 
provide habitat for red tree voles are limited and highly fragmented, 
while ongoing forest practices in much of the DPS maintain the 
remaining patches of older forest in a highly fragmented and isolated 
condition. Modeling indicates only 11 percent within the area of the 
DPS currently contains tree vole habitat, largely restricted to the 22 
percent of the area that is under Federal ownership. Existing 
regulatory mechanisms on State and private lands are inadequate to 
prevent continued harvest of forest stands at a scale and extent that 
would be meaningful for conserving red tree voles. Biological 
characteristics of red tree voles, such as small home ranges, limited 
dispersal distances, and low reproductive potential, limits their 
ability to respond to and persist in areas of extensive habitat loss 
and alteration. These biological characteristics also make it difficult 
for the tree voles to recolonize isolated habitat patches. Due to its 
reduced distribution, the red tree vole is now vulnerable to random 
environmental disturbances that may remove or further isolate large 
blocks of already limited habitat, and to extirpation within the DPS 
from such factors as genetic variability, inbreeding depression, and 
demographic stochasticity. Although the entire population is 
experiencing threats, the impact is less pronounced on Federal lands 
where much of the red tree vole habitat remains. Hence, the magnitude 
of threats is moderate to low. The threats are imminent because they 
are currently occurring within the DPS. Therefore, we have assigned the 
red tree vole north Oregon coast DPS an LPN of 9.
    Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens)--The following 
information is based on information in our files and our warranted-but-
precluded 12-month petition finding published on February 10, 2011 (76 
FR 7634). The Pacific walrus is an ice-dependent species found across 
the continental shelf waters of the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas. 
Unlike seals that can remain in the water indefinitely, walrus must 
haulout onto ice or land periodically. Pacific walrus is a traditional 
and important source of food and products to native Alaskans, 
especially those living on Saint Lawrence Island, and to native 
Russians.
    Annually, walrus migrate up to 1,500 km (932 mi) between winter 
breeding areas in the sub-Arctic (northern Bering Sea) and summer 
foraging areas in the Arctic. Historically, the females and calves 
remained on pack ice over the continental shelf of the Chukchi Sea 
throughout the summer, using it as a platform for resting after making 
shallow foraging dives for invertebrates on the sea floor. Sea ice also 
provides isolation from disturbance and terrestrial predators such as 
polar bears. Since 1979, the extent of summer Arctic sea ice has 
declined. The four lowest records of minimum sea ice extent occurred 
from 2007 to 2011. Based on the best scientific information available, 
we anticipate that sea ice will retreat northward off the Chukchi 
continental shelf for 1 to 5 months every year in the foreseeable 
future.
    When the ice melts beyond the limits of the continental shelf (and 
the ability of the walrus to obtain food), thousands of walrus 
congregate at coastal haulouts. Although coastal haulouts have 
historically provided a place to rest, the aggregation of so many 
animals, in particular females and calves, at this time of year has 
increased in the last 5 years. Not only are the number of animals more 
concentrated at coastal haulouts than on widely dispersed sea ice, but 
also the probability of disturbance from humans and terrestrial animals 
is much higher. Disturbances at coastal haulouts cause stampedes, 
leading to mortalities and injuries. In addition, because of the amount 
of food these large animals need, there is also concern that the 
concentration of animals will cause local prey depletion leading to 
longer foraging trips, increased energy costs, and potential effects on 
female fitness and calf survival. We expect these effects to lead to a 
population decline.
    We recognize that Pacific walrus face additional stressors from 
ocean warming, ocean acidification, disease, oil and gas exploration 
and development, increased shipping, commercial fishing, and 
subsistence harvest, but none rise to the level of a threat except 
subsistence harvest. We found that subsistence harvest will rise to the 
level of a threat if the population declines but harvest levels remain 
the same. Because the threat of sea ice loss is not having significant 
population-level effects currently, but is projected to, we determined 
the magnitude of this threat is moderate, not high. Because both the 
loss of sea ice habitat and subsistence harvest are presently 
occurring, these threats are imminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 9 to 
this subspecies.
    North American wolverine, contiguous U.S. DPS (Gulo gulo luscus)--
We continue to find that listing this species is warranted but 
precluded as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are 
working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to 
making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the 
course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to 
monitor new information about this species' status so that we can make 
prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an 
emergency posing a significant risk to the 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. Porzana tabuensis is a small, dark, cryptic rail found in 
wetlands and rank scrublands or forests 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

[[Page 70013]]

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, flight in island rails has atrophied or been 
completely lost over evolutionary time causing populations to 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 would result in an increase of roughly 500 
mi (805 km) in the distance 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 and native animals, 
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), and native predators, the 
Pacific boa (Candoia bibroni) and the purple swamphen (Porphyrio 
porphyrio), 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)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Friendly ground-dove, American Samoa DPS (Gallicolumba 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 population growth. 
Predation by introduced species has played a significant role in 
reducing, limiting, and extirpating populations of island birds, 
especially ground-nesters like the friendly ground-dove, 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 the area on Olosega Island where 
the species had been most frequently recorded. Although this species 
has evolved on islands subject to severe storms, 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 and no change in the relative abundance 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 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 relative 
abundance has remained unchanged for several years. Thus, we assign 
this DPS an LPN of 9.
    Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa)--We continue to find that listing 
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication 
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that 
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted 
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed 
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this 
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under 
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk 
to the species.
    Yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files and the petition we received on 
April 5, 2004. The yellow-billed loon is a migratory bird. Solitary 
pairs breed on lakes in the arctic tundra of the United States, Russia, 
and Canada from June to September. During the remainder of the year, 
the species winters in more southern coastal waters of the Pacific 
Ocean and the Norway and North Seas.
    The available information is not sufficient to dismiss subsistence 
harvest as a threat to the species. While subsistence harvest 
information, which has bias of unknown direction and magnitude, cannot 
be used to precisely estimate harvest, it indicates that tens to 
possibly low hundreds of yellow-billed loons are harvested throughout 
Alaska, Russia, and Canada annually. The available information suggests 
that the majority of harvest likely occurs during spring and fall 
migrations, as yellow-billed loons move along the coast of Alaska or 
through the Chukchi and Bering seas. As a result, what harvest actually 
is occurring is extracted from a migrant population that likely 
includes much of the species' total rangewide numbers of 16,000 to 
32,000. Although uncertainty surrounding harvest levels, breeding-
population composition of the migrant population, and total population 
size exists, the current information on subsistence harvest seems to 
indicate that a small proportion of the migrant population is

[[Page 70014]]

harvested each year. While it currently appears that fewer yellow-
billed loons may be harvested than previously thought, we are 
continuing to gather data and refine model-based predictions to address 
the uncertainties regarding subsistence harvest and the effect it may 
have at the population level. Therefore, we conclude that subsistence 
harvest is a threat to the species.
    Additionally, yellow-billed loons are subject to several stressors, 
including oil and gas exploration and development, marine pollution, 
the effects of climate change, the inadequacy of existing regulations, 
and fishing by-catch. While these stressors may not rise to the level 
of a threat individually, when taken collectively they could cause 
population-level effects.
    The primary threat of subsistence harvest is currently occurring; 
therefore, the threat is imminent. The magnitude of subsistence harvest 
is moderate based on what we currently know about the level of harvest. 
Thus, we assigned the yellow-billed loon an LPN of 8.
    Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris)--We continue to 
find that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the 
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a 
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the 
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the 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 family Alcidae that occurs along the west coast of North America 
in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. 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, scientists 
believe the population 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 possible extirpations on three 
islands in Mexico. A dramatic decline (up to 70 percent) from 1977 to 
1991 was detected at the largest nesting colony in southern California, 
possibly due to high levels of predation on eggs by the endemic deer 
mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus elusus). Identified threats include 
introduced predators at nesting colonies, oil spills and oil pollution, 
reduced prey availability, human disturbance, and artificial light 
pollution.
    Although substantial declines in the Xantus's murrelet population 
likely occurred over the last century, some of the largest threats are 
being addressed and, to some degree, ameliorated. Declines and possible 
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, efforts to restore nesting habitat on Santa 
Barbara Island through the Montrose Settlements Restoration Project may 
benefit the Xantus's murrelet population at that island.
    Artificial lighting from squid fishing and other vessels, or from 
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 (Larus occidentalis) 
and barn owls (Tyto alba) 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. Since 1999, no significant squid 
fishing has occurred near any of the colonies in the Channel Islands; 
however, this remains a potential future threat.
    A proposal to build three liquid natural gas facilities near the 
Channel Islands could affect the nesting colonies due to bright lights 
at night from the facilities and visiting tanker vessels, noise from 
the facilities or from helicopters visiting the facilities, and the 
threat of oil spills associated with visiting tanker vessels. However, 
these facilities are still 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 is directly adjacent to nesting 
colonies, where their impacts would be expected to be more significant. 
The threats from nonnative predators and artificial lighting are of a 
high magnitude because they have been sufficient to cause significant 
declines in the population. However, because of the efforts to 
eliminate nonnative predators and reduce artificial lighting, they are 
nonimminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 5 for this species.
    Red-crowned parrot (Amazona viridigenalis)--The red-crowned parrot 
occurs in fragmented isolated habitat in the Mexican states of 
Veracruz, San Luis Potosi, Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, and northeast 
Queretaro; and in Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, Texas. Feral 
populations may also exist in southern California, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, 
and Florida and escaped birds have been reported in central Texas. The 
species generally occurs in tropical lowlands and foothills, inhabiting 
tropical deciduous forest, gallery forest, evergreen floodplain forest, 
Tamaulipan thornscrub, and semi-open areas; in Texas, the species is 
known to nest in cavities in the urban centers of town in palm species. 
Currently, the population of red-crowned parrots is extremely small 
(less than 5,000 individuals) and fragmented, and a large portion 
(approximately half) of the population occurs within the species' 
historical range in Mexico. The primary threats to the red-crowned 
parrot at this time include habitat loss, illegal capture for the pet 
trade, and the inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms that address those 
threats.
    The primary threats to the red-crowned parrot are affecting a large 
portion of the species' population throughout the historical range of 
the species in Mexico. We consider the magnitude high because the 
current population is small, a large portion of the population is 
affected, and these factors may lead to extirpation in Mexico. Further, 
we have no information indicating the Lower Rio Grande Valley 
populations can persist in the absence of the Mexico populations. 
Threats to the red-crowned parrot are currently affecting populations 
and are expected to continue to occur in the future. Therefore, threats 
to the red-crowned parrot are imminent. As a result of the imminent, 
high magnitude threats, we assigned an LPN of 2 for the red-crowned 
parrot.

[[Page 70015]]

    Sprague's pipit (Anthus spragueii)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files and in the petition we received 
on October 15, 2008. The Sprague's pipit is a small grassland bird 
characterized by its high flight display and otherwise very secretive 
behavior. Sprague's pipits are strongly tied to native prairie (land 
which has never been plowed) throughout their life cycle. Its breeding 
range includes portions of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South 
Dakota, and Canada. The Sprague's pipit's wintering range includes 
south-central and southeast Arizona, southern New Mexico, Texas, 
southern Oklahoma, southern Arkansas, northwest Mississippi, southern 
Louisiana, and northern Mexico. The vast majority of the U.S. winter 
sightings have been in Texas but there have been migration sightings in 
Michigan, western Ontario, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Gulf and Atlantic 
States from Mississippi east and north to South Carolina. Sprague's 
pipits also have been sighted in California during fall migration.
    Threats to this species include: Habitat loss and conversion, 
habitat fragmentation on the breeding grounds, energy development, 
roads, and inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Due to prairie 
habitat loss and fragmentation, only 15 to 18 percent of the historical 
breeding habitat in the United States remains in patches of sufficient 
size for males to establish territories. The Breeding Bird Survey and 
Christmas Bird Count both show a 40-year decline of 73 to 79 percent 
(3.23 to 4.1 percent annually), although the population seems to have 
stabilized in recent years. We anticipate that prairie habitat will 
continue to be converted and fragmented. Most of the breeding range, 
including those areas where grassland habitat still remains, has been 
identified as a prime area for wind energy development, and an oil and 
gas boom is occurring in the central part of the breeding range in the 
United States and Canada. On the wintering range, conversion of 
grassland to agriculture and other uses appears to be accelerating. 
While habitat loss has occurred and will likely to continue to occur, 
as noted above, approximately 15 to18 percent of the breeding range 
remains in suitable habitat cover and in large enough patch sizes to 
support nesting, and population decline seems to have slowed in recent 
years. Thus, the threats are moderate in magnitude. The threats are 
imminent because the species is currently facing them in many portions 
of its range. Therefore, we have assigned the Sprague's pipit an LPN of 
8.
    Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus)--We continue to 
find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded as of the 
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a 
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the 
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus)--We continue to find 
that listing this species is warranted, but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files and in the petition we 
received on January 30, 2002. Currently, greater sage-grouse occur in 
11 States (Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, 
Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, South Dakota, and North Dakota), and 2 
Canadian provinces (Alberta and Saskatchewan), occupying approximately 
56 percent of their historical range. Greater sage-grouse depend on a 
variety of shrub-steppe habitats throughout their life cycle, and are 
considered obligate users of several species of sagebrush.
    The primary threat to greater sage-grouse is ongoing fragmentation 
and loss of shrub-steppe habitats through a variety of mechanisms. Most 
importantly, increasing fire cycles and invasive plants (and the 
interaction between them) in more westerly parts of the range, along 
with energy development and related infrastructure in more easterly 
areas, are negatively affecting species. In addition, direct loss of 
habitat and fragmentation is occurring due to agriculture, 
urbanization, and infrastructure such as roads and power lines built in 
support of several activities. We also have determined that existing 
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to protect the species from these 
ongoing threats. However, many of these habitat impacts are being 
actively addressed through conservation actions taken by local working 
groups, and State and Federal agencies. Notably, the National Resource 
Conservation Service has committed significant financial and technical 
resources to address threats to this species on private lands through 
their Sage-grouse Initiative. These efforts, when fully implemented, 
will potentially provide important conservation benefits to the greater 
sage-grouse and its habitats. We consider the threats to the greater 
sage-grouse to be of moderate magnitude, because the threats are not 
occurring with uniform intensity or distribution across the wide range 
of the species at this time, and substantial habitat still remains to 
support the species in many areas. The threats are imminent because the 
species is currently facing them in many portions of its range. 
Therefore, we assigned the greater sage-grouse an LPN of 8.
    Greater sage-grouse, Bi-State DPS (Centrocercus urophasianus)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted, but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Greater sage-grouse, Columbia Basin DPS (Centrocercus 
urophasianus)--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 the western sage-grouse (C. u. phaios). On May 
7, 2001, we concluded that listing the Columbia Basin DPS of the 
western sage-grouse was warranted, but precluded by higher priority 
listing actions (66 FR 22984); this population was historically found 
in northern Oregon and central Washington. Following our May 7, 2001, 
finding, the Service received additional petitions requesting listing 
actions for various other greater sage-grouse populations, including 
one for the nominal western subspecies, dated January 24, 2002, and 
three for the entire species, dated June 18, 2002, and March 19 and 
December 22, 2003. The Service subsequently found that the petition for 
the western subspecies did not present substantial

[[Page 70016]]

information (68 FR 6500; February 7, 2003), and that listing the 
greater sage-grouse throughout its historical range was not warranted 
(70 FR 2244; January 12, 2005). These latter findings were remanded to 
the Service for further consideration. In response, we initiated a new 
rangewide status review for the entire species (73 FR 10218; February 
26, 2008). On March 5, 2010, we found that listing of the greater sage-
grouse was warranted but precluded by higher priority listing actions 
(75 FR 13909; March 23, 2010), and it was added to the list of 
candidates. We also found that the western subspecies of the greater 
sage-grouse, the taxonomic entity we relied on in our DPS analysis for 
the Columbia Basin population, was no longer considered a valid 
subspecies. In light of our conclusions regarding the taxonomic 
invalidity of the western sage-grouse subspecies, the significance of 
the Columbia Basin DPS to the greater sage-grouse will require further 
review. The Service intends to complete an analysis to determine if 
this population continues to warrant recognition as a DPS in accordance 
with our Policy Regarding the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate 
Population Segments (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996) at the time we make 
a listing decision on the status of the greater sage-grouse. Until that 
time, the Columbia Basin DPS will remain a candidate for listing.
    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 that 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 that have 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 exchange. Therefore, the population is 
both discrete and significant, and constitutes 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 
species 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 (R. exulans), and Norway 
rat (R. norvegicus). These nonnative predators 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 under 
way 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 are 
reducing the population size of the 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. Dendroica 
angelae, or elfin-woods warbler, is a small entirely black and white 
warbler, distinguished by its white eyebrow stripe, white patches on 
ear covers and neck, incomplete eye ring, and black crown. The elfin-
woods warbler was at first thought to occur only in high elevations at 
dwarf or elfin forests, but it has since been found at lower elevations 
including shade coffee plantations and secondary forests. These birds 
build a compact cup nest, usually close to the trunk and well hidden 
among the epiphytes of small trees. Its breeding season extends from 
March to June. Elfin-woods warblers forage in the middle part of trees, 
gleaning insects from leaves in the outer portion of tree crowns. The 
species 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 and Cayey, following the passing of Hurricane Hugo in 1989. In 
2003 and 2004, surveys were conducted for the elfin-woods warbler in 
the Carite Commonwealth Forest, Toro Negro Forest, Guilarte Forest, 
Bosque del Pueblo, Maricao Forest, and the El Yunque National Forest. 
These surveys only reported sightings at Maricao Commonwealth Forest 
(778 individuals) and El Yunque National Forest (196 individuals).
    The elfin-woods warbler is currently threatened by habitat 
modification. Elfin-woods warblers have been historically common in the 
elfin woodland of El Yunque National Forest and the Podocarpus forest 
type of Maricao Commonwealth Forest. Removal and replacement of this 
forest vegetation with infrastructure (e.g., telecommunication towers 
and recreational facilities) may have affected the species. Although 
this loss of habitat has been permanent and restoration would take a 
few decades, the present regulatory process, at both the Commonwealth 
and Federal levels, have curtailed this threat. Unrestricted 
development within the El Yunque buffer zone needs to be addressed to 
determine the impact on the migratory

[[Page 70017]]

behavior of the species. Conversion of elfin-woods warbler habitat 
(e.g., mature secondary forests, young secondary forests, and shaded-
coffee plantations) along the periphery of the Maricao Commonwealth 
Forest to marginal habitat (e.g., pastures, dry slope forests, 
residential rural forests, gallery forests, and unshaded coffee 
plantations), has affected potential corridors for the elfin-woods 
warbler, resulting in a reduced dispersal and expansion capability of 
the species. These threats are not imminent because most of the range 
of the species is within protected lands. The magnitude of threat to 
the elfin-woods warbler is low to moderate because there is no 
indication that the two populations of the elfin-woods warbler are 
declining in numbers. The species can thrive in disturbed and 
plantation habitats, although abundance of the species on these 
habitats is lower than in primary habitats. Moreover, elfin-woods 
warblers appear to recover well, and in a relatively short time, from 
damaging effects of hurricanes to the forest structure. Therefore, we 
assign a listing priority number of 11 to the elfin-woods warbler.

Reptiles

    Northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files. The Service 
received a petition containing no new information on May 11, 2004. 
Until 2011, the eastern massasauga was considered one of three 
recognized subspecies of massasauga. Based on recent information, we 
recognized the eastern massasauga rattlesnake as a distinct species 
beginning in 2011. It is a small, thick-bodied rattlesnake that 
occupies shallow wetlands and adjacent upland habitat in portions of 
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario.
    Although the current range of S. catenatus resembles the species' 
historical range, the geographic distribution has been restricted by 
the loss of the species from much of the area within the boundaries of 
that range. Approximately 40 percent of the counties that were 
historically occupied by S. catenatus no longer support the species. S. 
catenatus is currently listed as endangered in every State and province 
in which it occurs, except for Michigan where it is designated as a 
species of special concern. Each State and Canadian province across the 
range of S. catenatus has lost more than 30 percent of its historical 
population of the species, and for the majority more than 50 percent. 
Furthermore, fewer than 35 percent of the remaining populations are 
considered secure. Approximately 59 percent of the remaining S. 
catenatus populations occur wholly or in part on public land, and 
Statewide and/or site-specific CCAAs are currently being developed for 
many of these areas in Illinois and Michigan. 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. In 2011, a CCAA with the Wisconsin Department of 
Natural Resources was completed for the Lower Chippewa River Bottoms. 
These agreements are addressing threats in those areas and thus reduce 
the magnitude of threats for the species as a whole. Therefore, the 
magnitude of threats is considered ``moderate'' at this time. However, 
a recently completed extinction risk model and information provided by 
species experts indicate that 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. 
Declines have continued or may be accelerating in several States. Thus 
we are monitoring the status of this species to determine if a change 
in listing priority is warranted. Threats of habitat modification, 
habitat succession, incompatible land management practices, illegal 
collection for the pet trade, and human persecution are ongoing and 
constitute imminent threats to many remaining populations, particularly 
those inhabiting private lands. Based on imminent threats of moderate 
magnitude, we assigned this species an LPN of 8.
    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. In Alabama, 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 there. 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 20, 2000, and updated through April 30, 2011. 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. 
The loss and fragmentation of the longleaf pine ecosystem has resulted 
in extant Louisiana pine snake populations that are isolated and small.
    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. Currently occupied 
habitat in Louisiana and Texas is estimated to be approximately 159,000 
ac. All remnant Louisiana pine

[[Page 70018]]

snake populations have been affected by habitat loss and all require 
active habitat management. A CCA was completed in 2003 to maintain and 
enhance occupied and potential habitat on public lands, and to protect 
known Louisiana pine snake populations. This proactive habitat 
management has likely slowed or reversed the rate of Louisiana pine 
snake habitat degradation on many portions of federal lands. 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.
    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. The threats are not imminent, because the rate of 
habitat loss appears to be declining due to proactive habitat 
management. Thus, based on nonimminent, high-magnitude threats, we 
assign a listing priority number of 5 to this species.
    Tucson shovel-nosed snake (Chionactis occipitalis klauberi)--The 
Tucson shovel-nosed snake is a small, burrowing snake in the Colubridae 
family that occupied a roughly 35-mile-wide swath running along the 
Phoenix-Tucson corridor in northeastern Pima, southwestern Pinal, and 
eastern Maricopa Counties, Arizona. No systematic surveys have been 
conducted to assess the status of the subspecies throughout its range, 
but it has apparently disappeared from some areas.
    Threats to the Tucson shovel-nosed snake include urban and rural 
development; road construction, use, and maintenance; concentration of 
solar power facilities and transmission corridors; agriculture; 
wildfires; and lack of adequate management and regulation. 
Comprehensive plans encompassing the entire range of the snake 
encourage large growth areas in the next 20 years and beyond. These 
plans also call for an increase in roads and transportation corridors, 
which have been documented to affect the snake through direct 
mortality. Additionally, development of solar energy facilities and 
transmission corridors throughout the State is being pursued, and 
demand for these facilities will likely increase. Some of these 
facilities are being considered within the range of the Tucson shovel-
nosed snake. Wildfires due to infestations of nonnative grasses in the 
snake's habitat, dominated by native plants not adapted to survive 
wildfires, are likely to increase in frequency and magnitude in the 
future as these invasive grasses continue to spread rapidly. 
Regulations are not in place to minimize or mitigate these threats to 
the Tucson shovel-nosed snake and its habitat, and, therefore, they are 
likely to put the snake at risk of local extirpation or extinction. 
These threats, particularly those that lead to a loss of habitat, are 
likely to reduce the population of the Tucson shovel-nosed snake across 
its entire range. Given the limited geographic distribution of this 
snake and the fact that its entire range lies within the path of 
development in the foreseeable future, these threats are of high 
magnitude. Because development, wildfires, and spread of nonnative 
grasses are ongoing, and are likely to increase in the future, the 
threats are imminent. Accordingly, we have assigned an LPN of 3 to the 
Tucson shovel-nosed snake.
    Desert tortoise, Sonoran (Gopherus morafkai)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.
    Gopher tortoise, eastern population (Gopherus polyphemus)--The 
following summary is based on information in our files. The gopher 
tortoise is a large, terrestrial, herbivorous turtle that reaches a 
total length up to 15 in (38 cm), and typically inhabits the sandhills, 
pine/scrub oak uplands, and pine flatwoods associated with the longleaf 
pine (Pinus palustris) ecosystem. A fossorial animal, the gopher 
tortoise is usually found in areas with well-drained, deep, sandy 
soils; an open tree canopy; and a diverse, abundant, herbaceous 
groundcover. The gopher tortoise ranges from extreme southern South 
Carolina south through peninsular Florida, and west through southern 
Georgia, Florida, southern Alabama, and Mississippi, into extreme 
southeastern Louisiana. The eastern population of the gopher tortoise 
in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Alabama (east of the Mobile 
and Tombigbee Rivers) is a candidate species; the gopher tortoise is 
federally listed as threatened in the western portion of its range, 
which includes Alabama (west of the Mobile and Tombigbee Rivers), 
Mississippi, and Louisiana.
    The primary threat to the gopher tortoise is habitat fragmentation, 
destruction, and modification (either deliberately or from 
inattention), including conversion of longleaf pine forests to other 
silvicultural or agricultural habitats, urbanization, shrub/hardwood 
encroachment (mainly from fire exclusion or insufficient fire 
management), and establishment and spread of invasive species. Other 
threats include disease, predation (mainly on nests and young 
tortoises), and inadequate regulatory mechanisms, specifically those 
needed to protect and enhance relocated tortoise populations in 
perpetuity. The magnitude of threats to the eastern range of the gopher 
tortoise is moderate to low, as populations extend over a broad 
geographic area and conservation measures are in place in some areas. 
However, because the species is currently being affected by a number of 
threats including destruction and modification of its habitat, disease, 
predation, exotics, and inadequate regulatory mechanisms, the threat is 
imminent. Thus, we have assigned a listing priority number of 8 for 
this species.
    Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale)--See 
above in ``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary 
is based on information contained in our files.

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, the Great Basin DPS 
of Columbia spotted frogs appear to be widely distributed throughout 
southwest Idaho, southeast Oregon, northeast and central Nevada, but 
most populations within this range appear to be small and isolated from 
each other. Recent work by researchers in Idaho and Nevada have 
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 susceptible to extinction processes. Development and poor 
management of Columbia spotted

[[Page 70019]]

frog habitat--including water development, improper grazing, mining 
activities, and nonnative species--have contributed and continue to 
contribute to the degradation and fragmentation of habitat. Emerging 
fungal diseases such as chytridiomycosis, Ranavirus outbreaks, and the 
spread of parasites may be contributing factors to Columbia spotted 
frog population declines throughout portions of its range. Effects of 
climate change such as drought and stochastic events such as fire often 
have detrimental effects to small, isolated populations and can often 
exacerbate existing threats. A 10-year Conservation Agreement and 
Strategy was signed in September 2003 for both the Northeast and the 
Toiyabe subpopulations in Nevada. The goals of the conservation 
agreements are to reduce threats to Columbia spotted frogs and their 
habitat to the extent necessary to prevent populations from becoming 
extirpated throughout all or a portion of their historical 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 historical range. Additionally, a CCAA was 
completed in 2006 for the Owyhee subpopulation at Sam Noble Springs, 
Idaho. Several habitat enhancement projects have been conducted 
throughout the DPS's range that have benefitted these populations. 
Because the DPS is widely distributed and there are management actions 
in place working to reduce the scope of threats to the speces, we 
conclude that the threats are moderate. The threats are imminent, 
because development and poor management of its habitat, and fungal 
diseases and parasites are already present. Based on imminent threats 
of moderate magnitude, we assigned an LPN of 9 to this DPS of the 
Columbia spotted frog.
    Mountain yellow-legged frog, Sierra Nevada DPS (Rana muscosa)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)--We continue to find that 
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Relict leopard frog (Lithobates onca)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. Natural relict leopard 
frog populations occur in two general areas in Nevada: Near the Overton 
Arm area of Lake Mead, and Black Canyon below Lake Mead. These two 
areas represent a small fraction of the historical distribution of the 
species. Its historical range included springs, streams, and wetlands 
within the Virgin River drainage downstream from the vicinity of 
Hurricane, Utah; along the Muddy River, Nevada; and along the Colorado 
River from its confluence with the Virgin River downstream to Black 
Canyon below Lake Mead, Nevada and Arizona.
    Factors contributing to the decline of the species include 
alteration, loss, and degradation of aquatic habitat due to water 
developments and impoundments, and scouring and erosion; changes in 
plant communities that result in dense growth and the prevalence of 
vegetation; introduced predators; climate change; and stochastic 
events. The presence of chytrid fungus in relict leopard frogs at Lower 
Blue Point Spring is a concern and warrants further evaluation of the 
threat of disease to the relict leopard frog. The size of natural and 
translocated populations is small, and, therefore, these populations 
are vulnerable to stochastic events, such as floods and wildfire. 
Climate change that results in reduced spring flow, habitat loss, and 
increased prevalence of wildfire would adversely affect relict leopard 
frog populations. In 2005, the National Park Service, in cooperation 
with the Fish and Wildlife Service and other Federal, State, and local 
partners, developed a conservation agreement and strategy intended to 
improve the status of the species through prescribed management actions 
and protection. Conservation actions identified in the agreement and 
strategy include captive rearing of tadpoles for translocation and 
refugium populations, habitat and natural history studies, habitat 
enhancement, population and habitat monitoring, and translocation. New 
sites within the historical range of the species have been successfully 
established with captive-reared frogs. Conservation is proceeding under 
the agreement and strategy; however, additional time is needed to 
determine whether or not the agreement and strategy will be effective 
in eliminating or reducing the threats to the point that the relict 
leopard frog can be removed from candidate status. In consideration of 
these conservation efforts and the overall threat level to the species, 
we determined the magnitude of existing threats is moderate to low. 
Potential water development and other habitat effects, presence of 
introduced predators, chytrid fungus, limited distribution, small 
population size, and climate change are ongoing and, therefore, 
imminent threats. Therefore, we assigned a listing priority number of 8 
to this species.
    Striped newt (Notophthalmus perstriatus)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. The striped newt is a 
small salamander that inhabits ephemeral ponds surrounded by upland 
habitats of high pine, scrubby flatwoods, and scrub. Longleaf pine-
turkey oak stands with intact ground cover containing wiregrass are the 
preferred upland habitat for striped newts, followed by scrub, then 
flatwoods. Life-history stages of the striped newt are complex, and 
include the use of both aquatic and terrestrial habitats throughout 
their life cycle. Striped newts are opportunistic feeders that prey on 
frog eggs, worms, snails, fairy shrimp, spiders, and insects (adult and 
larvae) that are of appropriate size. They occur in appropriate 
habitats from the Atlantic Coastal Plain of southeastern Georgia to the 
north-central peninsula of Florida and through the Florida panhandle 
into portions of southwest Georgia. There is a 125-km (78-mi) 
separation between the western and eastern portions of the striped 
newt's range.
    The historical range of the striped newt was likely similar to the 
current range. However, loss of native longleaf habitat, fire 
suppression, and the natural patchy distribution of upland habitats 
used by striped newts have resulted in fragmentation of existing 
populations. Other threats to the species include disease, drought, and 
inadequate regulatory mechanisms. The magnitude of threats from habitat 
loss, fire suppression, and disease are moderate, as most of the known 
striped newt metapopulations are on conservation lands, and, although 
disease has been found in similar species, no known metapopulations of 
striped newts have shown any evidence of disease. For drought, the 
magnitude is high because nearly all populations are affected, and

[[Page 70020]]

this factor may lead to possible extirpation. Also, throughout the 
entire range of the striped newt, droughts are predicted to be more 
severe and longer in the coming years, which could have a detrimental 
effect on the species' long-term survival. In sum, because we find that 
most of the threats are of a moderate magnitude, we find the overall 
threats that the striped newt is facing to be moderate in magnitude. 
The threats are ongoing and, therefore, imminent. Thus, we assigned a 
listing priority number of 8 to the newt.
    Berry Cave salamander (Gyrinophilus gulolineatus)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files. The Berry Cave salamander 
is recorded from Berry Cave in Roane County, from Mud Flats, Aycock 
Spring, Christian, Meades Quarry, Meades River, and Fifth caves in Knox 
County; from Blythe Ferry Cave in Meigs County; and from an unknown 
cave in Athens, McMinn County, Tennessee. In May of 2012, the species 
was also discovered in an additional cave, The Lost Puddle Cave, in 
Knox County. These cave systems are all located within the Upper 
Tennessee River and Clinch River drainages. A total of 113 caves in 
Middle and East Tennessee were surveyed from the time period of April 
2004 through June 2007, resulting in observations of 63 Berry Cave 
salamanders. These surveys concluded that Berry Cave salamander 
populations are robust at Berry and Mudflats caves where population 
declines had been previously reported and documented two new 
populations of Berry Cave salamanders at Aycock Spring and Christian 
caves. Three Berry Cave salamanders were spotted during the May, 2012, 
survey in The Lost Puddle and additional surveys are planned. Ongoing 
threats to this species are in the form of lye leaching in the Meades 
Quarry Cave as a result of past quarrying activities, a proposed 
roadway with potential to impact the recharge area for the Meades 
Quarry Cave system, urban development in Knox County, water quality 
impacts despite existing State and Federal laws, and hybridization 
between spring salamanders and Berry Cave salamanders in Meades Quarry 
Cave. These threats, coupled with confined distribution of the species 
and apparent low population densities, are all factors that leave the 
Berry Cave salamander vulnerable to extirpation. Although these threats 
are ongoing, the population levels are robust at two caves, and three 
new populations have been found at three additional caves. Therefore, 
we have determined that the Berry Cave salamander faces imminent 
threats of moderate magnitude. Based on moderate-magnitude, imminent 
threats, we assigned this species a listing priority number of 8.
    Yosemite toad (Anaxyrus canorus)--We continue to find that listing 
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication 
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that 
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted 
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed 
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this 
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under 
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk 
to the species.
    Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.

Fishes

    Headwater chub (Gila nigra)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files since 2006 and in the 12-month 
finding published in the Federal Register on May 3, 2006 (71 FR 26007). 
The headwater chub is a moderate-sized cyprinid fish. The range of the 
headwater chub has been reduced by approximately 60 percent. Twenty-
three streams (125 mi (200 km) of stream) are thought to be occupied 
out of 26 streams (312 mi (500 km) of stream) formerly occupied in the 
Gila River Basin in Arizona and New Mexico. All remaining populations 
are fragmented and isolated, and threatened by a combination of 
factors.
    Headwater chubs are threatened by introduced, nonnative fish that 
prey on them and compete with them for food. Habitat destruction and 
modification have occurred and continue 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 through habitat degradation. The 
fragmented nature and rarity of existing populations makes them 
vulnerable to other natural or manmade factors, such as drought and 
wildfire. Climate change is predicted to worsen these threats through 
increased aridity of the region, thus reducing stream flows and warming 
aquatic habitats, which makes the habitat more suitable to nonnative 
species.
    The Arizona Game and Fish Department's 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) was finalized in 2006. The New 
Mexico Department of Game and Fish has listed the headwater chub as 
endangered and in 2006 finalized a recovery plan for the species: 
Colorado River Basin Chubs (Roundtail Chub, Gila Chub (G. intermedia), 
and Headwater Chub) Recovery Plan. Arizona's agreement and New Mexico's 
recovery plan both recommend preservation and enhancement of extant 
populations and restoration of historical headwater-chub populations. 
The recovery and conservation actions prescribed by Arizona's and New 
Mexico's plans, which we predict will reduce and remove threats to this 
species, will require further discussions and authorizations as they 
are being implemented. The recently completed Arizona Game and Fish 
Department Sportfish Stocking Program's Conservation and Mitigation 
Program contains significant conservation actions for the headwater 
chub that will be implemented over the next 10 years.
    Existing information indicates that existing populations are stable 
and persisting in the long-term; 9 of the 23 extant stream populations 
are currently considered stable based on abundance and evidence of 
recruitment. Therefore, although threats are ongoing, the threats are 
moderate in magnitude. We have retained an LPN of 8 for this species at 
this time.
    Least chub (Iotichthys phlegethontis)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and in the petition 
received on June 25, 2007. The least chub is a small, colorful fish 
species in Utah that follows thermal patterns for habitat use. Least 
chub use flooded, warmer, vegetated marsh areas to spawn in the spring, 
and retreat to spring heads to overwinter as the water recedes in the 
late summer and fall. Historically, many least chub occurrences were 
reported across the State of Utah, but the current distribution of the 
species is highly reduced from its historical range. Currently, only 
six known wild populations remain, but one of these is considered 
functionally extirpated. Least chub also currently exist at several 
genetic refuge sites. The species faces

[[Page 70021]]

threats from the effects of livestock grazing, which affects most least 
chub sites despite efforts to protect least chub habitat with grazing 
exclosures and management plans. Least chub habitat also is affected by 
current and proposed future groundwater withdrawals, especially when 
combined with the threat of drought. These threats also act 
cumulatively with climate change to put the least chub at further risk. 
Existing regulatory mechanisms are currently inadequate to regulate 
groundwater withdrawals and ameliorate their effects on least chub 
habitat. Nonnative species, particularly mosquitofish, also are a 
continuing threat to least chub. There is no known means of controlling 
mosquitofish, and they have already caused the functional extirpation 
of one wild least chub population.
    In 1998, several State and Federal agencies, including the Service 
and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, developed a Least Chub 
Conservation Agreement and Strategy and formed the Least Chub 
Conservation Team. Their objectives are to eliminate or significantly 
reduce threats to the least chub and its habitat, and to ensure the 
continued existence of the species by restoring and maintaining a 
minimum number of least chub populations throughout its historical 
range. Recent State-led least chub conservation actions have included 
restoration of habitat affected by grazing, reintroduction and range 
expansion, nonnative removal, population monitoring, and working 
cooperatively with landowners to conserve water and aquatic habitat. 
This group also has recently begun a structured decision-making 
modeling process that will provide additional guidance for conservation 
activities.
    Overall, grazing, groundwater withdrawal, and predation by 
nonnative species are moderate magnitude threats; some populations are 
more negatively affected by these threats but in others the threats are 
not decreasing the populations or the threats are not present. The 
threats are imminent because the species is currently facing them in 
many portions of its range. Therefore, we have assigned the least chub 
an LPN of 7.
    Roundtail chub (Gila robusta), Lower Colorado River DPS--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the 12-month finding published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2009 
(74 FR 32352). The roundtail chub is a moderate to large cyprinid fish. 
The range of the roundtail chub has been reduced by approximately 68 to 
82 percent. Thirty-two streams are currently occupied, representing 
approximately 18 to 32 percent of the species' former range, or 800 km 
(500 mi) to 1,350 km (840 mi) of 3,050 km (1,895 mi) of formerly 
occupied streams in the Gila River Basin in Arizona and New Mexico. 
Most of the remaining populations are fragmented and isolated, and all 
are threatened by a combination of factors.
    Roundtail chub are threatened by introduced, nonnative fish that 
prey on them and compete with them for food. Habitat destruction and 
modification have occurred and continue 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 through habitat destruction or 
modification. The fragmented nature and rarity of existing populations 
make roundtail chub vulnerable to other natural or manmade factors, 
such as drought and wildfire. Climate change is predicted to worsen 
these threats through increased aridity of the region, thus reducing 
stream flows and warming aquatic habitats, which makes the habitat more 
suitable to nonnative species.
    The Arizona Game and Fish Department's Arizona Statewide 
Conservation Agreement for Roundtail Chub, Headwater Chub (G. nigra), 
Flannelmouth Sucker (Catostomus latipinnis), Little Colorado River 
Sucker (Catostomus spp.), Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus), and Zuni 
Bluehead Sucker (C. discobolus yarrowi) was finalized in 2006. The New 
Mexico Department of Game and Fish lists the roundtail chub as 
endangered and in 2006 finalized a recovery plan for the species: 
Colorado River Basin Chubs (Roundtail Chub, Gila Chub (G. intermedia), 
and Headwater Chub) Recovery Plan. Both the Arizona Agreement and the 
New Mexico Recovery Plan recommend preservation and enhancement of 
extant populations and restoration of historical roundtail chub 
populations. The recovery and conservation actions prescribed by the 
Arizona and New Mexico plans, which we predict will reduce and remove 
threats to this species, will require further discussions and 
authorizations as they are being implemented. The recently completed 
Arizona Game and Fish Department Sportfish Stocking Program's 
Conservation and Mitigation Program contains significant conservation 
actions for the roundtail chub that will be implemented over the next 
10 years.
    Although threats are ongoing, existing information indicates long-
term persistence and stability of existing populations. Currently, 7 of 
the 32 extant stream populations are considered stable, based on 
abundance and evidence of recruitment. One new conservation population 
was initially stocked in 2012, raising the number of extant populations 
to 33. Based on our assessment, threats (primarily nonnative species 
and habitat loss from land uses) remain imminent, because they are 
ongoing, and are of moderate magnitude because there is evidence of 
long-term persistence and stability of the existing popualtions. Thus, 
we have retained an LPN of 9 for this distinct population segment.
    Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini)--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 fish species 
occurs in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. The 
species is found most often in sand- or pebble-bottomed pools of small, 
spring-fed streams and marshes, with cool water and broadleaved aquatic 
vegetation. Its current distribution is indicative of a species that 
once was widely dispersed throughout its range, but has been relegated 
to isolated areas surrounded by unsuitable habitat that prevents 
dispersal.
    Factors influencing the current distribution include: Surface and 
groundwater irrigation resulting in decreased flows or stream 
dewatering; the dewatering of long reaches of riverine habitat 
necessary for species movement when surface flows do occur; conversion 
of prairie to cropland, which influences groundwater recharge and 
spring flows; water quality degradation from a variety of sources; and 
the construction of dams, which act as barriers preventing emigration 
upstream and downstream through the reservoir pool. The magnitude of 
threats facing this species is moderate to low, given the number of 
different locations where the species occurs and the fact that no 
single threat or combination of threats affects more than a portion of 
the widespread population occurrences. Overall, the threats are 
nonimminent as groundwater pumping is declining and development, 
spills, and runoff are not currently affecting the species rangewide. 
Thus, we are retaining an LPN of 11 for the Arkansas darter.
    Pearl darter (Percina aurora)--The following summary is based on

[[Page 70022]]

information contained in our files. Little is known about the specific 
habitat requirements or natural history of the Pearl darter. Pearl 
darters have been collected from a variety of river/stream attributes, 
mainly over gravel bottom substrate. This species is historically known 
only from localized sites within the Pascagoula and Pearl River 
drainages in Mississippi and Louisiana. Currently, the Pearl darter is 
considered extirpated from the Pearl River drainage and rare in the 
Pascagoula River drainage. Since 1983, the range of the Pearl darter 
has decreased by 55 percent.
    The Pearl darter is threatened by non-point source pollution caused 
by urbanization and other land use activities; gravel mining and 
resultant changes in river geomorphology, especially head cutting; and 
the possibility of water quantity decline from the proposed Department 
of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve project and a proposed dam on the 
Bouie River. Additional threats are posed by the apparent lack of 
adequate State and Federal water quality regulations due to the 
continuing degradation of water quality within the species' habitat. 
The Pearl darter's localized distribution and apparent low population 
numbers may indicate a species with lower genetic diversity, which 
would also make this species more vulnerable to catastrophic events. 
Threats affecting the Pearl darter are localized in nature, affecting 
only portions of the population within the drainage; thus, a threat 
magnitude of moderate to low is assigned for this species. In addition, 
the threats are considered imminent, as the identified threats are 
currently affecting this species in some portions of its range. 
Therefore, we have assigned a listing priority number of 8 for this 
species.
    Arctic grayling, Upper Missouri River DPS (Thymallus arcticus)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files. This 
fish species has a broad, nearly circumpolar distribution, occurring in 
a variety of cold-water habitats including small streams, large rivers, 
lakes, and even bogs. We determined in our September 8, 2010, status 
review (75 FR 54708) that the upper Missouri River population of arctic 
grayling in Montana and Wyoming represents a DPS because it is discrete 
due to geographic separation and genetic differences, and it is 
significant to the taxon as a whole. The historical range of Arctic 
grayling in the upper Missouri River basin has declined dramatically in 
the past century. The five remaining indigenous populations are 
isolated from one another by dams or other factors.
    All populations face potential threats from competition with and 
predation by nonnative trout, and most populations face threats 
resulting from the alteration of their habitats, such as habitat 
fragmentation from dams or irrigation diversion structures, stream 
dewatering, high summer water temperatures, loss of riparian habitats, 
and entrainment in irrigation ditches. Severe drought likely also 
affects all populations by reducing water availability and reducing the 
extent of thermally suitable habitat. Projected climate changes will 
likely influence the severity and scope of these threats in the future. 
As applied, existing regulatory mechanisms do not appear to be adequate 
to address the primary threats to arctic grayling. In addition, four of 
five populations are at risk from random environmental fluctuations and 
genetic drift due to their low abundance and isolation. The magnitude 
of these threats is high because one or more of these threats occurs in 
each known population in the Missouri River basin. The threats are 
imminent because they are currently occurring and are expected to 
continue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, we have assigned the 
upper Missouri River DPS of arctic grayling an LPN of 3.
    Sicklefin redhorse (Moxostoma sp.)--We continue to find that 
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Sharpnose shiner (Notropis oxyrhynchus)--We continue to find that 
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Smalleye shiner (Notropis buccula)--We continue to find that 
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Zuni bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus yarrowi)--We continue 
to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the 
date of publication of this notice. However, we are working on a 
proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the 
next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Rio Grande cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
our status review published on May 14, 2008 (73 FR 27900). Rio Grande 
cutthroat trout is one of 14 subspecies of cutthroat trout found in the 
western United States. Populations of this subspecies are in New Mexico 
and Colorado in drainages of the Rio Grande, Pecos, and Canadian 
rivers. Although once widely distributed in connected stream networks, 
Rio Grande cutthroat trout populations now occupy about 10 percent of 
historical habitat, and the populations are fragmented and isolated 
from one another. The majority of populations occur in high-elevation 
streams.
    Major threats include the loss of suitable habitat that has 
occurred and is likely to continue occurring due to water diversions, 
dams, stream drying, habitat quality degradation, and changes in 
hydrology; introduction of nonnative trout and ensuing competition, 
predation, and hybridization; and whirling disease. In addition, 
average air temperatures in the Southwest have increased about 1 [deg]C 
(2.5 [deg]F) in the past 30 years, and they are projected to increase 
by another 1.2 to 2.8 [deg]C (3 to 7 [deg]F) by 2050. Because trout 
require cold water, and water temperatures depend in large part on air 
temperature, there is concern that the habitat of Rio Grande cutthroat 
trout will further decrease in response to warmer water temperatures 
caused by climate change. Wildfire and

[[Page 70023]]

drought (stream drying) are additional threats to Rio Grande cutthroat 
trout populations that are likely to increase in magnitude in response 
to climate change. Research is occurring to assess the effects of 
climate change on this subspecies, and agencies are working to restore 
historically occupied streams and develop a conservation plan to direct 
conservation. The threats are of moderate magnitude because there is 
good distribution and a comparatively large number of populations 
across the landscape, some populations have few threats present, and in 
other areas management actions are being taken to help control the 
threat of nonnative trout. Overall, the threats are ongoing and, 
therefore, imminent. Based on imminent threats of moderate magnitude, 
we retain an LPN of 9 for this subspecies.

Clams

    Texas fatmucket (Lampsilis bracteata)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. The Texas fatmucket is a 
large, elongated freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. 
Its shell can be moderately thick, smooth, and rhomboidal to oval in 
shape. Its external coloration varies from tan to brown with continuous 
dark brown, green-brown, or black rays, and internally it is pearly 
white, with some having a light salmon tint. This species historically 
occurred throughout the Colorado and Guadalupe-San Antonio River basins 
but is now known to occur only in nine streams within these basins in 
very limited numbers. All existing populations are represented by only 
one or two individuals and are not likely to be stable or recruiting.
    The Texas fatmucket is primarily threatened by habitat destruction 
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby 
removing mussel habitat; decrease water quality; modify stream flows; 
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels. 
This species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and 
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats 
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate 
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated 
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the Texas fatmucket and its 
habitat are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory 
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species 
and its lack of mobility, these threats are likely to result in the 
extinction of the Texas fatmucket in the foreseeable future.
    The threats are such that the Texas fatmucket warrants listing; the 
threats are high in magnitude because habitat loss and degradation from 
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical 
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas fatmucket 
and profoundly affect its survival and recruitment. These threats are 
exacerbated by climate change, which will increase the frequency and 
magnitude of droughts. Remaining populations are small, isolated, and 
highly vulnerable to stochastic events, which could lead to extirpation 
or extinction. We consider these threats to be imminent because they 
are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future. Habitat loss 
and degradation have already occurred and will continue as the human 
population continues to grow in central Texas. Texas fatmucket 
populations may already be below the minimum viable population 
requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of populations and 
an increase in the species' vulnerability to extinction. Based on 
imminent, high-magnitude threats, we assigned the Texas fatmucket an 
LPN of 2.
    Texas fawnsfoot (Truncilla macrodon)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. The Texas fawnsfoot is a 
small, relatively thin-shelled freshwater mussel that is endemic to 
central Texas. Its shell is long and oval, generally free of external 
sculpturing, with external coloration that varies from yellowish- or 
orangish-tan, brown, reddish-brown, to smoky-green with a pattern of 
broken rays or irregular blotches. The internal color is bluish-white 
or white and iridescent posteriorly. This species historically occurred 
throughout the Colorado and Brazos River basins and is now known from 
only five locations. The Texas fawnsfoot has been extirpated from 
nearly all of the Colorado River basin and from much of the Brazos 
River basin. Of the populations that remain, only three are likely to 
be stable and recruiting; the remaining populations are disjunct and 
restricted to short stream reaches.
    The Texas fawnsfoot is primarily threatened by habitat destruction 
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby 
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows, 
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels, 
as well as by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and gravel mining, and 
chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats may be exacerbated 
by the current and projected effects of climate change, population 
fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated threat of nonnative 
species. Threats to the Texas fawnsfoot and its habitat are not being 
adequately addressed through existing regulatory mechanisms. Because of 
the limited distribution of this endemic species and its lack of 
mobility, these threats are likely to result in the extinction of the 
Texas fawnsfoot in the foreseeable future.
    The threats are such that the Texas fawnsfoot warrants listing; the 
threats are high in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation from 
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical 
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas fawnsfoot 
and profoundly affect its habitat. These threats are exacerbated by 
climate change, which will increase the frequency and magnitude of 
droughts. Remaining populations are small, isolated, and highly 
vulnerable to stochastic events. These threats are imminent because 
they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future. Habitat 
loss and degradation has already occurred and will continue as the 
human population continues to grow in central Texas. The Texas 
fawnsfoot populations may already be below the minimum viable 
population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of 
populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to 
extinction. Based on imminent, high-magnitude threats we assigned the 
Texas fawnsfoot an LPN of 2.
    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. The Texas hornshell is a freshwater mussel found in the 
Black River in New Mexico, and in 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. In 2011, the Rio Grande population near Laredo was 
resurveyed and found to be large and robust.
    The primary threats to this species are habitat alterations such as 
streambank channelization, impoundments, and diversions for agriculture 
and flood control (including a proposed low-water

[[Page 70024]]

diversion dam just downstream of the Rio Grande population near 
Laredo); contamination of water by oil and gas activity; alterations in 
the natural riverine hydrology; and increased sedimentation and flood 
pulses 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 under way in 
New Mexico, including the completion of a State recovery plan for the 
species, and are beginning in Texas on the Big Bend reach of the Rio 
Grande. Due to these ongoing conservation efforts, and because at least 
one of the populations appears to be robust, the magnitude of the 
threats is moderate. However, the threats to the species are ongoing 
and remain imminent. Thus, we maintained an LPN of 8 for this species.
    Golden orb (Quadrula aurea)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files. The golden orb is a small, round-
shaped freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. Its shell is 
smooth and unsculptured, except for concentric growth rings, and the 
external coloration varies from yellow-brown, gold, or orangish-brown 
to dark brown or black with some individuals having faint green rays. 
The internal color is bluish-white. This species historically occurred 
throughout the Nueces-Frio and Guadalupe-San Antonio River basins and 
is now known from only nine locations in four rivers. The golden orb 
has been eliminated from nearly the entire Nueces-Frio River basin. 
Four of these populations appear to be stable and reproducing, and the 
remaining five populations are small and isolated and show no evidence 
of recruitment. It appears that the populations in the middle Guadalupe 
and lower San Marcos Rivers are likely connected. The remaining extant 
populations are highly fragmented and restricted to short reaches.
    The golden orb is primarily threatened by habitat destruction and 
modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby 
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows, 
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels. 
The species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and 
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats 
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate 
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated 
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the golden orb and its habitat 
are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory 
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species 
and its lack of mobility, these threats may be likely to result in the 
extinction of the golden orb in the foreseeable future.
    The threats are such that the golden orb warrants listing; the 
threats are moderate in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation from 
impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical 
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the golden orb, but 
several large populations remain, including one that was recently 
discovered, suggesting that the threats are not high in magnitude. 
These threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will increase 
the frequency and magnitude of droughts. These threats are imminent 
because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable future. 
Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will continue as 
the human population continues to grow in central Texas. Several golden 
orb populations may already be below the minimum viable population 
requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of populations and 
an increase in the species' vulnerability to extinction. Based on 
imminent, moderate threats, we assigned the golden orb an LPN of 8.
    Smooth pimpleback (Quadrula houstonensis)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. The smooth pimpleback is a 
small, round-shaped freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. 
Its shell is moderately thick and inflated, and the external coloration 
varies from tan to light brown, dark brown, and black with little to no 
sculpturing. The internal color is silvery white. This species 
historically occurred throughout the Colorado and Brazos River basins 
and is now known from only nine locations. The smooth pimpleback has 
been eliminated from nearly the entire Colorado River and all but one 
of its tributaries, and has been limited to the central and lower 
Brazos River drainage. Five of the populations are represented by no 
more than a few individuals while six of the existing populations 
appear to be relatively stable and recruiting, while the remaining 
populations are small, isolated, and represented by only a few 
individuals.
    The smooth pimpleback is primarily threatened by habitat 
destruction and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, 
thereby removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream 
flows, and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater 
mussels. The species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, 
sand and gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these 
threats may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of 
climate change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the 
anticipated threat of nonnative species. Threats to the smooth 
pimpleback and its habitat are not being adequately addressed through 
existing regulatory mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of 
this endemic species and its lack of mobility, these threats may be 
likely to result in the extinction of the smooth pimpleback in the 
foreseeable future.
    The threats are such that the smooth pimpleback warrants listing; 
the threats are moderate in magnitude. Habitat loss and degradation 
from impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical 
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the smooth 
pimpleback, but several large populations remain, including one that 
was recently discovered, suggesting that the threats are not high in 
magnitude. These threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will 
increase the frequency and magnitude of droughts. These threats are 
imminent because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable 
future. Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will 
continue as the human population continues to grow in central Texas. 
Several smooth pimpleback populations may already be below the minimum 
viable population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number 
of populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to 
extinction. Based on imminent, moderate threats, we assigned the smooth 
pimpleback an LPN of 8.
    Texas pimpleback (Quadrula petrina)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files. The Texas pimpleback is a large, 
freshwater mussel that is endemic to central Texas. Its shell is 
generally smooth with the exception of growth lines and moderately 
thick and inflated. The external coloration ranges from yellowish-tan 
to dark brown with some individuals mottled or with dark green rays, 
and, internally, the nacre is white and iridescent posteriorly. This 
species historically occurred throughout the Colorado and Guadalupe-San 
Antonio River basins, but is now known to only occur in four streams 
within these basins. Only two populations appear large enough to be 
stable, but evidence of recruitment is limited in the Concho River 
population and is present in the

[[Page 70025]]

San Saba River population, which may be the only remaining recruiting 
populations of Texas pimpleback. The remaining two populations are 
represented by one or two individuals and are highly disjunct.
    The Texas pimpleback is primarily threatened by habitat destruction 
and modification from impoundments, which scour river beds, thereby 
removing mussel habitat, decrease water quality, modify stream flows, 
and prevent fish host migration and distribution of freshwater mussels. 
This species is also threatened by sedimentation, dewatering, sand and 
gravel mining, and chemical contaminants. Additionally, these threats 
may be exacerbated by the current and projected effects of climate 
change, population fragmentation and isolation, and the anticipated 
threat of nonnative species. Threats to the Texas pimpleback and its 
habitat are not being adequately addressed through existing regulatory 
mechanisms. Because of the limited distribution of this endemic species 
and its lack of mobility, these threats may be likely to result in the 
extinction of the Texas pimpleback in the foreseeable future.
    The threats are such that the Texas pimpleback warrants listing; 
the threats are high in magnitude because habitat loss and degradation 
from impoundments, sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, and chemical 
contaminants are widespread throughout the range of the Texas 
pimpleback and profoundly affect its survival and recruitment. 
Remaining populations are small, isolated, and highly vulnerable to 
stochastic events, which could lead to extirpation or extinction. These 
threats are exacerbated by climate change, which will increase the 
frequency and magnitude of droughts. We consider these threats to be 
imminent because they are ongoing and will continue in the foreseeable 
future. Habitat loss and degradation have already occurred and will 
continue as the human population continues to grow in central Texas. 
Texas pimpleback populations may already be below the minimum viable 
population requirement, which causes a reduction in the number of 
populations and an increase in the species' vulnerability to 
extinction. Based on imminent, high-magnitude threats, we assigned the 
Texas pimpleback an LPN of 2.

Snails

    Black mudalia (Elimia melanoides)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided 
in the petition we received on April 20, 2010. The black mudalia is a 
small snail that is found clinging to clean gravel, cobble, boulders, 
and logs in flowing water on shoals and riffles. The historical 
distribution of the black mudalia encompassed over 250 mi of stream 
channel in the upper Black Warrior River drainage in Alabama. The 
species has been extirpated from more than 80 percent of that range by 
the construction of two major dams on the main stem Black Warrior River 
and another dam on the lower Sipsey Fork. Other historical causes of 
range curtailment in the un-dammed river and stream channels of the 
upper Black Warrior River drainage include coal mine drainage, 
industrial and municipal pollution events, and agricultural runoff. The 
black mudalia is currently known from 10 shoal populations in five 
streams.
    Water quality and habitat degradation are the biggest threats to 
the continued existence of the black mudalia. Sources of point and 
nonpoint pollution in the Black Warrior River Basin have been numerous 
and widespread. Pollution is generated from inadequately treated 
effluent from industrial plants, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment 
plants, poultry operations, and cattle feedlots. Surface mining 
represents another threat to the biological integrity of stream 
habitats. Runoff from old, abandoned coal mines generates pollution 
through acidification, increased mineralization, and sediment loading. 
Most of the stream segments draining into black mudalia habitat 
currently support their water quality classification standards; 
however, the reach of the Locust Fork where the species is found is 
identified on the Alabama 303(d) List (a list of water bodies failing 
to meet their designated water-use classifications) as impaired by 
siltation, nutrients, and/or other habitat alterations. Overall the 
magnitude of threats is moderate. While all known populations are 
currently negatively affected by point or nonpoint source pollution, 
the discovery of surviving populations in shoals of five streams in the 
upper Black Warrior River reduces the magnitude of stochastic threats. 
Additional surveys that are currently underway will clarify the extent 
and status of black mudalia populations. The threats are ongoing, and 
therefore imminent. We assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
    Magnificent ramshorn (Planorbella magnifica)--Planorbella 
magnifica, or magnificent ramshorn, is the largest North American air-
breathing freshwater snail in the family Planorbidae. The magnificent 
ramshorn is believed to be a southeastern North Carolina endemic, 
though the complete historical range of the species is unknown. The 
species is known from only four sites in the lower Cape Fear River 
Basin in North Carolina. Salinity and pH are major factors limiting the 
distribution of the magnificent ramshorn, as the snail prefers 
freshwater bodies with pH within the range of 6.8 to 7.5.
    While several factors have likely contributed to the possible 
extirpation of the magnificent ramshorn in the wild, the primary 
factors include loss of habitat associated with the extirpation of 
beavers (and their impoundments) in the early 20th century, increased 
salinity and alteration of flow patterns, and increased input of 
nutrients and other pollutants. While efforts have been made to restore 
habitat for the magnificent ramshorn at one of the sites known to have 
previously supported the species, all of the sites continue to be 
affected or threatened by the same factors believed to have resulted in 
extirpation of the species from the wild. Currently, only two captive 
populations exist: a single robust captive population of the species 
comprised of approximately 100 adults, and a second small population of 
35 individuals. Although the robust captive population of the species 
has been maintained since 1993, a single catastrophic event, such as a 
severe storm, disease, or predator infestation, affecting this captive 
population could result in the near extinction of the species. Thus, 
the threats are high in magnitude and imminent, and we assigned this 
species an LPN of 2.
    Sisi snail (Ostodes strigatus)--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 sisi snail is a ground-
dwelling species in the Potaridae family, and is endemic to American 
Samoa. The species is now known from a single population on the island 
of Tutuila, American Samoa.
    This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and 
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails. The 
decline of the sisi snail in American Samoa has resulted, in part, from 
loss of habitat to forestry and agriculture and loss of forest 
structure to hurricanes and nonnative weeds that establish after these 
storms. All live sisi snails have been found in the leaf litter beneath 
remaining intact forest canopy. No snails were found in areas bordering 
agricultural plots or in forested areas that were severely damaged by 
three hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). Under natural historical 
conditions, loss

[[Page 70026]]

of forest canopy to storms did not pose a great threat to the long-term 
survival of these snails; enough intact forest with healthy populations 
of snails would support dispersal back into newly regrown forest 
canopy. However, the presence of nonnative weeds such as mile-a-minute 
vine (Mikania micrantha) may reduce the likelihood that native forests 
will re-establish in areas damaged by the hurricanes. This loss of 
habitat to storms is greatly exacerbated by expanding agriculture. 
Agricultural plots on Tutuila have spread from low elevation up to 
middle and some high elevations, greatly reducing the forested area and 
thus reducing the resilience of native forests and populations of 
native snails. These reductions also increase the likelihood that 
future storms will lead to the extinction of populations or species 
that rely on the remaining forest canopy. In an effort to eradicate the 
giant African snail (Achatina fulica), the nonnative rosy carnivore 
snail (Euglandina rosea) was introduced in 1980. The rosy carnivore 
snail has spread throughout the main island of Tutuila. Numerous 
studies show that the rosy carnivore snail feeds on endemic island 
snails including the sisi, and is a major agent in their declines and 
extirpations. At present, the major threat to long-term survival of the 
native snail fauna in American Samoa is predation by nonnative 
predatory snails. These threats are ongoing and are therefore imminent. 
As the threats occur throughout the entire range of the species and 
have a severe effect on the survival of the snails, they are of a high 
magnitude. Therefore we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Rosemont talussnail (Sonorella rosemontensis)--We continue to find 
that listing these species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Fragile tree snail (Samoana fragilis)--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. A tree-dwelling 
species, the fragile tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of 
snails, and is endemic to the islands of Guam and Rota (Mariana 
Islands). Requiring cool and shaded native forest habitat, the species 
is now known from one population on Guam and from one population on 
Rota.
    The fragile tree snail is currently threatened by habitat loss and 
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails and 
flatworms. Large numbers of Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus) (Guam 
and Rota), pigs (Sus scrofa) (Guam), water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) 
(Guam), and cattle (Bos taurus) (Rota) directly alter the understory 
plant community and overall forest microclimate, making it unsuitable 
for tree snails. Predation by the nonnative rosy carnivore snail 
(Euglandina rosea) and the Manokwar flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is 
a serious threat to the survival of the fragile tree snail. Field 
observations have established that the rosy carnivore snail and the 
Manokwar flatworm will readily feed on native Pacific island tree 
snails, including the Partulidae, such as those of the Mariana Islands. 
The rosy carnivore snail has caused the extirpation of many populations 
and species of native snails throughout the Pacific islands. The 
Manokwar flatworm has also contributed to the decline of native tree 
snails, in part due to its ability to ascend into trees and bushes that 
support native snails. Areas with populations of the flatworm usually 
lack partulid tree snails or have declining numbers of snails. Because 
all of the threats occur rangewide and have a significant effect on the 
survival of the fragile tree snail, they are high in magnitude, and the 
species has a relatively high likelihood of extinction. The threats are 
also ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species 
an LPN of 2.
    Guam tree snail (Partula radiolata)--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. A tree-dwelling species, 
the Guam tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails and 
is endemic to the island of Guam. Requiring cool and shaded native 
forest habitat, the species is now known from 22 populations on Guam.
    This species is primarily threatened by predation from nonnative 
predatory snails, flatworms, and rats. In addition, the species is also 
threatened by habitat loss and degradation. Predation by the nonnative 
rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea) and the nonnative Manokwar 
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is a serious threat to the survival of 
the Guam tree snail (see summary for the fragile tree snail, above). In 
addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious and ongoing 
threat to the Guam tree snail. On Guam, open agricultural fields and 
other areas prone to erosion were seeded with tangantangan (Leucaena 
leucocephala) by the U.S. Military. Tangantangan grows as a single 
species stand with no substantial understory. The microclimatic 
condition is dry with little accumulation of leaf litter humus and is 
unsuitable as Guam tree snail habitat. In addition, native forests 
cannot reestablish and grow where this nonnative weed has become 
established. Because all of the threats occur rangewide and have a 
significant effect on the survival of this snail species, they are high 
in magnitude, and the species has a relatively high likelihood of 
extinction. The threats are also ongoing and thus are imminent. 
Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Humped tree snail (Partula gibba)--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. A tree-dwelling species, 
the humped tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails, 
and was originally known from the island of Guam and the Commonwealth 
of the Northern Mariana Islands (islands of Rota, Aguiguan, Tinian, 
Saipan, Anatahan, Sarigan, Alamagan, and Pagan). Until recently, the 
species was known from a total of 14 populations on the islands of 
Guam, Rota, Aguiguan, Sarigan, Saipan, Alamagan, and Pagan. However, 
new (2011) information indicates that P. gibba may be found only on the 
islands of Guam, Saipan, Sarigan, and Pagan. This information also 
suggests that the individuals identified as P. gibba on Rota may be a 
different species. Although still the most widely distributed tree 
snail endemic in the Mariana Islands, remaining population sizes are 
often small.
    This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and 
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails, flat 
worms, and rats. Throughout the Mariana Islands, feral ungulates (pigs 
(Sus scrofa), Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus), cattle (Bos taurus), 
water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), and goats (Capra hircus)) have caused 
severe damage to native forest vegetation by browsing directly on 
plants, causing erosion, and retarding forest growth and regeneration. 
This in turn reduces the quantity and quality of forested habitat for 
the humped tree snail. Currently, populations of feral ungulates are 
found on the islands of Guam (deer, pigs, and water buffalo), Rota 
(deer and cattle), Aguiguan (goats), Saipan (deer, pigs, and cattle), 
Alamagan (goats, pigs, and

[[Page 70027]]

cattle), and Pagan (cattle, goats, and pigs). Goats were eradicated 
from Sarigan in 1998, and the humped tree snail has increased in 
abundance on that island, likely in response to the removal of all the 
goats. However, the population of humped tree snails on Anatahan is 
likely extirpated due to the massive volcanic explosions of the island 
beginning in 2003 and still continuing, and the resulting loss of up to 
95 percent of the vegetation on the island. Predation by the nonnative 
rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea), and the nonnative Manokwar 
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) is a serious threat to the survival of 
the humped tree snail (see summary for the fragile tree snail, above). 
In addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious and ongoing 
threat to the humped tree snail. The magnitude of threats is high 
because these nonnative predators cause significant population declines 
to the humped tree snail rangewide. These threats are ongoing and thus 
are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Langford's tree snail (Partula langfordi)--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. A tree-dwelling 
species, Langford's tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of 
snails, and is known from one population on the island of Aguiguan.
    This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and 
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails. In the 
1930s, the island of Aguiguan was mostly cleared of native forests to 
support sugar cane and pineapple production. The abandoned fields and 
airstrip are now overgrown with nonnative weeds. The remaining native 
forest understory has greatly suffered from large and uncontrolled 
populations of alien goats and the invasion of weeds. Goats (Capra 
hircus) have caused severe damage to native forest vegetation by 
browsing directly on plants, causing erosion, and retarding forest 
growth and regeneration. This, in turn, reduces the quantity and 
quality of forested habitat for Langford's tree snail. Predation by the 
nonnative rosy carnivore snail (Euglandina rosea) and by the Manokwar 
flatworm (Platydemus manokwari) (see summary for the fragile tree 
snail, above) is also a serious threat to the survival of Langford's 
tree snail. In addition, predation by rats (Rattus spp.) is a serious 
and ongoing threat to Langford's tree snail. All of the threats are 
occurring rangewide, and no efforts to control or eradicate the 
nonnative predatory snail species or rats, or to reduce habitat loss, 
are being undertaken. The magnitude of threats is high because they 
result in direct mortality and significant population declines to 
Langford's tree snail rangewide. A survey of Aguiguan in November 2006 
failed to find any live Langford's tree snails. These threats are also 
ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned this species an 
LPN of 2.
    Tutuila tree snail (Eua zebrina)--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. A tree-dwelling species, the 
Tutuila tree snail is a member of the Partulidae family of snails, and 
is endemic to American Samoa. The species is known from 32 populations 
on the islands of Tutuila, Nuusetoga, and Ofu.
    This species is currently threatened by habitat loss and 
modification and by predation from nonnative predatory snails and rats. 
All live Tutuila tree snails were found on understory vegetation 
beneath remaining intact forest canopy. No snails were found in areas 
bordering agricultural plots or in forested areas that were severely 
damaged by three hurricanes (1987, 1990, and 1991). (See summary for 
the sisi snail, above, regarding impacts of nonnative weeds and of the 
rosy carnivore snail.) Rats (Rattus spp.) have also been shown to 
devastate snail populations, and rat-chewed snail shells have been 
found at sites where the Tutuila snail occurs. At present, the major 
threat to the long-term survival of the native snail fauna in American 
Samoa is predation by nonnative predatory snails and rats. The 
magnitude of threats is high because they result in direct mortality 
and significant population declines to the Tutuila tree snail 
rangewide. The threats are also ongoing and thus are imminent. 
Therefore, we assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Huachuca springsnail (Pyrgulopsis thompsoni)--The following is 
based on information contained in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition received on May 11, 2004. The Huachuca 
springsnail inhabits approximately 19 springs in southeastern Arizona 
and two springs in Sonora, Mexico. The springsnail is typically found 
in shallow water habitats, often in rocky seeps at the spring source. 
Potential threats include habitat modification and destruction through 
catastrophic wildfire and unmanaged grazing at the landscape scale. 
Overall, the threats are low in magnitude because threats are not 
occurring throughout the range of the species uniformly and not all 
populations would likely be affected simultaneously by the known 
threats. We have no site-specific information indicating that grazing 
is currently ongoing in or adjacent to occupied habitats and 
catastrophic wildfire is not known to be an imminent threat. 
Accordingly, threats are nonimminent. Therefore, we retain an LPN of 11 
for this species.
    Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--See above in ``Listing 
Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based on 
information contained in our files.

Insects

    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus anthracinus)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the 
petition that we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus 
anthracinus is a species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family 
Colletidae) found in certain coastal areas and dry lowland forests 
containing native plant communities on the islands of Hawaii, 
Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. Hylaeus anthracinus is 
currently known from 13 populations comprised of an unknown number of 
individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and 
modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, 
wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus anthracinus is directly 
threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several species of 
nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species include the 
limited number of and small size of populations, competition from 
European honey bees, the possibility of habitat destruction from 
stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms 
affording protection to the species.
    Some Hylaeus anthracinus populations occur in areas that are 
managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no 
population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation 
on the species is not currently managed at any population site. We 
consider the threats to H. anthracinus to be high in magnitude because 
their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of 
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. anthracinus 
are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned 
this species an LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus assimulans)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the 
petition that we received

[[Page 70028]]

for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus assimulans is a species of 
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in certain coastal 
areas and dry lowland forests containing native plant communities on 
the islands of Hawaii, Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. 
Hylaeus assimulans is currently known from 13 populations comprised of 
an unknown number of individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing 
habitat loss and modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, 
nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus assimulans is 
directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several 
species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species 
include the limited number of and small size of populations, 
competition from European honey bees, the possibility of habitat 
destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of 
regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
    Some Hylaeus assimulans populations occur in areas that are managed 
for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no population 
is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the 
species is not currently managed at any population site. We consider 
the threats to H. assimulans to be high in magnitude because their 
severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of extinction 
throughout its entire range. The threats to H. assimulans are imminent, 
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this species an 
LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus facilis)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that 
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus facilis is a 
species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) with a wide 
historical range of native plant community habitat including coastal 
areas, lowland dry and wet forests, and montane mesic forests on the 
islands of Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. Now extirpated from the 
islands of Lanai and Maui, H. facilis is currently known from two 
populations comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This species 
is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to the 
effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate 
change. Hylaeus facilis is directly threatened by predation from 
yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional 
indirect threats to the species include the limited number of and small 
size of populations, competition from European honey bees, the 
possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic 
events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the 
species.
    Both of the Hylaeus facilis populations occur in areas that are 
managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no 
population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation 
upon the species is not currently managed within any population site. 
We consider the threats to H. facilis to be high in magnitude because 
their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of 
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. facilis are 
imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this 
species an LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus hilaris)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that 
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus hilaris is a 
cleptoparasitic species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family 
Colletidae) with a historical range in coastal habitat on the islands 
of Lanai, Maui, and Molokai. Now extirpated from the islands of Lanai 
and Maui, H. hilaris is currently known from a single population on 
Molokai comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This species is 
threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to the effects 
of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change. 
Hylaeus hilaris is directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket 
wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect 
threats to the species include the limited number of and small size of 
its population, competition from European honey bees, the possibility 
of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a 
lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
    The Hylaeus hilaris population occurs within a private preserve 
that is managed for one or more of the threats affecting habitat; 
however the population is not entirely protected from impacts to 
habitat, and predation upon the species is not currently managed at 
all. We consider the threats to H. hilaris to be high in magnitude 
because their severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of 
extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. hilaris are 
imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this 
species an LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus kuakea)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition that 
we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus kuakea is a 
species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in 
lowland mesic forests on the island of Oahu. Hylaeus kuakea is 
currently known from two populations comprised of an unknown number of 
individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and 
modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, 
wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus kuakea is directly threatened by 
predation from yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative 
ants. Additional indirect threats to the species include the limited 
number of and small size of populations, competition from European 
honey bees, the possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and 
catastrophic events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording 
protection to the species.
    Both Hylaeus kuakea populations occur in areas that are managed for 
one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however no population is 
entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the 
species is not currently managed within either population site. We 
consider the threats to H. kuakea to be high in magnitude because their 
severity endangers the species with a high likelihood of extinction 
throughout its entire range. The threats to H. kuakea are imminent, 
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have assigned this species an 
LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus longiceps)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and in the 
petition that we received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus 
longiceps is a species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) 
found in certain coastal areas and dry lowland forest containing native 
plant communities on the islands of Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. 
Hylaeus longiceps is currently known from six populations comprised of 
an unknown number of individuals. This species is threatened by ongoing 
habitat loss and modification due to the effects of feral ungulates, 
nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate change. Hylaeus longiceps is 
directly threatened by predation from yellowjacket wasps and several 
species of nonnative ants. Additional indirect threats to the species 
include the limited number of and small size of populations, 
competition from European honey bees, the possibility of habitat 
destruction from stochastic and catastrophic events, and a lack of 
regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the species.
    Some Hylaeus longiceps populations occur in areas that are managed 
for one or more of the threats affecting habitat;

[[Page 70029]]

however no population is entirely protected from impacts to habitat, 
and predation on the species is not currently managed within any 
population site. We consider the threats to H. longiceps to be high in 
magnitude because their severity endangers the species with a high 
likelihood of extinction throughout its entire range. The threats to H. 
longiceps are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we have 
assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Hylaeus mana)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and in the petition that we 
received for this species on March 23, 2009. Hylaeus mana is a species 
of Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (family Colletidae) found in lowland mesic 
forests on the island of Oahu. Hylaeus mana is currently known from a 
single population comprised of an unknown number of individuals. This 
species is threatened by ongoing habitat loss and modification due to 
the effects of feral ungulates, nonnative plants, wildfire, and climate 
change. Hylaeus mana is directly threatened by predation from 
yellowjacket wasps and several species of nonnative ants. Additional 
indirect threats to the species include the limited number of and small 
size of populations, competition from European honey bees, the 
possibility of habitat destruction from stochastic and catastrophic 
events, and a lack of regulatory mechanisms affording protection to the 
species.
    The Hylaeus mana population occurs in an area that is managed for 
one or more of the threats affecting habitat; however the population is 
not entirely protected from impacts to habitat, and predation on the 
species is not currently managed at all. We consider the threats to H. 
mana to be high in magnitude because their severity endangers the 
species with a high likelihood of extinction throughout its entire 
range. The threats to H. mana are imminent, because they are ongoing. 
Therefore, we have assigned this species an LPN of 2.
    Hermes copper butterfly (Hermelycaena [Lycaena] hermes)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files. 
Hermes copper butterfly primarily occurs in San Diego County, 
California, and a few records of the species have been documented in 
Baja California, Mexico. The species inhabits coastal sage scrub and 
southern mixed chaparral and is dependent on its larval host plant, 
Rhamnus crocea (spiny redberry), to complete its lifecycle. Adult 
Hermes copper butterflies lay single eggs on spiny redberry stems where 
they hatch and feed until pupation occurs at the base of the plant. 
Hermes copper butterflies have one flight period occurring in mid-May 
to early-July, depending on weather conditions and elevation. We 
estimate there were at least 57 known separate historical populations 
throughout the species' range since the species was first described. Of 
the 57 known Hermes copper butterfly populations, 17 are extant, 28 are 
believed to have been extirpated, and 12 are of unknown status.
    Primary threats to the Hermes copper butterfly are megafires (large 
wildfires), and small and isolated populations. Secondary threats 
include increased wildfire frequency that results in habitat loss, and 
combined impacts of existing development, possible future (limited) 
development, existing dispersal barriers, and megafires that result in 
fragmentation of habitat. The Hermes copper butterfly occupies 
scattered areas of sage scrub and chaparral habitat in an arid region 
susceptible to wildfires of increasing frequency and size. The 
likelihood that individuals of the species will be burned as a result 
of catastrophic wildfires, combined with the isolation and small size 
of extant populations makes the Hermes copper butterfly particularly 
vulnerable to population extirpation rangewide. Overall, the threats 
that the Hermes copper butterfly faces are high in magnitude because 
the major threats (particularly mortality due to wildfire and increased 
wildfire frequency) occur throughout all of the species' range and are 
likely to result in adverse impacts to the species. The threats are 
nonimminent overall because the presence of wildfire in the Hermes 
copper butterfly habitat occurs on a sporadic basis and we do not have 
the ability to predict when wildfires will occur. This species faces 
high-magnitude nonimminent threats; therefore, we assigned this species 
an LPN of 5.
    Mariana eight spot butterfly (Hypolimnas octucula mariannensis)--
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 Mariana eight spot butterfly is a nymphalid butterfly species 
that feeds upon two host plants, Procris pedunculata and Elatostema 
calcareum. Endemic to the islands of Guam and Saipan, the species is 
now only known from 10 populations on Guam. This species is currently 
threatened by predation and parasitism. The Mariana eight spot 
butterfly has extremely high mortality of eggs and larvae due to 
predation by nonnative ants and wasps. Because the threat of parasitism 
and predation by nonnative insects occurs rangewide and can cause 
significant population declines to this species, they are high in 
magnitude. The threats are imminent because they are ongoing. 
Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 3 for this subspecies.
    Mariana wandering butterfly (Vagrans egistina)--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 Mariana wandering butterfly is a nymphalid butterfly species that 
feeds upon a single host plant species, Maytenus thompsonii. Originally 
known from and endemic to the islands of Guam and Rota, the species is 
now known from one population on Rota. This species is currently 
threatened by nonnative predation and parasitism. The Mariana wandering 
butterfly is likely predated by nonnative ants and parasitized by 
native and nonnative parasitoids. Because the threats of parasitism and 
predation by nonnative insects occur rangewide and can cause 
significant population declines to this species, leading to a 
relatively high likelihood of extinction, they are high in magnitude. 
These threats are imminent because they are ongoing. Therefore, we 
assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.
    Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly (Atlantea tulita)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files and in the petition we 
received on Feburary 29, 2009. The Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly is 
endemic to Puerto Rico, and one of the four species endemic to the 
Greater Antilles within the genus Atlantea. This species occurs within 
the subtropical moist forest life zone in the northern karst region 
(i.e., municipality of Quebradillas) of Puerto Rico, and in the 
subtropical wet forest (i.e., Maricao Commonwealth Forest, municipality 
of Maricao). The Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly has only been found 
utilizing Oplonia spinosa (prickly bush) as its host plant (i.e., plant 
used for laying the eggs, also serves as a food source for development 
of the larvae).
    The primary threats to the Puerto Rican harlequin butterfly are 
development, habitat fragmentation, and other natural or manmade 
factors such as human-induced fires, use of herbicides and pesticides, 
vegetation management, and climate change. These factors would 
substantially affect the distribution and abundance of the species, as 
well as its habitat. In addition, the lack of effective enforcement 
makes the existing policies and regulations inadequate for the 
protection of the species' habitat. These threats are high in magnitude 
and

[[Page 70030]]

imminent because known populations occur in areas that are subject to 
development, increased traffic, and increased road maintenance and 
construction. Such threats directly affect populations during all life 
stages. We expect these threats to continue and potentially increase in 
the foreseeable future. Therefore, we assigned a LPN of 2 to this 
species.
    Sequatchie caddisfly (Glyphopsyche sequatchie)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. The Sequatchie 
caddisfly is known from two spring runs that emerge from caves in 
Marion County, Tennessee--Owen Spring Branch (the type locality) and 
Martin Spring run in the Battle Creek system. In 1998, biologists 
estimated population sizes at 500 to 5,000 individuals for Owen Spring 
Branch and 2 to 10 times higher at Martin Spring, due to the greater 
amount of apparently suitable habitat. In spite of greater amounts of 
suitable habitat at the Martin Spring run, Sequatchie caddisflies are 
more difficult to find at this site, and in 2001 (the most recent 
survey), the Sequatchie caddisfly was ``abundant'' at the Owen Spring 
Branch location, while only two individuals were observed at the Martin 
Spring.
    Threats to the Sequatchie caddisfly include siltation, point and 
nonpoint discharges from municipal and industrial activities, and 
introduction of toxicants during episodic events. These threats, 
coupled with the extremely limited distribution of the species, its 
apparent small population size, the limited amount of occupied habitat, 
ease of accessibility, and the annual life cycle of the species, are 
all factors that leave the Sequatchie caddisfly vulnerable to 
extirpation. Therefore, the magnitude of the threat is high. These 
threats are gradual and not imminent. Based on high-magnitude and 
nonimminent threats, we assigned this species an LPN of 5.
    Clifton Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus caecus)--The following 
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new 
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. 
Clifton Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory 
insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is cave dependent, 
and is not found outside the cave environment. Clifton Cave beetle is 
only known from two privately owned Kentucky caves. Soon after the 
species was first collected in 1963 in one cave, the cave entrance was 
enclosed due to road construction. We do not know whether the species 
still occurs at the original location or if it has been extirpated from 
the site by the closure of the cave entrance. Other caves in the 
vicinity of this cave were surveyed for the species during 1995 and 
1996, and only one additional site was found to support the Clifton 
Cave beetle. The limestone caves in which the Clifton Cave beetle is 
found provide a unique and fragile environment that supports a variety 
of species that have evolved to survive and reproduce under the 
demanding conditions found in cave ecosystems. The limited distribution 
of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that would only 
have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. Events such as 
toxic chemical spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water, 
or indirect impacts from off-site construction activities, closure of 
entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances, 
could have serious adverse impacts on this species. Therefore, the 
magnitude of threat is high for this species. The threats are 
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would 
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an 
LPN of 5 to this species.
    Coleman cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus colemanensis)--The following 
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new 
information was provided in the petition we received on April 20, 2010. 
The Coleman cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory 
insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is cave dependent 
and is not found outside the cave environment. It is only known from 
three Tennessee caves. The limestone caves in which this species is 
found provide a unique and fragile environment that support a variety 
of species that have evolved to survive and reproduce under the 
demanding conditions found in cave ecosystems. Caves and the species 
that are completely dependent upon them receive the energy that forms 
the basis of the cave food chain from outside the cave. This energy can 
be in the form of bat guano deposited by cave-dependent bats, large or 
small woody debris washed or blown into the cave, or tiny bits of 
organic matter that are carried into the cave by water through small 
cracks in the rocks overlaying the cave.
    The Coleman cave beetle was originally known only from privately 
owned Coleman Cave in Montgomery County. This cave formerly supported a 
colony of endangered gray bats (Myotis grisescens). The bats have 
abandoned this cave because of air flow changes in the cave caused by 
closure of an upper entrance to the cave. Although the cave is 
protected by a cooperative management agreement with the landowner, the 
upper entrance has not been restored, and the bats have not returned to 
the cave. A new location for the species was discovered during a 
biological inventory of Foster Cave (also known as Darnell Cave). One 
specimen of the species was found during that survey. Foster Cave is on 
a preserve owned and managed by the Tennessee Department of 
Conservation. In 2006, specimens of this species were discovered in 
Bellamy Cave and in Darnell Spring Cave (part of the same cave complex 
as Foster Cave). All of these sites are in close proximity to each 
other. Bellamy Cave is owned and managed by the Tennessee Wildlife 
Resources Agency (TWRA). Both Foster Cave and Bellamy Cave were first 
acquired and protected by The Nature Conservancy and later transferred 
to the State for long-term protection and management. The threats are 
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would 
affect the species in the next few years. Because the species occurs at 
four locations and receives some protection under a cooperative 
management agreement and protective ownership, the magnitude of threats 
is moderate to low. Thus, we have assigned an LPN of 11 to this 
species.
    Icebox Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus frigidus)--The following 
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new 
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. 
Icebox Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory insect 
that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is not found outside the 
cave environment and is only known from one privately owned Kentucky 
cave.
    The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique 
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have 
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found 
in cave ecosystems. The species has not been observed since it was 
originally collected, but species experts believe that it may still 
exist in the cave in low numbers. The limited distribution of the 
species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a 
minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. Events such as toxic 
chemical spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water, or 
indirect impacts from off-site construction activities, closure of 
entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances, 
could have serious adverse impacts on this species.

[[Page 70031]]

Therefore, the magnitude of threat is high for this species because it 
is limited in distribution and the threats would result in a high level 
of mortality or reduced reproductive capacity. The threats are 
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would 
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an 
LPN of 5 to this species.
    Inquirer Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus inquisitor)--The following 
summary is based upon information contained in our files. No new 
information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. 
The Inquirer Cave beetle is a fairly small, eyeless, reddish-brown, 
predatory insect that feeds upon small cave invertebrates. It is not 
found outside the cave environment and is only known from one privately 
owned Tennessee cave.
    The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique 
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have 
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found 
in cave ecosystems. The species was last observed in 2006. The limited 
distribution of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated events that 
would only have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging insects. The area 
around the only known site for the species is in a rapidly expanding 
urban area. The entrance to the cave is protected by the landowner 
through a cooperative management agreement with the Service, The Nature 
Conservancy and Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency; however, a 
sinkhole that drains into the cave system is located away from the 
protected entrance and is near a highway. Events such as toxic chemical 
spills or discharges of large amounts of polluted water or indirect 
impacts from off-site construction activities could adversely affect 
the species and the cave habitat. The magnitude of threat is high for 
this species because it is limited in distribution and the threats 
would have severe negative impacts on its continued existence. The 
threats are nonimminent because there are no known projects planned 
that would affect the species in the near future and it receives some 
protection under a cooperative management agreement. We therefore have 
assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
    Louisville Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus troglodytes)--The 
following summary is based upon information contained in our files. No 
new information was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 
2004. The Louisville Cave beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, 
predatory insect that feeds upon cave invertebrates. It is not found 
outside the cave environment and is only known from two privately owned 
Kentucky caves.
    The limestone caves in which this species is found provide a unique 
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have 
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found 
in cave ecosystems. The limited distribution of the species makes it 
vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a minimal effect on 
more wide-ranging insects. Events such as toxic chemical spills or 
discharges of large amounts of polluted water, or indirect impacts from 
off-site construction activities, closure of entrances, alteration of 
entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have serious adverse 
impacts on this species. The magnitude of threat is high for this 
species, because it is limited in distribution and the threats would 
have severe negative impacts on the species. The threats are 
nonimminent because there are no known projects planned that would 
affect the species in the near future. We therefore have assigned an 
LPN of 5 to this species.
    Tatum Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus parvus)--The following summary 
is based upon information contained in our files. No new information 
was provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Tatum Cave 
beetle is a small, eyeless, reddish-brown, predatory insect that feeds 
upon cave invertebrates. It is not found outside the cave environment 
and is only known from one privately owned Kentucky cave.
    The limestone cave in which this species is found provides a unique 
and fragile environment that supports a variety of species that have 
evolved to survive and reproduce under the demanding conditions found 
in cave ecosystems. The species has not been observed since 1965, but 
species experts believe that it still exists in low numbers. The 
limited distribution of the species makes it vulnerable to isolated 
events that would only have a minimal effect on more wide-ranging 
insects. Events such as toxic chemical spills or discharges of large 
amounts of polluted water, or indirect impacts from off-site 
construction activities, closure of entrances, alteration of entrances, 
or the creation of new entrances, could have serious adverse impacts on 
this species. The magnitude of threat is high for this species, because 
its limited numbers mean that any threats could severely affect its 
continued existence. The threats are nonimminent because there are no 
known projects planned that would affect the species in the near 
future. We therefore have assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
    Orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly (Megalagrion xanthomelas)--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 orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly is a stream-dwelling species 
endemic to the Hawaiian Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, Lanai, 
and Hawaii. The species no longer is found on Kauai, and is now 
restricted to 16 populations on the islands of Oahu, Maui, Molokai, 
Lanai, and Hawaii. This species is threatened by predation from 
nonnative aquatic species such as fish and predacious insects, and by 
habitat loss through dewatering of streams and invasion by nonnative 
plants. Nonnative fish and insects prey on the naiads of the damselfly, 
and loss of water reduces the amount of suitable naiad habitat. 
Invasive plants (e.g., California grass (Brachiaria mutica)) also 
contribute to loss of habitat by forming dense, monotypic stands that 
completely eliminate open water. Nonnative fish and plants are found in 
all the streams where orangeblack Hawaiian damselflies occur, except at 
the Oahu location, where there are no nonnative fish. Predation and 
habitat loss are ongoing and therefore imminent; they are of moderate 
magnitude, because they affect the survival of the species to varying 
degrees throughout the species' range. We therefore assign an LPN of 8 
to this species.
    Stephan's riffle beetle (Heterelmis stephani)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.
    Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae)--We continue to find that listing 
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication 
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that 
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted 
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed 
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this 
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under 
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk 
to the species.
    Meltwater lednian stonefly (Lednia tumana)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files and in the petition we 
received on July 30, 2007. This species is an aquatic insect in the 
order Plecoptera (stoneflies). Stoneflies are primarily

[[Page 70032]]

associated with clean, cool streams and rivers. Eggs and nymphs 
(juveniles) of the meltwater lednian stonefly are found in high-
elevation, alpine, and subalpine streams, most typically in locations 
closely linked to glacial runoff. The species is generally restricted 
to streams with mean summer water temperature less than 10 [deg]C (50 
[deg]F). Adults emerge from the nymph stage and mate in streamside 
vegetation. The only known meltwater lednian stonefly occurrences are 
within Glacier National Park (NP), Montana.
    Climate change, and the associated effects of glacier loss (with 
glaciers predicted to be gone by 2030)--including reduced streamflows, 
and increased water temperatures--are expected to significantly reduce 
the occurrence of populations and extent of suitable habitat for the 
species in Glacier NP. In addition, the existing regulatory mechanisms 
do not address environmental changes due to global climate change. We 
announced candidate status for the meltwater lednian stonefly in a 
warranted-but precluded 12-month petition finding published on April 5, 
2011 (76 FR 18684). We have assigned the species an LPN of 5 based on 
three criteria: (1) The high magnitude of threat, which is projected to 
substantially reduce the amount of suitable habitat relative to the 
species' current range; (2) the low imminence of the threat based on 
the lack of documented evidence that climate change is affecting 
stonefly habitat; and (3) the taxonomic status of the species, which is 
a full species.
    Highlands tiger beetle (Cicindela highlandensis)--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 Highlands tiger beetle is narrowly distributed and restricted to 
areas of bare sand within scrub and sandhill on ancient sand dunes of 
the Lake Wales Ridge in Polk and Highlands Counties, Florida. Adult 
tiger beetles have been most recently found at 40 sites at the core of 
the Lake Wales Ridge. In 2004-2005 surveys, a total of 1,574 adults 
were found at 40 sites, compared with 643 adults at 31 sites in 1996, 
928 adults at 31 sites in 1995, and 742 adults at 21 sites in 1993. Of 
the 40 sites in the 2004-2005 surveys with one or more adults, results 
ranged from 3 sites with large populations of over 100 adults, to 13 
sites with fewer than 10 adults. Results from a limited removal study 
at four sites and similar studies suggested that the actual population 
size at some survey sites can be as much as two times as high as 
indicated by the visual index counts. If assumptions are correct and 
unsurveyed habitat is included, then the total number of adults at all 
survey sites might be 3,000 to 4,000.
    Habitat loss and fragmentation and lack of fire and disturbances to 
create open habitat conditions are serious threats; remaining patches 
of suitable habitat are disjunct and isolated. Populations occupy 
relatively small patches of habitat and are small and isolated; 
individuals have difficulty dispersing between suitable habitats. These 
factors pose serious threats to the species. Although significant 
progress in implementing prescribed fire has occurred over the last 10 
years through collaborative partnerships and the Lake Wales Ridge 
Prescribed Fire Team, a backlog of long-unburned habitat within 
conservation areas remains. Overcollection and pesticide use are 
additional concerns. Because this species is narrowly distributed with 
specific habitat requirements and small populations, any of the threats 
could have a significant impact on the survival of the species, leading 
to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, the magnitude 
of threats is high. Although the majority of its historical range has 
been lost, degraded, and fragmented, numerous sites are protected, and 
land managers are implementing prescribed fire at some sites; these 
actions are expected to restore habitat and help reduce threats and 
have already helped stabilize and improve the populations. Habitat 
management at some sites may be forestalling the threat of vegetation 
encroaching into bare sand areas needed by the beetle. While the 
species is inherently vulnerable to extinction due to its low 
population sizes, restricted range, small and isolated habitat patches, 
and difficulty in dispersal between suitable habitats, the immediacy of 
these threats is unknown. Thus, overall, the threats are nonimminent. 
Therefore, we assigned the Highlands tiger beetle an LPN of 5.

Arachnids

    Warton's cave meshweaver (Cicurina wartoni)--The Warton's Cave 
meshweaver is an eyeless, cave-dwelling, unpigmented, 0.23-inch-long 
invertebrate known only from female specimens. This meshweaver is known 
to occur in only one cave (Pickle Pit) in Travis County, Texas. Primary 
threats to the species and its habitat are predation and competition 
from red-imported fire ants, surface and subsurface effects from 
polluted runoff from an adjacent subdivision, unauthorized entry into 
the area surrounding the cave, and trash dumping that may include toxic 
materials near the feature. The magnitude of threats is now considered 
low to moderate based on observations made during field visits to 
Pickle Pit in November 2011 and March 2012. For example, Pickle Pit is 
receiving some protection because it is in a mitigation preserve for 
the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia). While adequate 
fencing has not been completed, we did not see trails or other signs of 
recent human use in the immediate vicinity of the cave. Also, despite 
the fact that this preserve is not receiving red-imported fire ant 
treatment, we did not see many red-imported fire ants in the immediate 
area. Because fire ants have been found and fencing to eliminate human 
use has not been completed, the threats are ongoing (imminent). Thus, 
we assigned this species a LPN of 8.

Crustaceans

    Anchialine pool shrimp (Metabetaeus lohena)--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. Metabetaeus 
lohena is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to 
the family Alpheidae. This species was originally thought to be endemic 
to the Hawaiian Islands with populations on the islands of Oahu, Maui, 
and Hawaii. Recent information indicates this species may also occur in 
Rapa Nui, a special territory of Chile. The current status of this 
species in Rapa Nui and the primary threats there are unknown at this 
time.
    The primary threats to this species in Hawaii are predation by fish 
(which do not naturally occur in the pools inhabited by this species) 
and habitat loss from degradation (primarily from illegal trash 
dumping). The pools where this species occurs on the islands of Maui 
and Hawaii are located within State Natural Area Reserves (NAR) and in 
a National Park. Both the State NARs and the National Park prohibit the 
collection of the species and the disturbance of the pools. However, 
enforcement of collection and disturbance prohibitions is difficult, 
and the negative effects from the introduction of fish are extensive 
and happen quickly. On Oahu, four pools are located in a National 
Wildlife Refuge and are protected from collection and disturbance to 
the pool; however, on State-owned land where the species occurs, there 
is no protection from collection or disturbance of the pools. Because 
of the limited number of sites where this species occurs, collection or 
disturbance of the species, particularly

[[Page 70033]]

on State-owned lands, could have a significant adverse effect on the 
survival of the species, leading to a relatively high likelihood of 
extinction, and are of a high magnitude. However, the primary threats 
of predation from fish and loss of habitat due to degradation are 
nonimminent overall, because on the islands of Maui and Hawaii no fish 
were observed in any of the pools where this species occurs and there 
has been no documented trash dumping in these pools. Only one site on 
Oahu had a trash dumping instance, and in that case the trash was 
cleaned up immediately, and the species was subsequently observed. No 
additional dumping events are known to have occurred. We have assigned 
this species an LPN of 5. The Service is currently seeking any 
additional information on the status of, and the threats to, the 
population(s) of Metabetaeus lohena in any location outside of the 
United States. The Service may consider removing this species as a 
candidate for listing depending upon our review of new information 
regarding the status and distribution of this species outside the 
United States.
    Anchialine pool shrimp (Palaemonella burnsi)--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. Palaemonella 
burnsi is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to 
the family Palaemonidae. This species was originally thought to be 
endemic to the Hawaiian Islands with populations on the islands of Maui 
at three sites and Hawaii in several pools at one site. Recent 
information indicates this species may also occur in the Ryukyu 
Islands, Japan. The current status of this species in the Ryukyu 
Islands and the primary threats there are unknown at this time.
    The primary threats to this species are predation by nonnative fish 
(which do not naturally occur in the pools inhabited by this species) 
and habitat loss due to degradation (primarily from illegal trash 
dumping). The pools where this species occurs on Maui are located 
within a State Natural Area Reserve (NAR). Hawaii's State statutes 
prohibit the collection of the species and the disturbance of the pools 
in State NARs. On the island of Hawaii, the species occurs within a 
State NAR and a National Park, where collection and disturbance are 
also prohibited. However, enforcement of these prohibitions is 
difficult, and the negative effects from the introduction of fish are 
extensive and happen quickly, in part because the pools are very small. 
Therefore, threats to this species could have a significant adverse 
effect on the survival of the species, leading to a relatively high 
likelihood of extinction, and are of a high magnitude. However, the 
threats are nonimminent, because surveys in 2004 and 2007 did not find 
fish in the pools where these shrimp occur on Maui or the island of 
Hawaii. Also, there was no evidence of recent habitat degradation at 
those pools. We assigned this species an LPN of 5. The Service is 
currently seeking any additional information on the status of, and the 
threats to, the population(s) of Palaemonella burnsi in any location 
outside of the United States. The Service may consider removing this 
species as a candidate for listing depending upon our review of new 
information regarding the status and distribution of this species 
outside the United States.
    Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris hawaiana)--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. Procaris hawaiana 
is an anchialine pool-inhabiting species of shrimp belonging to the 
family Procarididae. This species is endemic to the Hawaiian Islands, 
and is currently known from 2 pools on the island of Maui and 13 pools 
on the island of Hawaii. The primary threats to this species are 
predation from fish (which do not naturally occur in the pools 
inhabited by this species) and habitat loss due to degradation 
(primarily from illegal trash dumping). The pools where this species 
occurs on Maui are located within a State Natural Area Reserve (NAR). 
Hawaii's State statutes prohibit the collection of the species and the 
disturbance of the pools in State NARs. Twelve of the pools on the 
island of Hawaii are also located within a State NAR. However, 
enforcement of these prohibitions is difficult, and the negative 
effects from the introduction of fish are extensive and happen quickly. 
In addition, there are no prohibitions for either removal of the 
species or disturbance to the pool for the one pool located outside a 
NAR on the island of Hawaii. Therefore, threats to this species could 
have a significant adverse effect on the survival of the species, 
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction, and thus remain 
at a high magnitude. However, the threats to the species are 
nonimminent because, during 2004 and 2007 surveys, no fish were 
observed in the pools where these shrimp occur on Maui, and no fish 
were observed in the one pool on the island of Hawaii that was surveyed 
in 2005. In addition, there were no signs of trash dumping or fill in 
any of the pools where the species occurs. Therefore, we assigned this 
species an LPN of 5.

Flowering Plants

    Abronia alpina (Ramshaw Meadows sand-verbena)--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. 
Abronia alpina is a small perennial herb in the Nyctaginaceae (four o-
clock) family, 2.5 to 15.2 cm (1 to 6 in) across, forming compact mats 
of lavender-pink, trumpet-shaped, and generally fragrant flowers. 
Abronia alpina is known from one main population center at Ramshaw 
Meadow and a smaller population at the adjacent Templeton Meadow. The 
meadows are located on the Kern River Plateau in the Sierra Nevada, on 
lands administered by the Inyo National Forest, in Tulare County, 
California. The total estimated area occupied is approximately 6 ha (15 
ac). The population fluctuates from year to year without any clear 
trends. Population estimates for the years from 1985 through 2009 range 
from a high of approximately 130,000 plants in 1997, to a low of 
approximately 40,000 plants in 2003. In 2009, when the population was 
last monitored, the estimated total population increased again to just 
over 120,000 plants. The factors currently threatening Abronia alpina 
include natural and human habitat alteration, lowering of the water 
table due to erosion within the meadow system, and recreational use 
within meadow habitats. Lodgepole pines are encroaching upon meadow 
habitat with trees germinating within A. alpina habitat, occupying up 
to 20 percent of two A. alpina subpopulations. Lodgepole pine 
encroachment may alter soil characteristics by increasing organic 
matter levels, decreasing porosity, and moderating diurnal temperature 
fluctuations, thus reducing the competitive ability of A. alpina to 
persist in an environment more hospitable to other plant species.
    The habitat occupied by Abronia alpina directly borders the meadow 
system, which is supported by the South Fork of the Kern River. The 
river flows through the meadow, at times coming within 15 m (50 ft) of 
Abronia alpina habitat, particularly in the vicinity of five 
subpopulations. Livestock trampling, along with the removal of bank 
stabilizing vegetation by grazing livestock, has contributed to 
downcutting of the river channel through the meadow, leaving the meadow 
subject to potential alteration by lowering of the water table. In 
2001,

[[Page 70034]]

the U.S. Forest Service began resting the grazing allotment for 10 
years, eliminating cattle use up through the present time. The U.S. 
Forest Service is currently assessing the data collected on the rested 
allotment and, if the data indicate that sufficient watershed recovery 
has occurred, may conduct an environmental analysis to consider 
resumption of grazing.
    Established hiker, packstock, and cattle trails pass through A. 
alpina subpopulations. Two main hiker trails pass through Ramshaw 
Meadow, but in 1988 and 1997, they were rerouted out of A. alpina 
subpopulations where feasible. Occasional incidental use by horses and 
hikers sometimes occurs on the remnants of cattle trails that pass 
through subpopulations in several places The Service has funded studies 
to determine appropriate conservation measures for the species, and is 
working with the U.S. Forest Service on developing a conservation 
strategy for the species. The remaining threat affects individuals in 
the population and has not appeared to have population-level effects. 
Therefore, the threats are low in magnitude. In addition, because the 
grazing activities have been eliminated for the time being and the 
hiking trails have been rerouted, the threats are nonimminent. The LPN 
for A. alpina remains an 11 due to the presence of moderate to low 
threats, and the determination that the threats are nonimminent at this 
point in time.
    Agave eggersiana (no common name)--Agave eggersiana, is an herb of 
the family Agavaceae endemic to the island of St. Croix in the U.S. 
Virgin Islands. Approximately 450 individuals in 10 localities are 
known to exist around this island. The species currently occurs in six 
areas that appear to be remnants of wild populations. The other four 
populations are introduced individuals planted for conservation. The 
primary threats to Agave eggersiana are from habitat modification and 
from natural or manmade factors. The species occurs in areas either 
threatened by development pressure, or currently affected by landscape 
practices and competition with exotic species, resulting in detrimental 
effects to its reproduction and recruitment. In addition, threats such 
as commercial interest (e.g. use as an ornamental plant), possible 
predation by insects or arthropod larvae, and the possibility of feral 
animals predating the species, makes Agave eggersiana vulnerable. The 
magnitude of the current threats is moderate because at least 450 
adults and 260 bulbils are known to occur, with half of the populations 
showing evidence of recruitment in the wild. In addition, three 
populations are located in areas managed for conservation and public 
outreach. The immediacy of the threats to the species as a whole is 
imminent because the threats are occurring now within each population 
on St. Croix. Additionally, we do not anticipate any changes that would 
appreciably reduce these threats in the foreseeable future. Therefore 
we have assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
    Arabis georgiana (Georgia rockcress)--We continue to find that 
listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's silverbush)--The following 
summary is based on information in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Blodgett's 
silverbush occurs in Florida and is found in open, sunny areas in pine 
rockland; at the edges of rockland hammock; at the edges of coastal 
berm; and sometimes in disturbed areas at the edges of natural areas. 
Plants can be found growing from crevices on limestone, or sand. The 
pine-rockland habitat where the species occurs in Miami-Dade County and 
the Florida Keys requires periodic fires to maintain habitat with a 
minimum amount of hardwoods. There are approximately 22 extant 
occurrences, 12 in Monroe County and 10 in Miami-Dade County; many 
occurrences are on conservation lands. However, 4 to 5 sites are 
recently thought to be extirpated. The estimated population size of 
Blodgett's silverbush in the Florida Keys, excluding Big Pine Key, is 
roughly 11,000; the estimated population in Miami-Dade County is 375 to 
13,650 plants.
    Blodgett's silverbush is threatened by habitat loss, which is 
exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the 
difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and threats 
from exotic plants. Remaining habitats are fragmented. Threats such as 
road maintenance and enhancement, infrastructure, and illegal dumping 
threaten some occurrences. Blodgett's silverbush is vulnerable to 
natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm 
surges. Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term 
threats that are expected to continue to affect pine rocklands and 
ultimately substantially reduce the extent of available habitat, 
especially in the Keys. Overall, the magnitude of threats is moderate 
because a number of occurrences remain with relatively high population 
levels, and not all of the occurrences are affected by the threats. In 
addition, land managers are aware of the threats from exotic plants and 
lack of fire, and are, to some extent, working to reduce these threats 
where possible. While a number of threats are occurring in some areas, 
the more significant threat from development is nonimminent because 
most occurrences are on public land, and sea-level rise is not 
currently affecting this species. Overall, the threats are nonimminent. 
Thus, we assigned an LPN of 11 to this species.
    Artemisia borealis var. wormskioldii (Northern wormwood)--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. Historically known from eight sites, northern wormwood is 
currently known from two populations, one in Klickitat County and one 
in Grant County, Washington. This plant is restricted to exposed 
basalt, cobbly-sandy terraces, and sand habitat along the shore of, and 
on islands in, the Columbia River. The two populations are separated by 
186 river miles (300 km) and three reservoirs (formed behind large 
hydroelectric dams). Annual monitoring indicates both populations are 
declining and both remain vulnerable to environmental variability. 
Surveys have not detected any additional plants.
    Threats to northern wormwood include direct loss of habitat through 
regulation of water levels in the Columbia River and placement of 
riprap along the river bank; human trampling of plants from recreation; 
competition with nonnative, invasive species; burial by wind- and 
water-borne sediments; small population sizes; susceptibility to 
genetic drift and inbreeding; and the potential for hybridization with 
two other species of Artemisia. Ongoing conservation actions have 
reduced trampling, but have not eliminated or reduced the other threats 
at the Grant County site. Active conservation measures are not 
currently in place at the Miller Island site in Klickitat County. The 
magnitude of threat is high for this subspecies. Although the two 
remaining populations are demographically isolated, loss of habitat 
through regulation of water levels, competition with invasive species, 
burial by wind- and water-borne

[[Page 70035]]

sediments, and hybridization could eliminate one or both populations 
with a single disturbance. The threats are imminent because 
recreational use is ongoing; invasive, nonnative species occur at both 
sites; erosion of the substrate is ongoing at the Klickitat County 
site; and high water flows are random, naturally occurring events that 
may occur unpredictably in any year. Therefore, we have retained an LPN 
of 3 for this subspecies.
    Astragalus anserinus (Goose Creek milkvetch)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.
    Astragalus microcymbus (Skiff milkvetch)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and in the petition we 
received on July 30, 2007. Skiff milkvetch is a perennial forb that 
dies back to the ground every year. It has a very limited range and a 
spotty distribution within Gunnison and Saguache Counties in Colorado, 
where it is found in open, park-like landscapes in the sagebrush steppe 
ecosystem on rocky or cobbly, moderate to steep slopes of hills and 
draws. The most significant threats to skiff milkvetch are recreation, 
roads, trails, the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms, and habitat fragmentation and degradation. Recreational 
impacts are likely to increase given the close proximity of skiff 
milkvetch to the town of Gunnison and the increasing popularity of 
mountain biking, motorcycling, and all- terrain vehicles. Furthermore, 
the Hartman Rocks Recreation Area draws users and contains over 40 
percent of the skiff milkvetch units. Other threats to the species 
include residential and urban development; livestock, deer, and elk 
use; climate change; and increasing periodic drought, nonnative 
invasive cheatgrass; and wildfire. We consider the threats to skiff 
milkvetch to be moderate in magnitude because while serious and 
occurring rangewide, they do not collectively result in population 
declines on a short time scale. The threats are imminent because the 
species is currently facing them in many portions of its range. 
Therefore, we have assigned skiff milkvetch an LPN of 8.
    Astragalus schmolliae (Schmoll milkvetch)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and in the petition we 
received on July 30, 2007. Schmoll milkvetch is a narrow endemic 
perennial plant that grows in the mature pinyon-juniper woodland of 
mesa tops in the Mesa Verde National Park area and in the Ute Mountain 
Ute Tribal Park in Colorado. The most significant threats to the 
species are degradation of habitat by fire, followed by invasion by 
nonnative cheatgrass and subsequent increase in fire frequency. These 
threats currently affect about 40 percent of the species' entire known 
range. Cheatgrass is likely to increase given its rapid spread and 
persistence in habitat disturbed by wildfires, fire and fuels 
management, development of infrastructure, and the inability of land 
managers to control it on a landscape scale. Other threats to Schmoll 
milkvetch include fires, fire break clearings, drought, and inadequate 
regulatory mechanisms. We consider the threats to the species overall 
to be imminent and moderate in magnitude, because the species is 
currently facing them in many portions of its range, but the threats do 
not collectively result in population declines on a short time scale. 
Therefore, we have assigned Schmoll milkvetch an LPN of 8.
    Astragalus tortipes (Sleeping Ute milkvetch)--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. Sleeping Ute 
milkvetch is a perennial plant that grows only on the Smokey Hills 
layer of the Mancos Shale Formation on the Ute Mountain Ute Indian 
Reservation in Montezuma County, Colorado. In 2000, 3,744 plants were 
recorded at 24 locations covering 500 ac within an overall range of 
6,400 ac. Available information from 2000 indicates that the species 
remains stable. Threats from borrow pit excavation, off-highway 
vehicles, irrigation canal construction, and a prairie dog colony have 
had minor impacts that reduced the range and number of plants by small 
amounts. Off-road-vehicle use of the habitat has reportedly been 
controlled by fencing. Oil and gas development is active in the general 
area, but the Service has received no information to indicate that 
there is development within plant habitat. The Tribe reported that the 
status of the species remains unchanged, the population is healthy, and 
a management plan for the species is currently in draft form. Despite 
these positive indications, we have no documentation concerning the 
current status of the plants, condition of habitat, or terms of the 
species management plan being drafted by the Tribe. Thus, at this time, 
we cannot accurately assess whether populations are being adequately 
protected from previously existing threats. The threats are moderate in 
magnitude, as their effects on the species have been minor and the 
species appears to be stable. Based on information we have, the 
population appears to be stable. Until the management plan is completed 
and made available, there are no regulatory mechanisms in place to 
protect the species. Overall, we conclude that threats are nonimminent 
because the more significant threats are not currently occurring; off-
road-vehicle use has been controlled by fencing, and there are no plans 
for oil and gas development within the plant's habitat. Therefore, we 
assigned an LPN of 11 to this species.
    Boechera pusilla (Fremont County rockcress)--The following summary 
is based on information in our files and in the petition received on 
July 24, 2007. Boechera pusilla is a perennial herb that occupies 
sparsely vegetated, coarse granite soil pockets in exposed granite-
pegmatite outcrops, with slopes generally less than 10 degrees, at an 
elevation between 2,438 to 2,469 m (8,000 to 8,100 ft). The only known 
population of B. pusilla is located in Wyoming on lands administered by 
the Bureau of Land Management's, Rock Springs Field Office in the 
southern foothills of the Wind River Range. B. pusilla is likely 
restricted in distribution by the limited occurrence of pegmatite in 
the area. The specialized habitat requirements of B. pusilla have 
allowed the plant to persist without competition from other herbaceous 
plants or sagebrush-grassland species that are present in the 
surrounding landscape.
    Boechera pusilla has a threat that is not identified, but that is 
indicated by the small and declining population size. The population 
size may be declining from a variety of unknown causes, with drought or 
disease possibly contributing to the trend. The trend may have been 
reversed somewhat recently, but without improved population numbers, 
the species may reach a population level at which other stressors 
become threats. We are unable to determine how climate change may 
affect the species in the future. To the extent that we understand the 
species, other potential habitat-related threats have been removed 
through the implementation of Federal regulatory mechanisms and 
associated actions. Overutilization, predation, and the inadequacy of 
regulatory mechanisms are not viewed as threats to the species. We 
consider the threats that B. pusilla faces to be moderate in magnitude 
primarily because the population decline has been somewhat reversed. 
Although the threat is not fully understood, we know it exists as 
indicated by the declining population, but we have not detected the 
source or nature of the threat. The threat to B. pusilla is imminent 
because, although not fully identified, we have evidence

[[Page 70036]]

that the species is currently facing a threat indicated by reduced 
population size. The threat appears to be ongoing, although we are 
unsure of the extent and timing of its effects on the species. Thus, we 
have assigned B. pusilla an LPN of 8.
    Brickellia mosieri (Florida brickell-bush)--The following summary 
is based on information contained in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is 
restricted to pine rocklands of Miami-Dade County, Florida. This 
habitat requires periodic prescribed fires to maintain the low 
understory and prevent encroachment by native tropical hardwoods and 
exotic plants, such as Brazilian pepper. Only one large occurrence is 
known to exist; 15 other occurrences contain fewer than 100 
individuals. Eleven occurrences are on conservation lands, while the 
rest of the extant populations are on private land and are currently 
vulnerable to habitat loss and degradation.
    Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term threats 
that will reduce the extent of habitat. This species is threatened by 
habitat loss, which is exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire 
suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine 
rocklands, and threats from exotic plants. Remaining habitats are 
fragmented. The species is vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as 
hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges. Due to its restricted 
range and the small sizes of most isolated occurrences, this species is 
vulnerable to environmental (catastrophic hurricanes), demographic 
(potential episodes of poor reproduction), and genetic (potential 
inbreeding depression) threats. Ongoing conservation efforts include 
projects aimed at facilitating restoration and management of public and 
private lands in Miami-Dade County and projects to reintroduce and 
establish new populations at suitable sites within the species' 
historical range. The Service is also pursuing additional habitat 
restoration projects, which could help further improve the status of 
the species. Because of these efforts, the overall magnitude of threats 
is moderate. The threats are ongoing and thus imminent. We assigned 
this species an LPN of 8.
    Calamagrostis expansa (Maui reedgrass)--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. Calamagrostis 
expansa is a perennial grass found in wet forests and bogs, and in bog 
margins, on the islands of Maui and Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is 
known from 13 populations totaling fewer than 750 individuals.
    Calamagrostis expansa is threatened by habitat degradation and loss 
by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), and by competition with nonnative plants. 
Herbivory by feral pigs is a potential threat to this species. All of 
the known populations of C. expansa on Maui occur in managed areas. Pig 
exclusion fences have been constructed, and control of nonnative plants 
is ongoing within the exclosures but still pose a significant threat. 
On the island of Hawaii, the population in the Upper Waiakea Forest 
Reserve has been fenced entirely. This species is not represented in an 
ex situ collection. Threats to this species from feral pigs and 
nonnative plants are ongoing, or imminent, and of high magnitude 
because they significantly affect the species throughout its range, 
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we 
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Calochortus persistens (Siskiyou mariposa lily)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.
    Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine partridge pea)--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 pea is endemic to the lower Florida Keys, and restricted to 
pine rocklands, hardwood hammock edges, and roadsides and firebreaks 
within these ecosystems. Historically, it was known from Big Pine, 
Cudjoe, No Name, Ramrod, and Little Pine Keys (Monroe County, Florida). 
In 2005, a small population was detected on lower Sugarloaf Key, but 
this population was not located after Hurricane Wilma; plants were 
likely killed by the tidal surge from this storm. It presently occurs 
on Big Pine Key, with a very small population on Cudjoe Key. It is 
fairly well distributed in Big Pine Key pine rocklands, which encompass 
approximately 580 ha (1,433 ac), approximately 360 ha (890 ac) of which 
are within the Service's National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR). Over 80 
percent of the population probably exists on NKDR, with the remainder 
distributed among State, County, and private properties. Hurricane 
Wilma (October 2005) resulted in a storm surge that covered most of Big 
Pine Key with sea water. The surge reduced the population by as much as 
95 percent in some areas.
    Pine rockland communities are maintained by relatively frequent 
fires. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine 
rockland, and this subspecies is eventually shaded out. NKDR has a 
prescribed fire program, although with many constraints on 
implementation. Habitat loss due to development was historically the 
greatest threat to the pea. Much of the remaining habitat is now 
protected on public lands. Absence of fire now appears to be the 
greatest of the deterministic threats. Given the recent increase in 
hurricane activity, storm surges are the greatest of the stochastic 
threats. The small range and patchy distribution of the variety 
increase risk from stochastic events. Climatic changes, including sea-
level rise, are serious long-term threats. Models indicate that even 
under the best of circumstances, a significant proportion of upland 
habitat will be lost on Big Pine Key by 2100. Additional threats 
include restricted range, invasive nonnative plants, roadside dumping, 
loss of pollinators, seed predators, and development.
    We maintain the previous assessment that hurricanes, storm surges, 
lack of fire, and limited distribution result in a moderate magnitude 
of threat because a large part of the range is on conservation lands 
wherein threats are being addressed, although fire management is at 
much slower rate than is required. The immediacy of hurricane threats 
is difficult to characterize, but imminence is considered high given 
that hurricanes (and storm surges) of various magnitudes are frequent 
and recurrent events in the area. Sea-level rise remains uncontrolled 
but, overall, is nonimminent. Overall, the threats from limited 
distribution and inadequate fire management are imminent because they 
are ongoing. In addition, the most consequential threats (hurricanes, 
storm surges) are frequent, recurrent, and imminent. Therefore, we 
retained an LPN of 9 for Big Pine partridge pea.
    Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (Pineland sandmat)--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 pineland sandmat is only known from Miami-Dade County, 
Florida. The largest occurrence, estimated at more than 10,000 plants, 
is located on Long Pine Key within Everglades National Park. All other 
occurrences are smaller and are in isolated pine rockland fragments in 
heavily urbanized Miami-Dade County.
    Occurrences on private (non-conservation) lands and on one County-
owned parcel are at risk from development and habitat degradation and 
fragmentation. Conditions related to

[[Page 70037]]

climate change, particularly sea-level rise, will be a factor over the 
long term. All occurrences of the species are threatened by habitat 
loss and degradation due to fire suppression, the difficulty of 
applying prescribed fire, and exotic plants. These threats are severe 
within small and unmanaged fragments in urban areas. However, the 
threats of fire suppression and exotics are reduced on lands managed by 
the National Park Service. Hydrologic changes are considered to be 
another threat. Hydrology has been altered within Long Pine Key due to 
artificial drainage, which lowered ground water, and by the 
construction of roads, which either impounded or diverted water. 
Regional water management intended to restore the Everglades could 
negatively affect the pinelands of Long Pine Key in the future. At this 
time, we do not know whether the proposed restoration and associated 
hydrological modifications will have a positive or negative effect on 
pineland sandmat. This narrow endemic may be vulnerable to catastrophic 
events and natural disturbances, such as hurricanes. Overall, the 
magnitude of threats to this species is moderate; by applying regular 
prescribed fire, the National Park Service has kept Long Pine Key's 
pineland vegetation intact and relatively free of exotic plants, and 
partnerships are in place to help address the continuing threat of 
exotics on other pine rockland fragments. Overall, the threats are 
nonimminent because fire management at the largest occurrence is 
regularly conducted and sea-level rise and hurricanes are longer-term 
threats and because regional water management actions are only 
proposed, so they will not be implemented in the immediate future. 
Therefore, we assigned a LPN of 12 to this subspecies.
    Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (Wedge spurge)--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. 
Systematic surveys of publicly owned pine rockland throughout this 
plant's range were conducted during 2005-2006 and 2007-2008 to 
determine population size and distribution. Wedge spurge is a small 
prostrate herb. It was historically, and remains, restricted to pine 
rocklands on Big Pine Key in Monroe County, Florida. Pine rocklands 
encompass approximately 580 ha (1,433 ac) on Big Pine Key, 
approximately 360 ha (890 ac) of which are within the Service's 
National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR). Most of the species' range falls 
within the NKDR, with the remainder on State, County, and private 
properties. It is not widely dispersed within the limited range. 
Occurrences are sparser in the southern portion of Big Pine Key, which 
contains smaller areas of NKDR lands than does the northern portion. 
Wedge spurge inhabits sites with low woody cover (e.g., low palm and 
hardwood densities) and usually, exposed rock or gravel.
    Pine rockland communities are maintained by relatively frequent 
fires. In the absence of fire, shrubs and trees encroach on pine 
rockland, and the subspecies is eventually shaded out. NKDR has a 
prescribed fire program, although with many constraints on 
implementation. Habitat loss due to development was historically the 
greatest threat to the wedge spurge. Much of the remaining habitat is 
now protected on public lands. Absence of fire now appears to be the 
greatest of the deterministic threats. Given the recent increase in 
hurricane activity, storm surges are the greatest of the stochastic 
threats. The small range and patchy distribution of the subspecies 
increases risk from stochastic events. Climatic changes, including sea-
level rise, are serious long-term threats. Models indicate that even 
under the best of circumstances, a significant proportion of upland 
habitat will be lost on Big Pine Key by 2100. Additional threats 
include restricted range, invasive nonnative plants, roadside dumping, 
loss of pollinators, seed predators, and development.
    We maintain the previous assessment that low fire-return intervals 
plus hurricane-related storm surges, in combination with a limited, 
fragmented distribution and threats from sea-level rise, result in a 
moderate magnitude of threat, in part, because a large part of the 
range is on conservation lands, where some threats can be substantially 
controlled. The immediacy of hurricane threats is difficult to 
categorize, but in this case threats are imminent given that hurricanes 
(and storm surges) of various magnitudes are frequent and recurrent 
events in the area. Sea-level rise remains uncontrolled, but over much 
of the range is nonimminent compared to other prominent threats. 
Threats resulting from limited fire occurrences are imminent. As major 
threats are ongoing, overall, the threats are imminent. Therefore, we 
retained an LPN of 9 for this subspecies.
    Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando Valley 
spineflower)--The following summary is based on information contained 
in our files and the petition we received on December 14, 1999. 
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina is a low-growing, herbaceous, annual 
plant in the buckwheat family. Germination occurs following the onset 
of late-fall and winter rains and typically represents different 
cohorts from the seed bank. Flowering occurs in the spring, generally 
between April and June. Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina grows up to 
30 cn in height and 5 to 40 cn across. The plant currently is known 
from two disjunct localities: One in the southeastern portion of 
Ventura County, California, on a site within the Upper Las Virgenes 
Canyon Open Space Preserve, formerly known as Ahmanson Ranch, and the 
other in an area of southwestern Los Angeles County known as Newhall 
Ranch. Investigations of historical locations and seemingly suitable 
habitat within the range of the species have not revealed any other 
occurrences.
    The threats facing Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina include 
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 
range; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and other natural 
or manmade factors. The threats to Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina 
from habitat destruction or modification are slightly less than they 
were 7 years ago. One of the two populations (Upper Las Virgenes Canyon 
Open Space Preserve) is in permanent, public ownership and is being 
managed by an agency that is working to conserve the plant; however, 
the use of adjacent habitat for Hollywood film productions was brought 
to our attention in 2007, and the potential impacts to Chorizanthe 
parryi var. fernandina have not yet been evaluated. During a site visit 
in April 2012, we noted an abundance of nonnative species that, if not 
managed, could degrade the quality of the habitat for C. parryi var. 
fernandina over time. It is not clear whether this presents an imminent 
threat at this time. We will be working with the landowners to manage 
the site for the benefit of Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina. The 
other population (Newhall Ranch) is under the threat of development; 
however, a Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) is being developed 
with the landowner, and it is possible that the remaining plants can 
also be conserved. Until such an agreement is finalized, the threat of 
development and the potential damage to the Newhall Ranch population 
still exists, as shown by the destruction of some plants during 
installation of an agave farm. Furthermore, cattle grazing on Newhall 
Ranch may be a threat but we lack information to determine if it is 
currently occurring at a level that would threaten this species. Cattle 
grazing may

[[Page 70038]]

harm Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina by trampling and soil 
compaction. Grazing activity could also alter the nutrient (e.g., 
elevated organic material levels) content of the soils for Chorizanthe 
parryi var. fernandina habitat through fecal inputs, which in turn may 
favor the growth of other plant species that would otherwise not grow 
so readily on the mineral-based soils. Over time, changes in species 
composition may render the sites less favorable for the persistence of 
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina. Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina 
may be threatened by invasive nonnative plants, including grasses, 
which could potentially displace it from available habitat; compete for 
light, water, and nutrients; and reduce survival and establishment.
    Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina is particularly vulnerable to 
extinction due to its concentration in two isolated areas. The 
existence of only two areas of occurrence, and a relatively small 
range, makes the variety highly susceptible to extinction or 
extirpation from a significant portion of its range due to random 
events such as fire, drought, and erosion as these threats would result 
in a high level of mortality. We retained an LPN of 6 for Chorizanthe 
parryi var. fernandina due to high-magnitude, nonimminent threats.
    Cirsium wrightii (Wright's marsh thistle)--The following summary is 
based on information from the 12-month warranted but precluded finding 
published November 4, 2010 (75 FR 67925). There are eight general 
confirmed locations of Wright's marsh thistle in New Mexico: Santa 
Rosa, Guadalupe County; Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Chaves 
County; Blue Spring, Eddy County; La Luz Canyon, Karr Canyon, Silver 
Springs, and Tularosa Creek, Otero County; and Alamosa Creek, Socorro 
County. The Wright's marsh thistle has been extirpated from all 
previously known locations in Arizona, and was misidentified and likely 
not ever present in Texas. The status of the species in Mexico is 
uncertain, with few verified collections.
    The Wright's marsh thistle faces threats primarily from natural and 
human-caused modifications of its habitat due to ground and surface 
water depletion, drought, invasion of Phragmites australis, and from 
the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. The species occupies 
relatively small areas of seeps, springs, and wetland habitat in an 
arid region plagued by drought and ongoing and future water 
withdrawals. The species' highly specific requirements of saturated 
soils with surface or subsurface water flow make it particularly 
vulnerable.
    We consider the threats that the Wright's marsh thistle faces to be 
moderate in magnitude because the major threats (habitat loss and 
degradation due to alteration of the hydrology of its rare wetland 
habitat), while serious and occurring rangewide, do not collectively 
result in serious population declines on a short time scale. Still, 
long-term drought, in combination with ground and surface water 
withdrawal, pose a current and future threat to Wright's marsh thistle 
and its habitat. All of the threats are ongoing and therefore imminent. 
In addition to their current existence, we expect these threats to 
likely intensify in the foreseeable future. Thus, we continue to assign 
an LPN of 8 to this species.
    Cordia rupicola (no common name)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in 
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Cordia rupicola is a small 
shrub that has been described from southwestern Puerto Rico, Vieques 
Island, and Anegada Island (British Virgin Islands). All these sites 
lay within the subtropical dry forest life zone overlying a limestone 
substrate. Cordia rupicola has a restricted distribution. Currently, 
approximately 227 individuals are known from 4 locations: 
Pe[ntilde]uelas, Yauco, Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forests, and 
Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. Additionally, the species is reported 
as common in Anegada.
    This species is threatened by maintenance of trails and power line 
right-of-way in the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, and residential 
and commercial development in Pe[ntilde]uelas, Yauco, and Anegada 
Island. Cordia rupicola is also vulnerable to natural (e.g., 
hurricanes) or manmade (e.g., human-induced fires) threats. 
Furthermore, the population on Anegada Island, which is considered the 
healthiest population, is expected to be affected by sea level rise as 
most of the suitable habitat for the species is below 3 m above sea 
level. Therefore, even a small rise in sea level could devastate the 
healthiest population, and lead to a significantly greater likelihood 
of extinction. For these reasons, the magnitude of the current threats 
is high. Although the threats faced by this species are expected to 
increase in the future if conservation measures are not implemented and 
long-term impacts are not averted, we conclude that the threats are 
nonimminent. About 60 percent of known adult plants are located in 
protected lands managed for conservation by the Puerto Rico Department 
of Natural and Environmental Resources or the Service. The staff from 
the Royal Botanical Garden (Kew) has developed germination and 
cultivation protocols for the species and is planning to conduct 
studies to determine the genetic variation of the populations. We 
therefore have assigned to Cordia rupicola an LPN of 5 for threats that 
on the whole are high in magnitude and nonimminent.
    Dalea carthagenensis ssp. floridana (Florida prairie-clover)--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. Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana occurs in Big Cypress 
National Preserve (BCNP) in Monroe and Collier Counties and at six 
locations within Miami-Dade County, Florida, albeit mostly in limited 
numbers. There are a total of nine extant occurrences, seven of which 
are on conservation lands. In addition, 25 plants were reintroduced to 
a park in Miami-Dade County in 2006, but only 4 remained after 8 
months.
    Existing occurrences are extremely small and may not be viable, 
especially some of the occurrences in Miami-Dade County. Remaining 
habitats are fragmented. Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, 
are long-term threats that are expected to reduce the extent of 
habitat. This plant is threatened by habitat loss and degradation due 
to fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine 
rocklands, and threats from exotic plants. Damage to plants by off-road 
vehicles is a serious threat within the BCNP; damage attributed to 
illegal mountain biking at the R. Hardy Matheson Preserve has been 
reduced. One location within BCNP is threatened by changes in mowing 
practices; this threat is low in magnitude. This species is being 
parasitized by the introduced insect lobate lac scale (Paratachardina 
pseudolobata) at some localities (e.g., R. Hardy Matheson Preserve), 
but we do not know the extent of this threat. This plant is vulnerable 
to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm 
surges. Due to its restricted range and the small sizes of most 
isolated occurrences, this species is vulnerable to environmental 
(catastrophic hurricanes), demographic (potential episodes of poor 
reproduction), and genetic (potential inbreeding depression) threats. 
The magnitude of threats is high because of the extremely limited 
number of occurrences, the small number of

[[Page 70039]]

individual plants at each occurrence, and poor reproduction. The 
threats are imminent; even though many sites are on conservation lands, 
these plants still face significant ongoing threats. Therefore, we have 
assigned an LPN of 3 to Florida prairie-clover.
    Dichanthelium hirstii (Hirst Brothers' panic grass)--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. 
Dichanthelium hirstii is a perennial grass that produces erect, leafy, 
flowering stems from May to October. The species occurs in coastal 
plain intermittent ponds, usually in wet savanna or pine barren 
habitats, and is known to occur at only three sites in New Jersey, one 
site in Delaware, and two sites in North Carolina. While all six extant 
D. hirstii populations are located on public land or privately owned 
conservation lands, threats to the species from encroachment of woody 
and herbaceous vegetation, competition from rhizomatous perennials, 
fluctuations in hydrology, and threats associated with small population 
number and size are significant. Given the naturally fluctuating number 
of plants found at each site and the isolated nature of the wetlands 
(limiting dispersal opportunities), even small changes in the species' 
habitat could result in local extirpation. Loss of any known sites 
would constitute a significant contraction of the species' range. 
Therefore, we consider the threats to be high in magnitude. Because 
most of the potential threats to D. hirstii evolve over a period of 
years before they rise to the level of becoming imminent threats, and, 
in some cases, are being managed to some extent, we consider the 
threats to be nonimminent. Based on nonimminent threats of a high 
magnitude, we retain an LPN of 5 for this species.
    Digitaria pauciflora (Florida pineland crabgrass)--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 perennial grass was historically found in central to southern 
Miami-Dade County, Florida, most commonly in habitat along the border 
between pine rockland and marl prairie. Pine rocklands in Miami-Dade 
County have largely been destroyed by residential, commercial, and 
urban development and by agriculture. With most remaining habitat 
having been negatively altered, this species has been extirpated from 
much of its historical range, including extirpation from all areas 
outside of National Parks. Two large occurrences remain within 
Everglades National Park and Big Cypress National Preserve; plants on 
Federal lands are protected from the threat of habitat loss due to 
development. However, any unknown plants, indefinite occurrences, and 
suitable habitat remaining on private or non-conservation land are 
threatened by development. Continued development of suitable habitat 
diminishes the potential for reintroduction into its historical range. 
Extant occurrences are in low-lying areas and will be affected by 
climatic changes, including rising sea level.
    Fire suppression, the difficulty of applying prescribed fire to 
pine rocklands, and threats from nonnative plants are ongoing threats. 
As the only known remaining occurrences are on lands managed by the 
National Park Service, the threats of fire suppression and exotics are 
somewhat reduced. The presence of the exotic Old World climbing fern is 
of particular concern due to its ability to spread rapidly and reduce 
the populations of this species. In Big Cypress National Preserve, 
plants are threatened by off-road-vehicle use. Changes to hydrology are 
a potential threat. Hydrology has been altered within Long Pine Key due 
to artificial drainage, which lowered ground water, and construction of 
roads, which either impounded or diverted water. Regional water 
management intended to restore the Everglades has the potential to 
affect the pinelands of Long Pine Key, where a large population occurs. 
At this time, it is not known whether Everglades restoration will have 
a positive or negative effect. This narrow endemic may be vulnerable to 
catastrophic events and natural disturbances, such as hurricanes. 
Overall, the magnitude of threats is high. Only two known occurrences 
remain, and the likelihood of establishing a sizable population on 
other lands is diminished due to continuing habitat loss. Impacts from 
climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are currently low, but 
expected to be severe in the future. The majority of threats are 
nonimminent as they are long-term in nature (water management, 
hurricanes, and sea-level rise). Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 5 to 
this species.
    Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii (Las Vegas buckwheat)--We 
continue to find that listing this species is warranted but precluded 
as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we are working 
on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making 
the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of 
preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new 
information about this species' status so that we can make prompt use 
of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency 
posing a significant risk to the species.
    Eriogonum kelloggii (Red Mountain buckwheat)--We continue to find 
that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Eriogonum soredium (Frisco buckwheat)--The following summary is 
based on information in our files and the petition we received on July 
30, 2007. Frisco buckwheat is a low, mound-forming, perennial plant 
with oval leaves covered by short, white, woolly hairs. Flowers are 
pink or white and grow in tight clusters that resemble drumsticks. 
Frisco buckwheat is a narrow endemic restricted to soils derived from 
Ordovician limestone outcrops. The range of the species is less than 5 
mi\2\ (13 km\2\) with only four known populations. All four populations 
occur exclusively on private lands in Beaver County, Utah, and each 
population occupies a very small area with large, localized densities 
of plants. Available population estimates are highly variable and 
inaccurate due to the limited access for surveys associated with 
private lands.
    The primary threat to Frisco buckwheat is habitat destruction from 
precious metal and gravel mining. Mining for precious metals 
historically occurred within the vicinity of all four populations. 
Three of the populations are currently in the immediate vicinity of 
active limestone quarries. Ongoing mining in the species' habitat has 
the potential to extirpate one population in the near future and 
extirpate all populations in the foreseeable future. Ongoing 
exploration for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining will 
continue, resulting in the loss and fragmentation of Frisco buckwheat 
populations. Other threats to species include nonnative species, 
vulnerability associated with small population size, climate change, 
and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. We 
consider threats that Frisco buckwheat faces to be moderate in 
magnitude, because while serious and occurring rangewide, the threats 
do

[[Page 70040]]

not significantly reduce populations on a short time scale. The threats 
are imminent because three of the populations are currently in the 
immediate vicinity of active limestone quarries. Therefore, we have 
assigned Frisco buckwheat an LPN of 8.
    Festuca hawaiiensis (no common name)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is a 
cespitose (growing in dense, low tufts) annual found in dry forests on 
the island of Hawaii, Hawaii. Festuca hawaiiensis is known from 4 
populations totaling approximately 1,000 individuals in and around the 
Pohakuloa Training Area. Historically, this species was also found on 
Hualalai and Puu Huluhulu, but it no longer occurs at these sites. In 
addition, Festuca hawaiiensis possibly occurred on Maui. This species 
is threatened by pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), mouflon (Ovis 
musimon), and feral sheep (O. aries) that degrade and destroy habitat; 
fire; military training activities; and nonnative plants that 
outcompete and displace it. Feral pigs, goats, mouflon, and feral sheep 
have been fenced out of a portion of the populations of F. hawaiiensis, 
and nonnative plants have been reduced in the fenced area, but the 
majority of the populations are still affected by threats from 
ungulates. The threats are imminent because they are not controlled and 
are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced populations. Firebreaks have 
been established at two populations, but fire is an imminent threat to 
the remaining populations that have no firebreaks. There are no ex situ 
collections. The threats are of a high magnitude because they could 
adversely affect the majority of F. hawaiiensis populations, resulting 
in a high level of direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity. 
Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Festuca ligulata (Guadalupe fescue)--The following summary is based 
on information obtained from the original species petition, received in 
1975, and from our files, on-line herbarium databases, and scientific 
publications. Six small populations of Guadalupe fescue, a member of 
the Poaceae (grass family), have been documented in mountains of the 
Chihuahuan desert in Texas and in Coahuila, Mexico. Only two extant 
populations have been confirmed in the last 5 years: one in the Chisos 
Mountains, Big Bend National Park, Texas, and one in the privately 
owned Area de Protecci[oacute]n de Flora y Fauna (Protected Area for 
Flora and Fauna--APFF) Maderas del Carmen in northern Coahuila. Despite 
intensive searches, a population known from Guadalupe Mountains 
National Park, Texas, has not been found since 1952, and is presumed 
extirpated. In 2009, botanists confirmed Guadalupe fescue at one site 
in APFF Maderas del Carmen, but could not find the species at the 
original site, known as Sierra El Jard[iacute]n, which was first 
reported in 1973. Two additional Mexican populations, near Fraile in 
southern Coahuila, and the Sierra de la Madera in central Coahuila, 
have not been monitored since 1941 and 1977, respectively. A great 
amount of potentially suitable habitat in Coahuila and adjacent Mexican 
states has never been surveyed. An historically unprecedented period of 
exceptional drought and high temperatures prevailed throughout the 
species' range from October 2010 until November 2011. We will not know 
what impacts this unusual weather had on Guadalupe fescue populations 
until monitoring is completed during the September 2012 flowering 
season.
    The potential threats to Guadalupe fescue include changes in the 
wildfire cycle and vegetation structure, trampling from humans and pack 
animals, possible grazing, trail runoff, fungal infection of seeds, 
small sizes and isolation of populations, and limited genetic 
diversity. The Service and the National Park Service established a 
candidate conservation agreement (CCA) in 2008, to provide additional 
protection for the Chisos Mountains population, and to promote 
cooperative conservation efforts with U.S. and Mexican partners. The 
threats to Guadalupe fescue are of moderate magnitude and are not 
imminent due to the provisions of the CCA and other conservation 
efforts which address threats from trampling, grazing, trail runoff, 
and genetic diversity, as well as the likelihood that other populations 
exist in mountains of Coahuila and adjacent Mexican states that have 
not been surveyed. Thus, we maintained an LPN of 11 for this species.
    Gardenia remyi (Nanu)--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. Gardenia remyi is a tree 
found in mesic to wet forests on the islands of Kauai, Molokai, Maui, 
and Hawaii, Hawaii. Gardenia remyi is known from 19 populations 
totaling between 85 and 87 individuals. This species is threatened by 
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and deer (Axis axis and 
Odocoileus hemionus) that degrade and destroy habitat and possibly 
forage upon the species, and by nonnative plants that outcompete and 
displace it. Gardenia remyi is also threatened by landslides and 
reduced reproductive vigor on the island of Hawaii. This species is 
represented in ex situ collections. On Kauai, G. remyi individuals have 
been outplanted within ungulate-proof exclosures in two locations. 
Feral pigs have been fenced out of the west Maui populations of G. 
remyi, and nonnative plants have been reduced in those areas. However, 
these threats are not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining, 
unfenced populations, and are, therefore, imminent. In addition, the 
threat from goats and deer is ongoing and imminent throughout the range 
of the species, because no goat or deer control measures have been 
undertaken for any of the populations of G. remyi. All of the threats 
are of a high magnitude because habitat destruction, predation, and 
landslides could significantly affect the entire species, resulting in 
direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity, leading to a 
relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN 
of 2 for this species.
    Gonocalyx concolor (no common name)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided 
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Gonocalyx concolor is a 
small evergreen epiphytic or terrestrial shrub. This species in 
currently known from two populations: one at Cerro La Santa and the 
other at Charco Azul, both in the Carite Commonwealth Forest. This 
forest is located in the Sierra de Cayey and extends through the 
municipalities of Guayama, Cayey, Caguas, San Lorenzo, and Patillas in 
southeastern Puerto Rico. A population previously reported in the 
Caribbean National Forest apparently no longer exists. In 1996, 
approximately 172 plants were reported at Cerro La Santa. However, in 
2006, only 25 individuals were reported at this site, and 4 were 
located in Charco Azul. At Cerro La Santa, the species is found growing 
on trees located close to communication towers, roads, plantations, and 
trails.
    The Gonocalyx concolor population found at Cerro La Santa is 
threatened by habitat destruction and modification caused by vegetation 
clearing around telecommunication towers. Although the species is 
located within a Commonwealth forest and protected by Law No. 133 
(``Ley de Bosques de Puerto Rico'' or The Puerto Rico Forest Law), 
unauthorized maintenance of existing communication facilities results 
in loss of individuals. Gonocalyx concolor is not currently listed in 
the Commonwealth Regulation No. 6766

[[Page 70041]]

(``Reglamento para Regir las Especies Vulnerables y en Peligro de 
Extinci[oacute]n en el Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico''), which 
provides protection for threatened and endangered species. However, the 
Natural Heritage Program of the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and 
Environmental Resources recognizes Gonocalyx concolor as a critical 
element. In addition, the Carite Commonwealth Forest is designated as a 
Critical Wildlife Area by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Despite 
these conservation efforts, damage to the species still occurs due to 
its location near telecommunication facilities. In addition, due to its 
restricted distribution, the species is vulnerable to the effects of 
natural events (e.g., hurricanes, landslides). Existing laws and 
regulations have not been effectively enforced to protect these 
populations. Because of small population size and limited distribution, 
any loss of individuals due to maintenance of communication facilities 
or natural events could significantly affect the entire species, 
leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, the 
threats to Gonocalyx concolor are high in magnitude. Overall the 
threats are nonimminent because the damage to the species from clearing 
of land near telecommunication facilities and the threats from natural 
events occur only periodically. Therefore, we have assigned an LPN of 5 
to Gonocalyx concolor.
    Hazardia orcuttii (Orcutt's hazardia)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition we 
received on March 8, 2001. Hazardia orcuttii is an evergreen shrubby 
species in the Asteraceae (sunflower family). The erect shrubs are 50-
100 cm (20-40 in) high. The only known extant native occurrence of this 
species in the United States covers an area of 2 ha (5 ac) in the 
Manchester Conservation Area in northwestern San Diego County, 
California. This site is managed by Center for Natural Lands Management 
(CNLM). Using material derived from the native population, the CNLM 
facilitated the establishment of test populations at four additional 
sites in northwest San Diego County, California, including sites in the 
Manchester Conservation Area, Kelly Ranch Habitat Conservation Area, 
Rancho La Costa Habitat Conservation Area, and San Elijo Lagoon. 
Hazardia orcuttii also occurs at a few coastal sites in Mexico, where 
it recently became listed as endangered under Mexican environmental 
law. The total number of plants at the only native site in the United 
States is approximately 669 adults, and it is unknown if reproduction 
is occurring. The five additional test populations collectively support 
approximately 483 adults, 17 juveniles, and 322 seedlings, and 
reproduction is occurring in three test populations. The population in 
Mexico is estimated to be 1,100 plants.
    The occurrences in Mexico are threatened by coastal development 
from Tijuana to Ensenada. The native population in the United States is 
within an area that receives public use; however, management at this 
site has minimized impacts associated with habitat degradation. This 
species has a very low reproductive output, although the causes are as 
yet unknown. Competition from invasive, nonnative plants may pose a 
threat to the reproductive potential of this species. In one limited 
study, 95 percent of the flowers examined were damaged by insects or 
fungal agents or aborted prematurely, and insects or fungal agents 
damaged 50 percent of the seeds produced. All of the populations in the 
United States are small, and one test population is declining. Small 
populations are considered subject to random events and reductions in 
fitness due to low genetic variability. Threats associated with small 
population size are further exacerbated by the limited range and low 
reproductive output of this species. However, if low seed production is 
because of ecosystem disruptions, such as loss of effective 
pollinators, there could be additional threats that need to be 
addressed. Due to low abundance and a very small area of occupancy, any 
regional fire would be a rangewide threat. Furthermore, because the 
soil seed bank is poor and seed viability is low, recovery from a fire 
may be especially challenging. The response mechanism of this species 
to fire is unknown. Overall, the threats to H. orcuttii are of a high 
magnitude because they have the potential to significantly reduce the 
reproductive potential of this species. The threats are nonimminent 
overall because invasive, nonnative plants and low reproductive output 
are long-term in nature, and it is not clear that they have risen to 
the level of becoming imminent threats. This species faces high-
magnitude nonimminent threats; therefore, we assigned this species an 
LPN of 5.
    Hedyotis fluviatilis (Kamapuaa)--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. Hedyotis fluviatilis is a 
scandent (climbing) shrub found in mixed shrubland to wet lowland 
forests on the islands of Oahu and Kauai, Hawaii. This species is known 
from 11 populations totaling between 400 and 900 individuals. Hedyotis 
fluviatilis is threatened by pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra hircus) 
that degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that 
outcompete and displace it. Landslides and hurricanes are a potential 
threat to populations on Kauai. Herbivory by pigs and goats is a likely 
threat. This species is not represented in an ex situ collection. We 
retained an LPN of 2 because the severity of the threats to the species 
is high given the low number of individuals and the potential for whole 
populations to be eliminated, and the threats are ongoing and, 
therefore, imminent.
    Helianthus verticillatus (Whorled sunflower)--See above in 
``Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files.
    Ivesia webberi (Webber ivesia)--We continue to find that listing 
this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of publication 
of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed listing rule that 
we expect to publish prior to making the next annual resubmitted 
petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the proposed 
listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information about this 
species' status so that we can make prompt use of our authority under 
Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a significant risk 
to the species.
    Joinvillea ascendens ssp. ascendens (Ohe)--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. Joinvillea 
ascendens ssp. ascendens is an erect herb found in wet to mesic 
Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa (ohia-koa) lowland and montane 
forests on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii, 
Hawaii. This subspecies is known from 44 widely scattered populations 
totaling approximately 200 individuals. Plants are typically found as 
only one or two individuals, with miles between populations. This 
subspecies is threatened by destruction or modification of habitat by 
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and deer (Axis axis and 
Odocoileus hemionus), and by nonnative plants that outcompete and 
displace native plants. Herbivory by pigs, goats, deer, and rats 
(Rattus exulans, R. norvegicus, and R. rattus) is a likely threat to 
this species. Landslides are a potential threat to populations on Kauai 
and Molokai.

[[Page 70042]]

Seedlings have rarely been observed in the wild. Seeds germinate in 
cultivation, but most die soon thereafter. It is uncertain if this 
rarity of reproduction is typical of this subspecies, or if it is 
related to habitat disturbance. Feral pigs have been fenced out of a 
few of the populations of this subspecies, and nonnative plants have 
been reduced in those populations that are fenced. However, these 
threats are not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced 
populations. This species is represented in ex situ collections. The 
threats are of high magnitude because habitat degradation, nonnative 
plants, and predation result in mortality or severely affect the 
reproductive capacity of the majority of populations of this species, 
leading to a relatively high probability of extinction. The threats are 
ongoing and thus are imminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 3 for 
this subspecies.
    Leavenworthia crassa (Gladecress)--The following information is 
based on information contained in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species of 
gladecress is a component of glade flora, occurring in association with 
limestone outcroppings. Leavenworthia crassa is endemic to a 13-mile 
radius area in north central Alabama in Lawrence and Morgan Counties, 
where only six populations of this species are documented. Glade 
habitats today have been reduced to remnants fragmented by agriculture 
and development. Populations of this species are now located in glade-
like areas exhibiting various degrees of disturbance including 
pastureland, roadside rights-of-way, and cultivated or plowed fields. 
The most vigorous populations of this species are located in areas 
which receive full, or near full, sunlight with limited herbaceous 
competition. The magnitude of threat is high for this species, because 
with the limited number of populations, the threats could result in 
direct mortality or reduced reproductive capacity of the species. This 
species appears to be able to adjust to periodic disturbances, and 
although competition, exotics, and herbicide use are potential threats, 
there is no evidence that they are ongoing, and they therefore are 
considered nonimminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 5 to this species.
    Lepidium ostleri (Ostler's peppergrass)--The following summary is 
based on information in our files and the petition we received on July 
30, 2007. Ostler's peppergrass is a long-lived perennial herb in the 
mustard family that grows in dense, cushion-like tufts. The leaves are 
hairy and grayish-green and the flowering stalks have 5 to 35 white or 
purple-tinted flowers. Ostler's peppergrass is a narrow endemic 
restricted to soils derived from Ordovician limestone outcrops. The 
range of the species is less than 5 mi\2\(13 km\2\) with only four 
known populations. All four populations occur exclusively on private 
lands in the southern San Francisco Mountains of Beaver County, Utah. 
Available population estimates are highly variable and inaccurate due 
largely to the limited access for surveys associated with private 
lands.
    The primary threat to Ostler's peppergrass is habitat destruction 
from precious metal and gravel mining. Mining for precious metals 
historically occurred within the vicinity of all four populations. 
Three of the populations are currently in the immediate vicinity of 
active limestone quarries, but mining is only currently occurring in 
the area of one population. Ongoing mining in the species' habitat has 
the potential to extirpate one population in the near future. Ongoing 
exploration for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining will 
continue, resulting in the loss and fragmentation of Ostler's 
peppergrass populations. Other threats to species include nonnative 
species, vulnerability associated with small population size, climate 
change, and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. 
We consider threats that Ostler's peppergrass faces to be moderate in 
magnitude, because while serious and occurring rangewide, the threats 
do not collectively result in significant population declines on a 
short time scale. The threats are imminent because the species is 
currently facing them across its entire range. Therefore, we have 
assigned Ostler's peppergrass an LPN of 8.
    Linum arenicola (Sand flax)--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. Sand flax is found in pine 
rockland and marl prairie habitats, which require periodic wildfires in 
order to maintain an open, shrub-free subcanopy and reduce leaf-litter 
levels. Based upon available data, there are 12 extant occurrences of 
sand flax; 11 others have been extirpated or destroyed. For the most 
part, only small and isolated occurrences remain in low-lying areas in 
a restricted range of southern Florida and the Florida Keys. In 
general, viability is uncertain for 10 of 12 occurrences.
    Sand flax is threatened by habitat loss and degradation due to 
development; climatic changes, including sea-level rise, which 
ultimately are likely to substantially reduce the extent of available 
habitat; fire suppression and difficulty in applying prescribed fire; 
road maintenance activities; exotic species; illegal dumping; natural 
disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and storm surges; 
and the small and fragmented nature of the current population. Reduced 
pollinator activity and suppression of pollinator populations from 
pesticides used in mosquito control and decreased seed production due 
to increased seed predation in a fragmented wildland urban interface 
may also affect sand flax; however, not enough information is known on 
this species' reproductive biology or life history to assess these 
potential threats. Some of the threats to the species--including fire 
suppression, difficulty in applying prescribed fire, road maintenance 
activities, exotic species, and illegal dumping--threaten nearly all 
remaining populations. However, some efforts are under way to use 
prescribed fire to control exotics on conservation lands where this 
species occurs.
    There are some circumstances that may mitigate the impacts of the 
threats upon the species. For example, a survey conducted in 2009 
showed approximately 74,000 plants on a non-conservation, public site 
in Miami-Dade County; this is far more plants than was previously 
known. Although a portion of the plants will be affected by 
development, approximately 60,000 are anticipated to be protected and 
managed. Still, this project will need to be carefully monitored 
because impacts would affect the largest known occurrence of the 
species. In addition, much of the pine rockland on Big Pine Key, the 
location of the largest occurrence in the Keys, is protected from 
development.
    Nevertheless, due to the small and fragmented nature of the current 
population, stochastic events, disease, or genetic bottlenecks may 
strongly affect this species in the Keys. One example is Hurricane 
Wilma, which inundated most of the species' habitat on Big Pine Key in 
2005, and plants were not found 8 to 9 weeks post-storm; the density of 
sand flax declined to zero in all management units at The Nature 
Conservancy's preserve in 2006. In a 2007 post-hurricane assessment, 
sand flax was found in northern plots, but not in any of the southern 
plots on Big Pine Key. More current data are not available.
    Overall, the magnitude of threats is high, because the threats 
affect all 12 known occurrences of the species and can result in a 
precipitous decline to the population levels, particularly when 
combined with the potential impacts

[[Page 70043]]

from hurricanes or other natural disasters. Because development is not 
immediate for the majority of the largest population in Miami-Dade 
County and another population in the Keys is also largely protected 
from development because much of it is within public and private 
conservation lands, the threat of habitat loss remains nonimminent. In 
addition, sea-level rise is a long-term threat because we do not have 
evidence that it is present in any population of sand flax. Therefore, 
we retained an LPN of 5 for this species.
    Linum carteri var. carteri (Carter's small-flowered flax)--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 plant occupies open and disturbed sites in pinelands of 
Miami-Dade County, Florida. Currently, there are nine known 
occurrences. Occurrences with fewer than 100 individuals are located on 
three county-owned preserves. A site with more than 100 plants is owned 
by the U.S. government, but the site is not managed for conservation.
    Climatic changes, including sea-level rise, are long-term threats 
that will likely reduce the extent of habitat. The nine existing 
occurrences are small and vulnerable to habitat loss, which is 
exacerbated by habitat degradation due to fire suppression, the 
difficulty of applying prescribed fire to pine rocklands, and threats 
from nonnative plants. Remaining habitats are fragmented. Incompatible 
management practices are also a threat at most protected sites; several 
sites are mowed during the flowering and fruiting season. In the 
absence of fire, periodic mowing can, in some cases, help maintain 
open, shrub-free understory and provide benefits to this plant. 
However, mowing can also eliminate reproduction entirely in very young 
plants, delay reproductive maturation, and kill adult plants. With 
flexibility in timing and proper management, threats from mowing 
practices can be reduced or negated. Carter's small-flowered flax is 
vulnerable to natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, tropical 
storms, and storm surges. This species exists in such small numbers at 
so few sites that it may be difficult to develop and maintain viable 
occurrences on the available conservation lands. Although no population 
viability analysis has been conducted for this plant, indications are 
that existing occurrences are at best marginal, and it is possible that 
none are truly viable. As a result, the magnitude of threats is high. 
The threats are ongoing, and thus are imminent. Therefore, we assigned 
an LPN of 3 to this plant variety.
    Myrsine fosbergii (Kolea)--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. Myrsine fosbergii is a 
branched shrub or small tree found in lowland mesic and wet forests, on 
watercourses or stream banks, on the islands of Kauai and Oahu, Hawaii. 
This species is currently known from 14 populations totaling a little 
more than 100 individuals. Myrsine fosbergii is threatened by feral 
pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra hircus) that degrade and destroy 
habitat and may forage upon the plant, and by nonnative plants that 
compete for light and nutrients. This species is represented in an ex 
situ collection. Although there are plans to fence and remove ungulates 
from the Helemano area of Oahu, which may benefit this species, no 
conservation measures have yet been taken to protect this species from 
nonnative herbivores. Feral pigs and goats are found throughout the 
known range of M. fosbergii, as are nonnative plants. The threats from 
feral pigs, goats, and nonnative plants are of a high magnitude because 
they pose a severe threat throughout the limited range of this species, 
and they are ongoing and therefore imminent. We retained an LPN of 2 
for this species.
    Nothocestrum latifolium (`Aiea)--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. Nothocestrum latifolium is a 
small tree found in dry to mesic forests on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, 
Maui, Molokai, and Lanai, Hawaii. Nothocestrum latifolium is known from 
17 declining populations totaling fewer than 1,200 individuals. This 
species is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), 
and deer (Axis axis and Odocoileus hemionus) that degrade and destroy 
habitat and may forage upon it; by nonnative plants that compete for 
light and nutrients; and by the loss of pollinators that negatively 
affect the reproductive viability of the species. This species is 
represented in an ex situ collection. Ungulates have been fenced out of 
four areas where N. latifolium currently occurs, hundreds of N. 
latifolium individuals have been outplanted in fenced areas, and 
nonnative plants have been reduced in some populations that are fenced. 
However, these ongoing conservation efforts for this species benefit 
only a few of the known populations. The threats are not controlled and 
are ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations. In addition, little 
regeneration is observed in this species. The threats are of a high 
magnitude, as they are severe enough to affect the continued existence 
of the species, leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. 
The threats are imminent, because they are ongoing. Therefore, we 
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Ochrosia haleakalae (Holei)--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. Ochrosia haleakalae is a tree 
found in dry to mesic forests, often on lava, on the islands of Hawaii 
and Maui. This species is currently known from 8 populations totaling 
between 64 and 76 individuals. Ochrosia haleakalae is threatened by 
fire; by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and cattle (Bos 
taurus) that degrade and destroy habitat and may directly forage upon 
it; and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. This 
species is represented in ex situ collections. Feral pigs, goats, and 
cattle have been fenced out of one wild and one outplanted population 
on private lands on the island of Maui and out of one outplanted 
population in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park on the island of Hawaii. 
Nonnative plants have been reduced in the fenced areas. The threat from 
fire is of a high magnitude and imminent because no control measures 
have been undertaken to address this threat that could adversely affect 
O. haleakalae as a whole. The threats from feral pigs, goats, and 
cattle are ongoing to the unfenced populations of O. haleakalae. The 
threat from nonnative plants is ongoing, imminent, and of a high 
magnitude to the wild populations on both islands as this threat 
adversely affects the survival and reproductive capacity of the 
majority of the individuals of this species, leading to a relatively 
high likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for 
this species.
    Penstemon scariosus var. albifluvis (White River beardtongue)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition we received on October 27, 1983. This species is 
restricted to calcareous soils derived from oil shale barrens of the 
Green River Formation in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah and 
adjacent Colorado. There are 20 occurrences known in Utah and 1 in 
Colorado. Most of the occupied habitat of the White River beardtongue 
is within developed and expanding oil and gas fields. The location of 
the species' habitat exposes it to destruction from road, pipeline, and 
well site

[[Page 70044]]

construction in connection with oil and gas development. Grazing by 
wildlife and livestock is an additional threat. A future threat (and 
potentially the greatest threat) to the species is oil shale 
development. Traditional oil and gas energy development is currently 
occurring and expected to increase within habitat areas for this 
species, and therefore the threat is imminent. However, the BLM has 
adopted a Special Status Species policy and has included in its current 
Resource Management Plan actions to protect this species. These 
protections lessen the extent of traditional oil and gas development 
impacts to this species, so that although oil and gas development will 
continue to increase within this species' range, the threat is of 
moderate magnitude. The threats are ongoing and therefore imminent. 
Thus, we assigned an LPN of 9 to this plant variety.
    Physaria globosa (Desvaux) O'Kane & Al-Shehbaz (Short's 
bladderpod)--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. Short's bladderpod is a perennial member of the 
mustard family that occurs in Indiana (1 location), Kentucky (6 
locations), and Tennessee (22 locations). It grows on steep, rocky, 
wooded slopes; on talus areas; along cliff tops and bases; and on cliff 
ledges. It is usually associated with south- to west-facing calcareous 
outcrops adjacent to rivers or streams. Road construction and road 
maintenance have played a significant role in the decline of P. 
globosa. Specific activities that have affected the species in the past 
and may continue to threaten it include bank stabilization, herbicide 
use, mowing during the growing season, grading of road shoulders, and 
road widening or repaving. Sediment deposition during road maintenance 
or from other activities also potentially threatens the species. 
Because the natural processes that maintained habitat suitability and 
competition from invasive, nonnative vegetation have been interrupted 
at many locations, active habitat management is necessary at those 
sites. Threats associated with roadside maintenance activities and 
habitat alterations by invasive plant encroachment are imminent because 
they are ongoing. These threats are of moderate magnitude as they are 
not affecting all locations of this species at this time, the viability 
of 10 of the 22 occurrences observed in Tennessee were rated as fair or 
better, and efforts undertaken to restore suitable habitat conditions 
at the Indiana site apparently have shown early signs of success. 
Therefore, we assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
    Pinus albicaulis (Whitebark pine)--The following summary is based 
on information in our files and in the petition received on December 9, 
2008. Pinus albicaulis is a hardy conifer found at alpine tree line and 
subalpine elevations in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Idaho, 
Montana, and Wyoming, and in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada. In 
the United States, approximately 96 percent of land where the species 
occurs is federally owned or managed, primarily by the U.S. Forest 
Service. Pinus albicaulis is a slow-growing, long-lived tree with a 
life span of up to 500 years and sometimes more than 1,000 years. It is 
considered a keystone, or foundation, species in western North America, 
where it increases biodiversity and contributes to critical ecosystem 
functions.
    The primary threat to the species is from disease in the form of 
the nonnative white pine blister rust and its interaction with other 
threats. Pinus albicaulis also is currently experiencing significant 
mortality from predation by the native mountain pine beetle. We also 
anticipate that continuing environmental effects resulting from climate 
change will result in direct habitat loss for P. albicaulis. 
Bioclimatic models predict that suitable habitat for P. albicaulis will 
decline precipitously within the next 100 years. Past and ongoing fire 
suppression is also negatively affecting populations of P. albicaulis 
through direct habitat loss. Additionally, environmental changes 
resulting from changing climatic conditions are acting alone and in 
combination with the effects of fire suppression to increase the 
frequency and severity of wildfires. Lastly, the existing regulatory 
mechanisms are inadequate to address the threats presented above. The 
threats that face P. albicaulis are high in magnitude because the major 
threats occur throughout all of the species' range and are having a 
major population-level effect on the species. The threats are imminent 
because rangewide disease, predation, fire and fire suppression, and 
environmental effects of climate change are affecting P. albicaulis 
currently and are expected to continue and likely intensify in the 
foreseeable future. Thus, we have assigned P. albicaulis an LPN of 2.
    Platanthera integrilabia (Correll) Leur (White fringeless orchid)--
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. Platanthera integrilabia is a perennial herb that grows in 
partially, but not fully, shaded, wet, boggy areas at the head of 
streams and on seepage slopes in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, 
Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Historically, there were at 
least 90 populations of P. integrilabia. It is presumed extirpated from 
North Carolina and Virginia. Currently there are about 60 extant sites 
supporting the species.
    Several populations have been destroyed due to road, residential, 
and commercial construction, and to projects that altered soil and site 
hydrology such that suitability for the species was reduced. Several of 
the known populations are in or adjacent to powerline rights-of-way. 
Mechanical clearing of these areas may benefit the species by 
maintaining adequate light levels, but can promote development of 
dense, shrubby vegetation due to extensive suckering of woody species; 
however, the indiscriminant use of herbicides in these areas could pose 
a significant threat to the species. All-terrain vehicles have damaged 
several sites and pose a threat at most sites. Some of the known sites 
for the species occur in areas that are managed specifically for timber 
production. Timber management is not necessarily incompatible with the 
protection and management of the species, but care must be taken during 
timber management to ensure that the hydrology of bogs supporting the 
species is not altered. Natural succession can result in decreased 
light levels. Because of the species' dependence upon moderate-to-high 
light levels, some type of active management to prevent complete canopy 
closure is required at most locations. Collecting for commercial and 
other purposes is a potential threat. Herbivory (primarily deer) 
threatens the species at several sites. Due to the alteration of 
habitat and changes in natural conditions, protection and recovery of 
this species is dependent upon active management rather than just 
preservation of habitat. Invasive, nonnative plants such as Japanese 
honeysuckle and kudzu also threaten several sites. The threats are 
widespread; however, the impact of those threats on the species' 
survival is moderate in magnitude. Several of the sites are protected 
to some degree from the threats by being within State parks, national 
forests, wildlife management areas, or other protected land and the 
species is spread out over sites in several States. The threats, 
however, are imminent because they are ongoing, and

[[Page 70045]]

we have therefore assigned an LPN of 8 to this species.
    Potentilla basaltica (Soldier Meadow cinquefoil or basalt 
cinquefoil)--We continue to find that listing this species is warranted 
but precluded as of the date of publication of this notice. However, we 
are working on a proposed listing rule that we expect to publish prior 
to making the next annual resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the 
course of preparing the proposed listing rule, we are continuing to 
monitor new information about this species' status so that we can make 
prompt use of our authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an 
emergency posing a significant risk to the species.
    Pseudognaphalium (= Gnaphalium) sandwicensium var. molokaiense 
(Enaena)--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. Pseudognaphalium sandwicensium var. molokaiense is a 
perennial herb found in strand vegetation in dry consolidated dunes on 
the islands of Molokai and Maui. Historically, this variety was also 
found on Oahu and Lanai. This variety is known from 5 populations 
totaling approximately 200 to 20,000 individuals (depending upon 
rainfall) in the Moomomi area on the island of Molokai, and from 2 
populations of a few individuals at Waiehu dunes and at Puu Kahulianapa 
on west Maui. Pseudognaphalium sandwicensium var. molokaiense is 
threatened by feral goats (Capra hircus) and axis deer (Axis axis) that 
degrade and destroy habitat and possibly prey upon it, and by nonnative 
plants that compete for light and nutrients. Potential threats also 
include collection for lei-making and off-road vehicles that directly 
damage plants and degrade habitat. Weed control is conducted for one 
population on Molokai; however, no conservation efforts have been 
initiated to date for the other populations on Molokai or for the 
individuals on Maui. This species is represented in an ex situ 
collection. The ongoing threats from feral goats, axis deer, nonnative 
plants, collection, and off-road vehicles are of a high magnitude 
because no control measures have been undertaken for the Maui 
population or for four of the five Molokai populations, and the threats 
result in direct mortality for a plant that already has very low 
population numbers, or significantly reduce reproductive capacity for 
the majority of the populations, leading to a relatively high 
likelihood of extinction. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 3 for this 
plant variety.
    Ranunculus hawaiensis (Makou)--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. Ranunculus hawaiensis is an 
erect or ascending perennial herb found in mesic to wet forests 
dominated by Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) and Acacia koa (koa) with 
scree substrate (loose stones or rocky debris on a slope) on the 
islands of Maui and Hawaii, Hawaii. This species is currently known 
from 14 individuals in 6 populations on the island of Hawaii. This does 
not include one population on Maui (Kukui Planeze) that was not 
relocated on a survey conducted in 2006 or one wild population at 
Waikamoi (also on Maui) has not been observed since 1995. Ranunculus 
hawaiensis is threatened by direct predation by slugs (Limax maximus, 
Vaginulus plebeius, and Milax gagates), feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats 
(Capra hircus), cattle (Bos taurus), mouflon (Ovis musimon), and feral 
sheep (O. aries); by pigs, goats, cattle, mouflon, and feral sheep that 
degrade and destroy habitat; and by nonnative plants that compete for 
light and nutrients. This species is represented in ex situ 
collections, and three populations have been outplanted into protected 
exclosures; however, feral ungulates and nonnative plants are not 
controlled in the remaining, unfenced populations. In addition, the 
threat from introduced slugs is of a high magnitude because slugs occur 
throughout the limited range of this species and no effective measures 
have been undertaken to control them or prevent them from causing 
significant adverse impacts to this species which currently is only 
known to have a small number of individuals. Overall, the threats from 
pigs, goats, cattle, mouflon, feral sheep, slugs, and nonnative plants 
are of a high magnitude and are ongoing (imminent) for R. hawaiensis. 
We retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Ranunculus mauiensis (Makou)--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. Ranunculus mauiensis is an 
erect to weakly ascending perennial herb found in open sites in mesic 
to wet forests and along streams on the islands of Maui, Kauai, and 
Molokai, Hawaii. This species is currently known from 14 populations 
totaling 198 individuals. Ranunculus mauiensis is threatened by feral 
pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), mule deer (Odocoileus 
hemionus), axis deer (Axis axis), and slugs (Limax maximus, Vaginulus 
plebeius, and Milax gagates) that consume it; by habitat degradation 
and destruction by feral pigs, goats, and deer; and by nonnative plants 
that compete for light and nutrients. This species is represented in an 
ex situ collection. Feral pigs have been fenced out of one Maui 
population of R. mauiensis, and nonnative plants have been reduced in 
the fenced area. One individual occurs in the Kamakou Preserve on 
Molokai, managed by The Nature Conservancy. However, ongoing 
conservation efforts benefit only two populations. The threats are of 
high magnitude because the threats result in direct mortality for a 
plant that already has low population numbers, or significantly reduce 
reproductive capacity for the majority of the populations, leading to a 
relatively high likelihood of extinction. They are imminent because 
they are ongoing in the Kauai and the majority of the Maui populations. 
Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Rorippa subumbellata (Tahoe yellow cress)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition we 
received on December 27, 2000. Rorippa subumbellata is a small, 
branching, perennial herb with umbel-like inflorescences and yellow 
flowers. Rorippa subumbellata is known only from the shores of Lake 
Tahoe in California and Nevada. Data collected over the last 25 years 
generally indicate that species occurrence fluctuates yearly as a 
function of both lake level and the amount of exposed habitat. Records 
kept since 1900 show a preponderance of years with high lake levels 
that would isolate and reduce R. subumbellata occurrences at higher 
beach elevations. From the standpoint of the species, less favorable 
peak years have occurred almost twice as often as more favorable low-
level years. Annual surveys are conducted to determine population 
numbers, site occupancy, and general disturbance regime. During the 
2003 and 2004 annual survey periods, the lake level was approximately 
6,224 ft (1,897.08m); 2004 was the fourth consecutive year of low 
water. Rorippa subumbellata was present at 46 of the 60 sites surveyed, 
up from 31 occupied sites in 2001, when the lake level was higher at 
6,225 ft (1,897.38 m). Approximately 25,200 stems were present in 2003, 
whereas during the 2001 annual survey, the estimated number of stems 
was 6,136. Lake levels rose again in 2006, and less habitat was 
available. Lake levels dropped again in 2008 through 2010, leading to 
an

[[Page 70046]]

increase in both occupied sites and estimated stem counts. During very 
low lake levels in 2009, an estimated 27,522 stems were observed at 46 
sites, equal to the highest number of occupied sites previously 
recorded. In 2011, the lake level was 6,228.4 ft (1,898.4 m), 3.8 ft 
(1.2 m) higher than in 2010, and an estimated 6,494 stems were observed 
at 25 sites.
    Many Rorippa subumbellata sites are intensively used for commercial 
and public purposes and are subject to various activities such as 
erosion control, marina developments, pier construction, and 
recreation. The U.S. Forest Service, California Tahoe Conservancy, and 
California Department of Parks and Recreation have management programs 
for R. subumbellata that include monitoring, fenced enclosures, and 
transplanting efforts when funds and staff are available. Public 
agencies (including the Service), private landowners, and environmental 
groups collaborated to develop a Conservation Strategy coupled with a 
Memorandum of Understanding-Conservation Agreement. The Conservation 
Strategy, completed in 2003, lays out goals and objectives for recovery 
and survival, contains a research and monitoring agenda, and serves as 
the foundation for an adaptive management program. Because of the 
continued commitments to conservation demonstrated by regulatory and 
land management agencies participating in the conservation strategy, we 
have determined the threats to R. subumbellata from various land uses 
have been reduced to a moderate magnitude. In high lake level years 
such as 2011, however, recreational use is concentrated within R. 
subumbellata habitat, and we consider this threat in particular to be 
ongoing and imminent. Therefore, we are maintaining an LPN of 8 for 
this species.
    Schiedea pubescens (Maolioli)--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. Schiedea pubescens is a 
reclining or weakly climbing vine found in diverse mesic to wet forests 
on the islands of Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii, Hawaii. It is presumed 
extirpated from Lanai. Currently, this species is known from 8 
populations totaling between 30 and 32 individuals on Maui, from 4 
populations totaling between 21 and 22 individuals on Molokai, and from 
1 population of 4 to 6 individuals on the island of Hawaii. Schiedea 
pubescens is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa) and goats (Capra 
hircus) that consume it and degrade and destroy habitat, and by 
nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. Feral ungulates 
have been fenced out of the population of S. pubescens on the island of 
Hawaii. Feral goats have been fenced out of a few of the west Maui 
populations of S. pubescens. Nonnative plants have been reduced in the 
populations that are fenced on Maui. However, the threats are not 
controlled and are ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations on 
Maui and the four populations on Molokai. Additional fenced areas are 
planned at Pohakuloa Training Area on the island of Hawaii. Nonnative 
feral ungulates and nonnative plants will be controlled within these 
fenced areas. Fire is a potential threat to the Hawaii Island 
population. This species is not represented in an ex situ collection. 
Due to the extremely low number of individuals of this species, the 
threats from goats and nonnative plants are of a high magnitude. These 
threats cause mortality and reduced reproductive capacity for the 
majority of the populations, leading to a relatively high likelihood of 
extinction. The threats are imminent because they are ongoing with 
respect to most of the populations. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 
for this species.
    Sedum eastwoodiae (Red Mountain stonecrop)--We continue to find 
that listing this species is warranted but precluded as of the date of 
publication of this notice. However, we are working on a proposed 
listing rule that we expect to publish prior to making the next annual 
resubmitted petition 12-month finding. In the course of preparing the 
proposed listing rule, we are continuing to monitor new information 
about this species' status so that we can make prompt use of our 
authority under Section 4(b)(7) in the case of an emergency posing a 
significant risk to the species.
    Sicyos macrophyllus (`Anunu)--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. Sicyos macrophyllus is a 
perennial vine found in wet Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia) forests and 
subalpine Sophora chrysophylla-Myoporum sandwicense (mamane-naio) 
forests. Sicyos macrophyllus was historically known from Kipahulu 
Valley on Maui and was widely distributed on the island of Hawaii. 
Currently, this species is known from 10 populations totaling between 
24 and 26 individuals in the Kohala and Mauna Kea areas, and in Hawaii 
Volcanoes National Park (Puna area) on the island of Hawaii. It appears 
that a naturally occurring population at Kipuka Ki in Hawaii Volcanoes 
National Park is reproducing by seeds, but seeds have not been 
successfully germinated under nursery conditions.
    This species is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), cattle (Bos 
taurus), and mouflon (Ovis musimon) that degrade and destroy habitat, 
and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. This 
species is represented in ex situ collections. Feral pigs have been 
fenced out of some of the areas where S. macrophyllus currently occurs, 
but the fences do not exclude mouflon. Nonnative plants have been 
reduced in the populations that are fenced. However, the threats are 
not controlled and are ongoing in the remaining, unfenced populations, 
and are, therefore, imminent. Similarly the threat from mouflon is 
ongoing and imminent in all populations, because the current fences do 
not exclude them. In addition, all of the threats are of a high 
magnitude because habitat degradation and competition from nonnative 
plants present a risk to the species, resulting in direct mortality for 
a species that already has very low population numbers, or 
significantly reducing the reproductive capacity. Therefore, we 
retained an LPN of 2 for this species.
    Solanum conocarpum (marron bacora)--The following summary is based 
on information in our files and in the petition we received on November 
21, 1996. Solanum conocarpum is a dry-forest shrub in the island of St. 
John, U.S. Virgin Islands. Its current distribution includes eight 
localities in the island of St. John, each ranging from 1 to 144 
individuals. The species has been reported to occur on dry, poor soils. 
It can be locally abundant in exposed topography on sites disturbed by 
erosion, areas that have received moderate grazing, and around 
ridgelines as an understory component in diverse woodland communities. 
A habitat suitability model suggests that the vast majority of Solanum 
conocarpum habitat is found in the lower elevation coastal scrub 
forest. Efforts have been conducted to propagate the species to enhance 
natural populations, and planting of seedlings has been conducted in 
the island of St. John.
    Solanum conocarpum is threatened by the lack of natural 
recruitment, absence of dispersers, fragmented distribution, lack of 
genetic variation, climate change, and habitat destruction or 
modification by exotic mammal species. These threats are evidenced by 
the reduced number of individuals, low number of populations, and lack 
of connectivity between populations. Overall, we determined the 
magnitude of the threats to be high as shown by the

[[Page 70047]]

poor quality of the populations. The majority of threats are ongoing 
and, therefore, imminent. We assigned an LPN of 2 to this species.
    Solanum nelsonii (popolo)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files. No new information was provided in 
the petition we received on May 11, 2004. Solanum nelsonii is a 
sprawling or trailing shrub found in coral rubble or sand in coastal 
sites. This species is known from populations on Molokai (approximately 
300 individuals), the island of Hawaii (5 individuals), and the 
northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI), Hawaii. The current populations 
in the NWHI are found on Kure (unknown number of individuals), Midway 
(approximately 260 individuals), Laysan (approximately 490 
individuals), Pearl and Hermes (unknown number of individuals), and 
Nihoa (8,000 to 15,000 individuals). On Molokai, S. nelsonii is 
moderately threatened by ungulates that degrade and destroy habitat, 
and may eat S. nelsonii. On Molokai and the NWHI, this species is 
threatened by nonnative plants that outcompete and displace it. Solanum 
nelsonii is threatened by herbivory by a nonnative grasshopper 
(Schistocerca nitens) in the NWHI. On Kure, Midway, Laysan, and Pearl 
and Hermes in the NWHI, tsunamis are also a potential threat to S. 
nelsonii. This species is represented in ex situ collections. Ungulate 
exclusion fences, routine fence monitoring and maintenance, and weed 
control protect the population of S. nelsonii on Molokai. Limited weed 
control is conducted in the NWHI. These threats are of moderate 
magnitude because of the relatively large number of plants, and the 
fact that this species is found on more than one island. The threats 
are imminent for the majority of the populations because they are 
ongoing and are not being controlled. We therefore retained an LPN of 8 
for this species.
    Solidago plumosa (Yadkin River goldenrod)--The following 
information is based on information in our files. No new information 
was provided in the petition we received on April 20, 2010. The global 
distribution of Solidago plumosa consists of a single population that 
occurs in two discrete locations along a 2.5-mile stretch of the Yadkin 
River in North Carolina.
    The availability of suitable habitat and the fate of the single 
known population of this species are primarily determined by the manner 
in which two hydroelectric projects (the Yadkin River and Yadkin-Pee 
Dee River Hydroelectric Projects) are operated. Any detrimental effects 
to S. plumosa resulting from the construction of these reservoirs 
occurred decades ago when these projects were built (during the years 
of 1917 to 1928), and the Service is not aware of any plans to 
construct additional reservoirs within the current range of this 
species. However, S. plumosa continues to be subject to threats from 
the continued operation of these reservoirs (which has reduced the 
frequency and severity of scouring floods that help to prevent the 
establishment of other species within the species' limited habitat) and 
the encroachment of nonnative, invasive species. Because the species' 
global distribution consists of a single population, its entire range 
is affected by these threats. However, because scouring floods (prior 
to reservoir construction) likely only occurred episodically, and in 
light of the relatively slow progression of nonnative species into 
areas of occupied habitat and efforts to reduce these nonnative plants, 
the magnitude of these threats is moderate to low. However, because 
these threats (especially those presented by nonnative, invasive plant 
species) are currently occurring, they are imminent. Thus, we assigned 
this species an LPN of 8.
    Symphyotrichum georgianum (Georgia aster) -- 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. Georgia aster is 
a relict species of post oak savanna/prairie communities that existed 
in the Southeast prior to widespread fire suppression and extirpation 
of large, native, grazing animals. Georgia aster currently occurs in 
the States of Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. The 
species is presumed extant in 8 counties in Alabama, 22 counties in 
Georgia, 9 counties in North Carolina, and 15 counties in South 
Carolina. The species appears to have been eliminated from Florida.
    Most remaining populations survive adjacent to roads, utility 
rights-of-way, and other openings where current land management mimics 
natural disturbance regimes. Most populations are small (10 to 100 
stems), and because the species' main mode of reproduction is 
vegetative, each isolated population may represent only a few 
genotypes. Many populations are currently threatened by one or more of 
the following factors: woody succession due to fire suppression, 
development, highway expansion or improvement, and herbicide 
application. However, the species is still relatively widely 
distributed, and information indicates that the species is more 
abundant than when we initially identified it as a candidate for 
listing. Taking into account its distribution and abundance, and the 
fact that it is increasing, the magnitude of threats is moderate. The 
threats are currently occurring and therefore are imminent. Thus we 
assigned an LPN of 8 for this species.
    Trifolium friscanum (Frisco clover)--The following summary is based 
on information in our files and the petition we received on July 30, 
2007. Frisco clover is a dwarf mat-forming or tufted perennial herb 
with a woody stem, silver hairy leaves, and reddish-purple flowers. The 
species is a narrow endemic found only in Utah, with five known 
populations restricted to sparsely vegetated, pinion-juniper-sagebrush 
communities and shallow, gravel soils derived from volcanic gravels, 
Ordovician limestone, and dolomite outcrops. The majority (68 percent) 
of Frisco clover plants occur on private lands, with the remaining 
plants found on Federal and State lands.
    On the private and State lands, the most significant threat to 
Frisco clover is habitat destruction from mining for precious metals 
and gravel. Active mining claims, recent prospecting, and an increasing 
demand for precious metals and gravel indicate that mining in Frisco 
clover habitats will increase in the foreseeable future, likely 
resulting in the loss of large numbers of plants. Other threats to 
Frisco clover include nonnative, invasive species; vulnerability 
associated with small population size; drought associated with climate 
change; and the overall inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. 
We consider the threats to Frisco clover to be moderate in magnitude 
because, while serious and occurring rangewide, they are not acting 
independently or cumulatively to have a highly significant negative 
impact on its survival or reproductive capacity. The threats are 
imminent because the species is currently facing them across its entire 
range. Therefore, we have assigned Frisco clover an LPN of 8.

Ferns and Allies

    Cyclosorus boydiae (no common name)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files. No new information was provided 
in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is a small- 
to medium-sized fern found in mesic to wet forests along stream banks 
on the islands of Oahu and Maui, Hawaii. Historically, this species was 
also found on the island of Hawaii, but it has been extirpated there. 
Currently, this species is known from 7 populations totaling

[[Page 70048]]

approximately 400 individuals. This species is threatened by feral pigs 
(Sus scrofa) that degrade and destroy habitat and may eat this plant, 
and by nonnative plants that compete for light and nutrients. Feral 
pigs have been fenced out of two populations, including the largest 
population, on Maui, and nonnative plants are being controlled in the 
fenced areas at these sites. No conservation efforts are under way to 
alleviate threats to the other populations on Maui, or the two 
populations on Oahu. This species is represented in an ex situ 
collection. The magnitude of the threats acting upon the currently 
extant populations is moderate because two of the seven populations, 
including the largest population that contains 40 percent of the total 
population for the species, are protected from pigs, and nonnative 
plants are being controlled in these areas. The threats are ongoing and 
therefore imminent. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 8 for this 
species.
    Huperzia stemmermanniae (Waewaeiole)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files. No new information was 
provided in the petition we received on May 11, 2004. This species is 
an epiphytic pendant clubmoss found in mesic-to-wet Metrosideros 
polymorpha-Acacia koa (ohia-koa) forests on the islands of Maui and 
Hawaii, Hawaii. Only 3 populations are known, totaling approximately 20 
individuals. The Maui population has not been observed since 1995. 
Huperzia stemmermanniae is threatened by feral pigs (Sus scrofa), goats 
(Capra hircus), cattle (Bos taurus), and axis deer (Axis axis) that 
degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that compete for 
light, space, and nutrients. Huperzia stemmermanniae is also threatened 
by randomly occurring natural events due to its small population size. 
One individual at Waikamoi Preserve may benefit from fencing for axis 
deer and pigs. This species is represented in ex situ collections. The 
threats from pigs, goats, cattle, axis deer, and nonnative plants are 
of a high magnitude because they are sufficiently severe to adversely 
affect the species throughout its limited range, resulting in direct 
mortality for a species that already has very low population numbers, 
or significantly reducing reproductive capacity and leading to a 
relatively high likelihood of extinction. The threats are imminent 
because they are ongoing. Therefore, we retained an LPN of 2 for this 
species.
    Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis (Palapalai)--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. 
Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis is a terrestrial fern found in 
mesic-to-wet forests. It is currently found in Hawaii on the islands of 
Maui, Oahu, and Hawaii, from at least 9 populations totaling at least 
50 individuals. There is a possibility that the range of this plant 
variety could be larger and include the other main Hawaiian Islands. 
Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis is threatened by feral pigs (Sus 
scrofa) that degrade and destroy habitat, and by nonnative plants that 
compete for light and nutrients. Pigs have been fenced out of some 
areas on east and west Maui, Oahu, and on Hawaii, where M. strigosa 
var. mauiensis currently occurs, and nonnative plants have been reduced 
in the fenced areas. However, the threats are not controlled and are 
ongoing in the remaining unfenced populations on Maui, Oahu, and 
Hawaii. Therefore, the threats from feral pigs and nonnative plants are 
imminent. The threats are of a high magnitude because they are 
sufficiently severe to adversely affect the species throughout its 
range, resulting in direct mortality for a species that already has 
very low population numbers, or significantly reducing reproductive 
capacity and leading to a relatively high likelihood of extinction. We 
therefore retained an LPN of 3 for M. strigosa var. mauiensis.

Petitions To Reclassify Species Already Listed or To Add to the Listed 
Range

    We previously made warranted-but-precluded findings on five 
petitions seeking to reclassify threatened species to endangered 
status. The taxa involved in the reclassification petitions are three 
populations of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), delta smelt 
(Hypomesus transpacificus), and Sclerocactus brevispinus (Pariette 
cactus). Because these species are already listed under the ESA, they 
are not candidates for listing and are not included in Table 1. 
However, this notice and associated species assessment forms or 5-year 
review documents also constitute the resubmitted petition findings for 
these species. For the three grizzly bear populations, our recently 
completed 5-year review serves as our assessment. For delta smelt and 
Sclerocactus brevispinus, our updated assessments are provided below. 
We find that reclassification to endangered status for the three 
grizzly bear populations, delta smelt, and Sclerocactus brevispinus are 
all currently warranted but precluded by work identified above (see 
``Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species''). One of the primary 
reasons that the work identified above is considered to have higher 
priority is that the grizzly bear populations, delta smelt, and 
Sclerocactus brevispinus are currently listed as threatened, and 
therefore already receive certain protections under the ESA. We 
promulgated regulations extending take prohibitions for wildlife and 
plants under section 9 to threatened species (50 CFR 17.31 and 50 CFR 
17.71, respectively). Prohibited actions under section 9 for wildlife 
include, but are not limited to, take (i.e., to harass, harm, pursue, 
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to 
engage in such activity). For plants, prohibited actions under section 
9 include removing or reducing to possession any listed plant from an 
area under Federal jurisdiction (50 CFR 17.61). Other protections that 
apply to these threatened species even before we complete proposed and 
final reclassification rules include those under section 7(a)(2) of the 
ESA whereby Federal agencies must insure that any action they 
authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued 
existence of any endangered or threatened species.
    Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) North Cascades ecosystem, 
Cabinet-Yaak, and Selkirk populations (Region 6)--Between 1986 and 
2007, we have received and reviewed 10 petitions requesting a change in 
status for individual grizzly bear populations (51 FR 16363, May 2, 
1986; 55 FR 32103, August 7, 1990; 56 FR 33892, July 24, 1991; 57 FR 
14372, April 20, 1992; 58 FR 8250, February 12, 1993; 58 FR 38552, July 
19, 1993; 58 FR 43856, August 18, 1993; 58 FR 43857, August 18, 1993; 
59 FR 46611, September 9, 1994; 64 FR 26725, May 17, 1999; 72 FR 14866, 
March 29, 2007). Through this process, we determined that the Cabinet-
Yaak, Selkirk, and North Cascade ecosystems warrant endangered status. 
On April 18, 2007, the Service initiated a 5-year review to evaluate 
the current status of grizzly bears in the lower 48 States (72 FR 
19549-19551). This status review, completed on August 29, 2011, and 
available online at: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A001 spcode=A001, recommended that reclassifying as 
endangered the Cabinet-Yaak, Selkirk, and North Cascades Ecosystems 
remain warranted but precluded.
    Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) (Region 8) (see 75 FR 17667, 
April 7, 2010, for additional information on why reclassification to 
endangered is warranted but precluded)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files. In April 2010, we completed a 
12-

[[Page 70049]]

month finding for delta smelt in which we determined a change in status 
from threatened to endangered was warranted, although precluded by 
other high-priority listings. The primary evidence is the continuing 
downward trend in delta smelt abundance indices since the significant 
decline that occurred in 2002. A 2005 population viability analysis 
calculated a 50-percent likelihood that the species could reach 
effective extinction (8,000 individuals) within 20 years.
    The primary threats to the delta smelt are direct entrainments by 
State and Federal water export facilities, summer and fall increases in 
salinity and water clarity resulting from decreases in freshwater flow 
into the estuary, and effects from introduced species. Ammonia in the 
form of ammonium may also be a significant threat to the survival of 
the delta smelt. Additional potential threats are predation by striped 
and largemouth bass and inland silversides, entrainment into power 
plants, contaminants, and small population size. Existing regulatory 
mechanisms have not proven adequate to halt the decline of delta smelt 
since the time of listing as a threatened species.
    As a result of our analysis of the best available scientific and 
commercial information, we have retained the recommendation of 
uplisting the delta smelt to an endangered species with a LPN of 2, 
based on high magnitude and imminent threats. The magnitude of the 
threats is high, because the threats occur rangewide and result in 
direct mortality for a species that already has low population numbers, 
or significantly reduce the reproductive capacity of the species. 
Threats are imminent because they are ongoing and, in some cases (e.g., 
nonnative species), considered irreversible.
    Sclerocactus brevispinus (Pariette cactus) (Region 6) (see 72 FR 
53211, September 18, 2007, and the species assessment form (see 
ADDRESSES) for additional information on why reclassification to 
endangered is warranted but precluded)--Sclerocactus brevispinus is 
restricted to clay badlands of the Wagon Hound member of the Uinta 
Formation in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah. The species is 
restricted to one population with an overall range of approximately 10 
miles by 5 miles in extent. The species' entire population is within a 
developed and expanding oil and gas field. The location of the species' 
habitat exposes it to destruction from road, pipeline, and well-site 
construction in connection with oil and gas development. The species 
may be collected as a specimen plant for horticultural use. 
Recreational off-road vehicle use and livestock trampling are 
additional potential threats. The species is currently federally listed 
as threatened by its previous inclusion within the species Sclerocactus 
glaucus. The threats are of a high magnitude because any one of the 
threats has the potential to severely affect this species, a narrow 
endemic with a highly limited range and distribution. Threats are 
ongoing and, therefore, are imminent. Thus, we assigned an LPN of 2 to 
this species for uplisting.

Current Notice of Review

    We gather data on plants and animals native to the United States 
that appear to merit consideration for addition to the Lists of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists). This notice 
identifies those species that we currently regard as candidates for 
addition to the Lists. These candidates include species and subspecies 
of fish, wildlife, or plants, and DPSes of vertebrate animals. This 
compilation relies on information from status surveys conducted for 
candidate assessment and on information from State Natural Heritage 
Programs, other State and Federal agencies, knowledgeable scientists, 
public and private natural resource interests, and comments received in 
response to previous notices of review.
    Tables 1 and 2 list animals arranged alphabetically by common names 
under the major group headings, and list plants alphabetically by names 
of genera, species, and relevant subspecies and varieties. Animals are 
grouped by class or order. Plants are subdivided into two groups: (1) 
Flowering plants and (2) ferns and their allies. Useful synonyms and 
subgeneric scientific names appear in parentheses with the synonyms 
preceded by an ``equals'' sign. Several species that have not yet been 
formally described in the scientific literature are included; such 
species are identified by a generic or specific name (in italics), 
followed by ``sp.'' or ``ssp.'' We incorporate standardized common 
names in these notices as they become available. We sort plants by 
scientific name due to the inconsistencies in common names, the 
inclusion of vernacular and composite subspecific names, and the fact 
that many plants still lack a standardized common name.
    Table 1 lists all candidate species, plus species currently 
proposed for listing under the ESA. We emphasize that in this notice we 
are not proposing to list any of the candidate species; rather, we will 
develop and publish proposed listing rules for these species in the 
future. We encourage State agencies, other Federal agencies, and other 
parties to give consideration to these species in environmental 
planning.
    In Table 1, the ``category'' column on the left side of the table 
identifies the status of each species according to the following codes:
    PE--Species proposed for listing as endangered. Proposed species 
are those species for which we have published a proposed rule to list 
as endangered or threatened in the Federal Register. This category does 
not include species for which we have withdrawn or finalized the 
proposed rule.
    PT--Species proposed for listing as threatened.
    PSAT--Species proposed for listing as threatened due to similarity 
of appearance.
    C--Candidates: Species for which we have on file sufficient 
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support 
proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Issuance of 
proposed rules for these species is precluded at present by other 
higher priority listing actions. This category includes species for 
which we made a 12-month warranted-but-precluded finding on a petition 
to list. We made new findings on all petitions for which we previously 
made ``warranted-but-precluded'' findings. We identify the species for 
which we made a continued warranted-but-precluded finding on a 
resubmitted petition by the code ``C*'' in the category column (see 
``Findings for Petitioned Candidate Species'' section for additional 
information).
    The ``Priority'' column indicates the LPN for each candidate 
species, which we use to determine the most appropriate use of our 
available resources. The lowest numbers have the highest priority. We 
assign LPNs based on the immediacy and magnitude of threats, as well as 
on taxonomic status. We published a complete description of our listing 
priority system in the Federal Register (48 FR 43098, September 21, 
1983).
    The third column, ``Lead Region,'' identifies the Regional Office 
to which you should direct information, comments, or questions (see 
addresses under Request for Information at the end of the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section).
    Following the scientific name (fourth column) and the family 
designation (fifth column) is the common name (sixth column). The 
seventh column provides the known historical range for the species or 
vertebrate population (for vertebrate populations, this is the 
historical range for the entire species or

[[Page 70050]]

subspecies and not just the historical range for the distinct 
population segment), indicated by postal code abbreviations for States 
and U.S. territories. Many species no longer occur in all of the areas 
listed.
    Species in Table 2 of this notice are those we included either as 
proposed species or as candidates in the previous CNOR (published 
October 26, 2011, at 76 FR 66370) that are no longer proposed species 
or candidates for listing. Since October 26, 2011, we listed 41 
species, withdrew a proposed rule for one species, and removed 6 
species from candidate status for the reason indicated by the code. The 
first column indicates the present status of each species, using the 
following codes (not all of these codes may have been used in this 
CNOR):
    E--Species we listed as endangered.
    T--Species we listed as threatened.
    Rc--Species we removed from the candidate list because currently 
available information does not support a proposed listing.
    Rp--Species we removed from because we have withdrawn the proposed 
listing.
    The second column indicates why we no longer regard the species as 
a candidate or proposed species using the following codes (not all of 
these codes may have been used in this CNOR):
    A--Species that are more abundant or widespread than previously 
believed and species that are not subject to the degree of threats 
sufficient to warrant continuing candidate status, or issuing a 
proposed or final listing.
    F--Species whose range no longer includes a U.S. territory.
    I--Species for which we have insufficient information on biological 
vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to 
list.
    L--Species we added to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife and Plants.
    M--Species we mistakenly included as candidates or proposed species 
in the last notice of review.
    N--Species that are not listable entities based on the ESA's 
definition of ``species'' and current taxonomic understanding.
    U--Species that are not subject to the degree of threats sufficient 
to warrant issuance of a proposed listing or continuance of candidate 
status due, in part or totally, to conservation efforts that remove or 
reduce the threats to the species.
    X--Species we believe to be extinct.
    The columns describing lead region, scientific name, family, common 
name, and historical range include information as previously described 
for Table 1.

Request for Information

    We request you submit any further information on the species named 
in this notice as soon as possible or whenever it becomes available. We 
are particularly interested in any information:
    (1) Indicating that we should add a species to the list of 
candidate species;
    (2) Indicating that we should remove a species from candidate 
status;
    (3) Recommending areas that we should designate as critical habitat 
for a species, or indicating that designation of critical habitat would 
not be prudent for a species;
    (4) Documenting threats to any of the included species;
    (5) Describing the immediacy or magnitude of threats facing 
candidate species;
    (6) Pointing out taxonomic or nomenclature changes for any of the 
species;
    (7) Suggesting appropriate common names; and
    (8) Noting any mistakes, such as errors in the indicated historical 
ranges.
    Submit information, materials, or comments regarding a particular 
species to the Regional Director of the Region identified as having the 
lead responsibility for that species. The regional addresses follow:

Region 1. Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, American Samoa, Guam, and 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Regional Director (TE), 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE. 11th 
Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181 (503/231-6158).
Region 2. Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Regional Director 
(TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Avenue SW., Room 4012, 
Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505/248-6920).
Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, 
and Wisconsin. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437-1458 (612/
713-5334).
Region 4. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 
(404/679-4156).
Region 5. Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, 
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode 
Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Regional Director (TE), 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 
01035-9589 (413/253-8615).
Region 6. Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South 
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 
80225-0486 (303/236-7400).
Region 7. Alaska. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503-6199 (907/786-3505).
Region 8. California and Nevada. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W2606, Sacramento, CA 95825 
(916/414-6464).
    We will provide information received in response to the previous 
CNOR to the Region having lead responsibility for each candidate 
species mentioned in the submission. We will likewise consider all 
information provided in response to this CNOR in deciding whether to 
propose species for listing and when to undertake necessary listing 
actions (including whether emergency listing under section 4(b)(7) of 
the ESA is appropriate). Information and comments we receive will 
become part of the administrative record for the species, which we 
maintain at the appropriate Regional Office.
    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your submission, be advised 
that your entire submission--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. Although you 
can ask us in your submission to withhold from public review your 
personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

Authority

    This notice is published under the authority of the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: November 6, 2012.
Rowan W. Gould,
Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[[Page 70051]]



                            Table 1--Candidate Notice of Review (Animals and Plants)
         [Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Status
-----------------------------  Lead region    Scientific name       Family        Common name       Historical
   Category       Priority                                                                            range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     MAMMALS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Eumops            Molossidae.....  Bat, Florida     U.S.A. (FL).
                                              floridanus.                        bonneted.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Emballonura       Emballonuridae.  Bat, Pacific     U.S.A. (GU,
                                              semicaudata                        sheathtailed     CNMI).
                                              rotensis.                          (Mariana
                                                                                 Islands
                                                                                 subspecies).
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Emballonura       Emballonuridae.  Bat, Pacific     U.S.A. (AS),
                                              semicaudata                        sheath-tailed    Fiji,
                                              semicaudata.                       (American        Independent
                                                                                 Samoa DPS).      Samoa, Tonga,
                                                                                                  Vanuatu.
C*...........  6............  R2...........  Tamias minimus    Sciuridae......  Chipmunk,        U.S.A. (NM).
                                              atristriatus.                      Pe[ntilde]asco
                                                                                 least.
C*...........  2............  R5...........  Sylvilagus        Leporidae......  Cottontail, New  U.S.A. (CT, MA,
                                              transitionalis.                    England.         ME, NH, NY,
                                                                                                  RI, VT).
C*...........  6............  R8...........  Martes pennanti.  Mustelidae.....  Fisher (west     U.S.A. (CA, CT,
                                                                                 coast DPS).      IA, ID, IL,
                                                                                                  IN, KY, MA,
                                                                                                  MD, ME, MI,
                                                                                                  MN, MT, ND,
                                                                                                  NH, NJ, NY,
                                                                                                  OH, OR, PA,
                                                                                                  RI, TN, UT,
                                                                                                  VA, VT, WA,
                                                                                                  WI, WV, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C*...........  12...........  R6...........  Lynx canadensis.  Felidae........  Lynx, Canada     U.S.A. (CO, ID,
                                                                                 (New Mexico      ME, MI, MN,
                                                                                 population).     MT, NH, NY,
                                                                                                  OR, UT, VT,
                                                                                                  WA, WI, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C*...........  3............  R2...........  Zapus hudsonius   Zapodidae......  Mouse, New       U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
                                              luteus.                            Mexico meadow    NM).
                                                                                 jumping.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              couchi.                            Shelton.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              douglasii.                         Brush Prairie.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              glacialis.                         Roy Prairie.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA)
                                              louiei.                            Cathlamet.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              melanops.                          Olympic.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              pugetensis.                        Olympia.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              tacomensis.                        Tacoma.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              tumuli.                            Tenino.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Thomomys mazama   Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                              yelmensis.                         Yelm.
C*...........  2............  R6...........  Cynomys           Sciuridae......  Prairie dog,     U.S.A. (CO,
                                              gunnisoni.                         Gunnison's       NM).
                                                                                 (populations
                                                                                 in central and
                                                                                 south-central
                                                                                 Colorado,
                                                                                 north-central
                                                                                 New Mexico).
C*...........  9............  R1...........  Spermophilus      Sciuridae......  Squirrel,        U.S.A. (ID).
                                              brunneus                           Southern Idaho
                                              endemicus.                         ground.
C*...........  5............  R1...........  Spermophilus      Sciuridae......  Squirrel,        U.S.A. (WA,
                                              washingtoni.                       Washington       OR).
                                                                                 ground.
C*...........  9............  R1...........  Arborimus         Cricetidae.....  Vole, Red        U.S.A. (OR).
                                              longicaudus.                       (north Oregon
                                                                                 coast DPS).
C*...........  9............  R7...........  Odobenus          Odobenidae.....  Walrus, Pacific  U.S.A. (AK),
                                              rosmarus                                            Canada,
                                              divergens.                                          Russia.
C*...........  6............  R6...........  Gulo gulo luscus  Mustelidae.....  Wolverine,       U.S.A. (CA, CO,
                                                                                 North American   ID, MT, OR,
                                                                                 (Contiguous      UT, WA, WY).
                                                                                 U.S. DPS).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      BIRDS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Porzana           Rallidae.......  Crake, spotless  U.S.A. (AS),
                                              tabuensis.                         (American        Australia,
                                                                                 Samoa DPS).      Fiji,
                                                                                                  Independent
                                                                                                  Samoa,
                                                                                                  Marquesas,
                                                                                                  Philippines,
                                                                                                  Society
                                                                                                  Islands,
                                                                                                  Tonga.

[[Page 70052]]

 
C*...........  3............  R8...........  Coccyzus          Cuculidae......  Cuckoo, yellow-  U.S.A. (Lower
                                              americanus.                        billed           48 States),
                                                                                 (Western U.S.    Canada,
                                                                                 DPS).            Mexico,
                                                                                                  Central and
                                                                                                  South America.
C*...........  9............  R1...........  Gallicolumba      Columbidae.....  Ground-dove,     U.S.A. (AS),
                                              stairi.                            friendly         Independent
                                                                                 (American        Samoa.
                                                                                 Samoa DPS).
PT...........  3............  R1...........  Eremophila        Alaudidae......  Horned lark,     U.S.A. (OR,
                                              alpestris                          streaked.        WA), Canada
                                              strigata.                                           (BC).
C*...........  3............  R5...........  Calidris canutus  Scolopacidae...  Knot, red......  U.S.A.
                                              rufa.                                               (Atlantic
                                                                                                  coast),
                                                                                                  Canada, South
                                                                                                  America.
C*...........  8............  R7...........  Gavia adamsii...  Gaviidae.......  Loon, yellow-    U.S.A. (AK),
                                                                                 billed.          Canada,
                                                                                                  Norway,
                                                                                                  Russia,
                                                                                                  coastal waters
                                                                                                  of southern
                                                                                                  Pacific and
                                                                                                  North Sea.
C*...........  8............  R7...........  Brachyramphus     Alcidae........  Murrelet,        U.S.A. (AK),
                                              brevirostris.                      Kittlitz's.      Russia.
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Synthliboramphus  Alcidae........  Murrelet,        U.S.A. (CA),
                                              hypoleucus.                        Xantus's.        Mexico.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Anthus spragueii  Motacillidae...  Pipit,           U.S.A. (AR, AZ,
                                                                                 Sprague's.       CO, KS, LA,
                                                                                                  MN, MS, MT,
                                                                                                  ND, NE, NM,
                                                                                                  OK, SD, TX),
                                                                                                  Canada,
                                                                                                  Mexico.
C*...........  2............  R2...........  Amazona           Psittacidae....  Parrot, red-     U.S.A. (TX),
                                              viridigenalis.                     crowned.         Mexico.
C*...........  2............  R2...........  Tympanuchus       Phasianidae....  Prairie-         U.S.A. (CO, KA,
                                              pallidicinctus.                    chicken,         NM, OK, TX).
                                                                                 lesser.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Centrocercus      Phasianidae....  Sage-grouse,     U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                              urophasianus.                      greater.         CO, ID, MT,
                                                                                                  ND, NE, NV,
                                                                                                  OR, SD, UT,
                                                                                                  WA, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada (AB,
                                                                                                  BC, SK).
C*...........  3............  R8...........  Centrocercus      Phasianidae....  Sage-grouse,     U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                              urophasianus.                      greater (Bi-     CO, ID, MT,
                                                                                 State DPS).      ND, NE, NV,
                                                                                                  OR, SD, UT,
                                                                                                  WA, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada (AB,
                                                                                                  BC, SK).
C*...........  6............  R1...........  Centrocercus      Phasianidae....  Sage-grouse,     U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                              urophasianus.                      greater          CO, ID, MT,
                                                                                 (Columbia        ND, NE, NV,
                                                                                 Basin DPS).      OR, SD, UT,
                                                                                                  WA, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada (AB,
                                                                                                  BC, SK).
C*...........  2............  R6...........  Centrocercus      Phasianidae....  Sage-grouse,     U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
                                              minimus.                           Gunnison.        NM, UT).
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Oceanodroma       Hydrobatidae...  Storm-petrel,    U.S.A. (HI),
                                              castro.                            band-rumped      Atlantic
                                                                                 (Hawaii DPS).    Ocean, Ecuador
                                                                                                  (Galapagos
                                                                                                  Islands),
                                                                                                  Japan.
C*...........  11...........  R4...........  Dendroica         Emberizidae....  Warbler, elfin-  U.S.A. (PR).
                                              angelae.                           woods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    REPTILES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  3............  R2...........  Thamnophis eques  Colubridae.....  Gartersnake,     U.S.A. (AZ, NM,
                                              megalops.                          northern         NV), Mexico.
                                                                                 Mexican.
C*...........  8............  R3...........  Sistrurus         Viperidae......  Massasauga (=    U.S.A. (IA, IL,
                                              catenatus.                         rattlesnake),    IN, MI, MN,
                                                                                 eastern.         MO, NY, OH,
                                                                                                  PA, WI),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C*...........  3............  R4...........  Pituophis         Colubridae.....  Snake, black     U.S.A. (AL, LA,
                                              melanoleucus                       pine.            MS).
                                              lodingi.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pituophis         Colubridae.....  Snake,           U.S.A. (LA,
                                              ruthveni.                          Louisiana pine.  TX).
C*...........  3............  R2...........  Chionactis        Colubridae.....  Snake, Tucson    U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              occipitalis                        shovel-nosed.
                                              klauberi.
C*...........  5............  R2...........  Gopherus          Testudinidae...  Tortoise,        U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                              morafkai.                          Sonoran desert.  NV, UT).
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Gopherus          Testudinidae...  Tortoise,        U.S.A. (AL, FL,
                                              polyphemus.                        gopher           GA, LA, MS,
                                                                                 (eastern         SC).
                                                                                 population).
C*...........  6............  R2...........  Kinosternon       Kinosternidae..  Turtle, Sonoyta  U.S.A. (AZ),
                                              sonoriense                         mud.             Mexico.
                                              longifemorale.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 70053]]

 
                                                   AMPHIBIANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  9............  R8...........  Rana              Ranidae........  Frog, Columbia   U.S.A. (AK, ID,
                                              luteiventris.                      spotted (Great   MT, NV, OR,
                                                                                 Basin DPS).      UT, WA, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada (BC).
C*...........  3............  R8...........  Rana muscosa....  Ranidae........  Frog, mountain   U.S.A (CA, NV).
                                                                                 yellow-legged
                                                                                 (Sierra Nevada
                                                                                 DPS).
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Rana pretiosa...  Ranidae........  Frog, Oregon     U.S.A. (CA, OR,
                                                                                 spotted.         WA), Canada
                                                                                                  (BC).
C*...........  8............  R8...........  Lithobates onca.  Ranidae........  Frog, relict     U.S.A. (AZ, NV,
                                                                                 leopard.         UT).
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Notophthalmus     Salamandridae..  Newt, striped..  U.S.A. (FL,
                                              perstriatus.                                        GA).
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Eurycea           Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                              waterlooensis.                     Austin blind.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Gyrinophilus      Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TN).
                                              gulolineatus.                      Berry Cave.
PE...........  8............  R2...........  Eurycea           Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                              naufragia.                         Georgetown.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Plethodon         Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S. A. (NM).
                                              neomexicanus.                      Jemez
                                                                                 Mountains.
PE...........  8............  R2...........  Eurycea tonkawae  Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 Jollyville
                                                                                 Plateau.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Eurycea           Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                              chisholmensis.                     Salado.
C*...........  11...........  R8...........  Anaxyrus canorus  Bufonidae......  Toad, Yosemite.  U.S.A. (CA).
C............  3............  R2...........  Hyla wrightorum.  Hylidae........  Treefrog,        U.S.A. (AZ),
                                                                                 Arizona          Mexico
                                                                                 (Huachuca/       (Sonora).
                                                                                 Canelo DPS).
C*...........  2............  R4...........  Necturus          Proteidae......  Waterdog, black  U.S.A. (AL).
                                              alabamensis.                       warrior (=
                                                                                 Sipsey Fork).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     FISHES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Gila nigra......  Cyprinidae.....  Chub, headwater  U.S.A. (AZ,
                                                                                                  NM).
C*...........  7............  R6...........  Iotichthys        Cyprinidae.....  Chub, least....  U.S.A. (UT).
                                              phlegethontis.
C*...........  9............  R2...........  Gila robusta....  Cyprinidae.....  Chub, roundtail  U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
                                                                                 (Lower           NM, UT, WY).
                                                                                 Colorado River
                                                                                 Basin DPS).
C*...........  11...........  R6...........  Etheostoma        Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (AR, CO,
                                              cragini.                           Arkansas.        KS, MO, OK).
C............  9............  R4...........  Etheostoma        Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (KY,
                                              sagitta sagitta.                   Cumberland       TN).
                                                                                 arrow.
PE...........  2............  R5...........  Crystallaria      Percidae.......  Darter, diamond  U.S.A. (KY, OH,
                                              cincotta.                                           TN, WV).
C............  3............  R4...........  Etheostoma        Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (KY).
                                              sagitta                            Kentucky arrow.
                                              spilotum.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Percina aurora..  Percidae.......  Darter, Pearl..  U.S.A. (LA,
                                                                                                  MS).
C*...........  3............  R6...........  Thymallus         Salmonidae.....  Grayling,        U.S.A. (AK, MI,
                                              arcticus.                          Arctic (upper    MT, WY),
                                                                                 Missouri River   Canada,
                                                                                 DPS).            northern Asia,
                                                                                                  northern
                                                                                                  Europe.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Moxostoma sp....  Catostomidae...  Redhorse,        U.S.A. (GA, NC,
                                                                                 sicklefin.       TN).
PE...........  2............  R3...........  Cottus sp.......  Cottidae.......  Sculpin, grotto  U.S.A. (MO).
C*...........  5............  R2...........  Notropis          Cyprinidae.....  Shiner,          U.S.A. (TX).
                                              oxyrhynchus.                       sharpnose.
C*...........  5............  R2...........  Notropis buccula  Cyprinidae.....  Shiner,          U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 smalleye.
C*...........  3............  R8...........  Spirinchus        Osmeridae......  Smelt, longfin   U.S.A. (AK, CA,
                                              thaleichthys.                      (San Francisco   OR, WA),
                                                                                 bay-delta DPS).  Canada.
C*...........  3............  R2...........  Catostomus        Catostomidae...  Sucker, Zuni     U.S.A. (AZ,
                                              discobolus                         bluehead.        NM).
                                              yarrowi.
PT...........  .............  R4...........  Elassoma........  Elassomatidae..  Sunfish, spring  U.S.A. (AL).
                                             alabamae........                    pygmy.
PSAT.........  N/A..........  R1...........  Salvelinus malma  Salmonidae.....  Trout, Dolly     U.S.A. (AK,
                                                                                 Varden.          WA), Canada,
                                                                                                  East Asia.
C*...........  9............  R2...........  Oncorhynchus      Salmonidae.....  Trout, Rio       U.S.A. (CO,
                                              clarki                             Grande           NM).
                                              virginalis.                        cutthroat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      CLAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  2............  R2...........  Lampsilis         Unionidae......  Fatmucket,       U.S.A. (TX).
                                              bracteata.                         Texas.
C*...........  2............  R2...........  Truncilla         Unionidae......  Fawnsfoot,       U.S.A. (TX).
                                              macrodon.                          Texas.

[[Page 70054]]

 
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Popenaias popei.  Unionidae......  Hornshell,       U.S.A. (NM,
                                                                                 Texas.           TX), Mexico.
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Ptychobranchus    Unionidae......  Kidneyshell,     U.S.A. (AL, KY,
                                              subtentum.                         fluted.          TN, VA).
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Lampsilis         Unionidae......  Mucket, Neosho.  U.S.A. (AR, KS,
                                              rafinesqueana.                                      MO, OK).
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Quadrula aurea..  Unionidae......  Orb, golden....  U.S.A. (TX).
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Lexingtonia       Unionidae......  Pearlymussel,    U.S.A. (AL, KY,
                                              dolabelloides.                     slabside.        TN, VA).
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Quadrula          Unionidae......  Pimpleback,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                              houstonensis.                      smooth.
C*...........  2............  R2...........  Quadrula petrina  Unionidae......  Pimpleback,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 Texas.
PT...........  9............  R4...........  Quadrula          Unionidae......  Rabbitsfoot....  U.S.A. (AL, AR,
                                              cylindrica                                          GA, IN, IL,
                                              cylindrica.                                         KS, KY, LA,
                                                                                                  MS, MO, OK,
                                                                                                  OH, PA, TN,
                                                                                                  WV).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     SNAILS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Elimia            Pleuroceridae..  Mudalia, black.  U.S.A. (AL).
                                              melanoides.
C*...........  2............  R4...........  Planorbella       Planorbidae....  Ramshorn,        U.S.A. (NC).
                                              magnifica.                         magnificent.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Ostodes           Potaridae......  Sisi snail.....  U.S.A. (AS).
                                              strigatus.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Pseudotryonia     Hydrobiidae....  Snail, Diamond   U.S.A. (TX).
                                              adamantina.                        Y Spring.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Samoana fragilis  Partulidae.....  Snail, fragile   U.S.A. (GU,
                                                                                 tree.            MP).
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Partula           Partulidae.....  Snail, Guam      U.S.A. (GU).
                                              radiolata.                         tree.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Partula gibba...  Partulidae.....  Snail, Humped    U.S.A. (GU,
                                                                                 tree.            MP).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Partulina         Achatinellidae.  Snail, Lanai     U.S.A. (HI).
                                              semicarinata.                      tree.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Partulina         Achatinellidae.  Snail, Lanai     U.S.A. (HI).
                                              variabilis.                        tree.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Partula           Partulidae.....  Snail,           U.S.A. (MP).
                                              langfordi.                         Langford's
                                                                                 tree.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Cochliopa texana  Hydrobiidae....  Snail, Phantom   U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 cave.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Newcombia         Achatinellidae.  Snail,           U.S.A. (Hl).
                                              cumingi.                           Newcomb's tree.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Eua zebrina.....  Partulidae.....  Snail, Tutuila   U.S.A. (AS).
                                                                                 tree.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Tryonia           Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (TX).
                                              circumstriata                      Gonzales.
                                              (=
                                              stocktonensis).
C*...........  11...........  R2...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ),
                                              thompsoni.                         Huachuca.        Mexico.
C*...........  11...........  R2...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              morrisoni.                         Page.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Tryonia cheatumi  Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail (=   U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 Tryonia),
                                                                                 Phantom.
C*...........  5............  R2...........  Sonorella         Helminthoglypti  Talussnail,      U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              rosemontensis.    dae.             Rosemont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     INSECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus           Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                              anthracinus.                       yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus           Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                              assimulans.                        yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus facilis.  Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                                                                 yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus hilaris.  Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                                                                 yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus kuakea..  Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                                                                 yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus           Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                              longiceps.                         yellow-faced.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hylaeus mana....  Colletidae.....  Bee, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                                                                 yellow-faced.
PSAT.........  .............  R8...........  Plebejus lupine   Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Lupine...  U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                              texanus.                                            CO, NE, NM,
                                                                                                  NV, TX, UT),
                                                                                                  Mexico.
PE...........  3............  R8...........  Plebejus shasta   Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Mt.        U.S.A. (NV).
                                              charlestonensis.                   Charleston.
PSAT.........  .............  R8...........  Echinargus isola  Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Reakirt's  U.S.A. (AR, AZ,
                                                                                                  CA, CO, IA,
                                                                                                  IL, IN, KS,
                                                                                                  LA, MI, MN,
                                                                                                  MO, MS, ND,
                                                                                                  NE, NM, NV,
                                                                                                  OH, OK, SD,
                                                                                                  TN, TX, UT,
                                                                                                  WA, WI, WY),
                                                                                                  Mexico.
PSAT.........  .............  R8...........  Euphilotes        Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Spring     U.S.A. (NV).
                                              ancilla                            Mountains dark.
                                              cryptica.

[[Page 70055]]

 
PSAT.........  .............  R8...........  Euphilotes        Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Spring     U.S.A. (NV).
                                              ancilla purpura.                   Mountains dark.
PSAT.........  .............  R8...........  Plebejus          Lycaenidae.....  Blue, Spring     U.S.A. (NV).
                                              icarioides                         Mountains
                                              austinorum.                        icariodes.
C............  3............  R4...........  Strymon acis      Lycaenidae.....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (FL).
                                              bartrami.                          Bartram's
                                                                                 hairstreak.
C............  3............  R4...........  Anaea troglodyta  Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (FL).
                                              floridalis.                        Florida
                                                                                 leafwing.
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Hermelycaena      Lycaenidae.....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (CA).
                                              [Lycaena]                          Hermes copper.
                                              hermes.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Hypolimnas        Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (GU,
                                              octucula                           Mariana eight-   MP).
                                              mariannensis.                      spot.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Vagrans egistina  Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (GU,
                                                                                 Mariana          MP).
                                                                                 wandering.
C*...........  2............  R4...........  Atlantea tulita.  Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (PR).
                                                                                 Puerto Rican
                                                                                 harlequin.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Glyphopsyche      Limnephilidae..  Caddisfly,       U.S.A. (TN).
                                              sequatchie.                        Sequatchie.
C............  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s insularis.                       Baker Station
                                                                                 (= insular).
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                              s caecus.                          Clifton.
C*...........  11...........  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s colemanensis.                    Coleman.
C............  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s fowlerae.                        Fowler's.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                              s frigidus.                        icebox.
C............  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s tiresias.                        Indian Grave
                                                                                 Point (=
                                                                                 Soothsayer).
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s inquisitor.                      inquirer.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                              s troglodytes.                     Louisville.
C............  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                              s paulus.                          Noblett's.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Pseudanophthalmu  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                              s parvus.                          Tatum.
PE...........  3............  R1...........  Euphydryas        Nymphalidae....  Checkerspot      U.S.A. (OR,
                                              editha taylori.                    butterfly,       WA), Canada
                                                                                 Taylor's (=      (BC).
                                                                                 Whulge).
C*...........  8............  R1...........  Megalagrion       Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                              xanthomelas.                       orangeblack
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C............  2............  R8...........  Ambrysus          Naucoridae.....  Naucorid bug (=  U.S.A. (CA).
                                              funebris.                          Furnace
                                                                                 Creek),
                                                                                 Nevares Spring.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Drosophila        Drosophilidae..  fly, Hawaiian    U.S.A. (HI).
                                              digressa.                          Picture-wing.
C*...........  11...........  R2...........  Heterelmis        Elmidae........  Riffle beetle,   U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              stephani.                          Stephan's.
C*...........  8............  R3...........  Hesperia dacotae  Hesperiidae....  Skipper, Dakota  U.S.A. (MN, IA,
                                                                                                  SD, ND, IL),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C............  2............  R3...........  Oarisma           Hesperiidae....  Skipperling,     U.S.A. (IA, IL,
                                              poweshiek.                         Poweshiek.       IN, MI, MN,
                                                                                                  ND, SD, WI),
                                                                                                  Canada (MB).
C*...........  5............  R6...........  Capnia arapahoe.  Capniidae......  Snowfly,         U.S.A. (CO).
                                                                                 Arapahoe.
C*...........  5............  R6...........  Lednia tumana...  Nemouridae.....  Stonefly,        U.S.A. (MT).
                                                                                 meltwater
                                                                                 lednian.
PT...........  2............  R6...........  Cicindela         Cicindelidae...  Tiger beetle,    U.S.A. (UT).
                                              albissima.                         Coral Pink
                                                                                 Sand Dunes.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Cicindela         Cicindelidae...  Tiger beetle,    U.S.A. (FL).
                                              highlandensis.                     highlands.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    ARACHNIDS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Cicurina wartoni  Dictynidae.....  Meshweaver,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                                                                 Warton's cave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   CRUSTACEANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Gammarus          Gammaridae.....  Amphipod,        U.S.A. (TX).
                                              hyalleloides.                      diminutive.

[[Page 70056]]

 
PE...........  .............  R2...........  Gammarus pecos..  Gammaridae.....  Amphipod, Pecos  U.S.A. (TX).
C............  8............  R5...........  Stygobromus       Crangonyctidae.  Amphipod,        U.S.A. (DC).
                                              kenki.                             Kenk's.
C*...........  5............  R1...........  Metabetaeus       Alpheidae......  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                              lohena.                            anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C*...........  5............  R1...........  Palaemonella      Palaemonidae...  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                              burnsi.                            anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C*...........  5............  R1...........  Procaris          Procarididae...  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hawaiana.                          anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
PE...........  4............  R1...........  Vetericaris       Procaridae.....  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                              chaceorum.                         anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                FLOWERING PLANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  11...........  R8...........  Abronia alpina..  Nyctaginaceae..  Sand-verbena,    U.S.A. (CA).
                                                                                 Ramshaw
                                                                                 Meadows.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Agave eggersiana  Agavaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (VI).
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Arabis georgiana  Brassicaceae...  Rockcress,       U.S.A. (AL,
                                                                                 Georgia.         GA).
C*...........  11...........  R4...........  Argythamnia       Euphorbiaceae..  Silverbush,      U.S.A. (FL).
                                              blodgettii.                        Blodgett's.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Artemisia         Asteraceae.....  Wormwood,        U.S.A. (OR,
                                              borealis var.                      northern.        WA).
                                              wormskioldii.
C*...........  2............  R6...........  Astragalus        Fabaceae.......  Milkvetch,       U.S.A. (ID, NV,
                                              anserinus.                         Goose Creek.     UT).
C............  3............  R1...........  Astragalus        Fabaceae.......  Milkvetch,       U.S.A. (ID).
                                              cusickii var.                      Packard's.
                                              packardiae.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Astragalus        Fabaceae.......  Milkvetch,       U.S.A. (CO).
                                              microcymbus.                       skiff.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Astragalus        Fabaceae.......  Milkvetch,       U.S.A. (CO).
                                              schmolliae.                        Schmoll.
C*...........  11...........  R6...........  Astragalus        Fabaceae.......  Milkvetch,       U.S.A. (CO).
                                              tortipes.                          Sleeping Ute.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Bidens            Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              amplectens.
PE...........  3............  R1...........  Bidens            Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              campylotheca
                                              pentamera.
PE...........  3............  R1...........  Bidens            Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              campylotheca
                                              waihoiensis.
PE...........  8............  R1...........  Bidens conjuncta  Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Bidens            Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hillenbrandiana
                                              hillebrandina.
PE...........  3............  R1...........  Bidens micrantha  Asteraceae.....  Ko`oko`olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              ctenophylla.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Boechera          Brassicaceae...  Rockcress,       U.S.A. (WY).
                                              (Arabis)                           Fremont County
                                              pusilla.                           or small.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Brickellia        Asteraceae.....  Brickell-bush,   U.S.A. (FL).
                                              mosieri.                           Florida.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Calamagrostis     Poaceae........  Reedgrass, Maui  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              expansa.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Calamagrostis     Poaceae........  Reedgrass,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hillebrandii.                      Hillebrand's.
C*...........  11...........  R8...........  Calochortus       Liliaceae......  Mariposa lily,   U.S.A. (CA,
                                              persistens.                        Siskiyou.        OR).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Canavalia         Fabaceae.......  `Awikiwiki.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              pubescens.
C*...........  9............  R4...........  Chamaecrista      Fabaceae.......  Pea, Big Pine    U.S.A. (FL).
                                              lineata var.                       partridge.
                                              keyensis.
C*...........  12...........  R4...........  Chamaesyce        Euphorbiaceae..  Sandmat,         U.S.A. (FL).
                                              deltoidea                          pineland.
                                              pinetorum.
C*...........  9............  R4...........  Chamaesyce        Euphorbiaceae..  Spurge, wedge..  U.S.A. (FL).
                                              deltoidea
                                              serpyllum.
C*...........  6............  R8...........  Chorizanthe       Polygonaceae...  Spineflower,     U.S.A. (CA).
                                              parryi var.                        San Fernando
                                              fernandina.                        Valley.
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Chromolaena       Asteraceae.....  Thoroughwort,    U.S.A. (FL).
                                              frustrata.                         Cape Sable.
C*...........  8............  R2...........  Cirsium wrightii  Asteraceae.....  Thistle,         U.S.A. (AZ,
                                                                                 Wright's.        NM), Mexico.
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Consolea          Cactaceae......  Cactus, Florida  U.S.A. (FL).
                                              corallicola.                       semaphore.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Cordia rupicola.  Boraginaceae...  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR),
                                                                                                  Anegada.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              asplenifolia.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              duvalliorum.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea horrida..  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyanea kunthiana  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              magnicalyx.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea maritae..  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea mauiensis  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea marksii..  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea munroi...  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyanea obtusa...  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea profuga..  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyanea solanacea  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  `Aku...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              tritomantha.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              ferripilosa.

[[Page 70057]]

 
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              filipes.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              nanawaleensis.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              oxybapha.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              wagneri.
C*...........  3............  R4...........  Dalea             Fabaceae.......  Prairie-clover,  U.S.A. (FL).
                                              carthagenensis                     Florida.
                                              var. floridana.
C*...........  5............  R5...........  Dichanthelium     Poaceae........  Panic grass,     U.S.A. (DE, GA,
                                              hirstii.                           Hirst            NC, NJ).
                                                                                 Brothers'.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Digitaria         Poaceae........  Crabgrass,       U.S.A. (FL).
                                              pauciflora.                        Florida
                                                                                 pineland.
PE...........  3............  R2...........  Echinomastus      Cactaceae......  Cactus, Acuna..  U.S.A. (AZ),
                                              erectocentrus                                       Mexico.
                                              var. acunensis.
PT...........  2............  R1...........  Eriogonum codium  Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat,       U.S.A. (WA).
                                                                                 Umtanum Desert.
C*...........  6............  R8...........  Eriogonum         Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat, Las   U.S.A. (NV).
                                              corymbosum var.                    Vegas.
                                              nilesii.
C............  5............  R8...........  Eriogonum         Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat,       U.S.A (NV).
                                              diatomaceum.                       Churchill
                                                                                 Narrows.
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Eriogonum         Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat, Red   U.S.A. (CA).
                                              kelloggii.                         Mountain.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Eriogonum         Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat,       U.S.A. (UT).
                                              soredium.                          Frisco.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Festuca           Poaceae........  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hawaiiensis.
C*...........  11...........  R2...........  Festuca ligulata  Poaceae........  Fescue,          U.S.A. (TX),
                                                                                 Guadalupe.       Mexico.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Festuca           Poaceae........  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              molokaiensis.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Gardenia remyi..  Rubiaceae......  Nanu...........  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  8............  R1...........  Geranium          Geraniaceae....  Nohoanu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hanaense.
PE...........  8............  R1...........  Geranium          Geraniaceae....  Nohoanu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hillebrandii.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Gonocalyx         Ericaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                              concolor.
PE...........  2............  R4...........  Harrisia          Cactaceae......  Pricklyapple,    U.S.A. (FL).
                                              aboriginum.                        aboriginal
                                                                                 (shellmound
                                                                                 applecactus).
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Hazardia          Asteraceae.....  Orcutt's         U.S.A. (CA),
                                              orcuttii.                          hazardia.        Mexico.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Hedyotis          Rubiaceae......  Kampua`a.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              fluviatilis.
C*...........  2............  R4...........  Helianthus        Asteraceae.....  Sunflower,       U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                              verticillatus.                     whorled.         TN).
PT...........  2............  R2...........  Hibiscus          Malvaceae......  Rose-mallow,     U.S.A. (TX).
                                              dasycalyx.                         Neches River.
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Ivesia webberi..  Rosaceae.......  Ivesia, Webber.  U.S.A. (CA,
                                                                                                  NV).
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Joinvillea        Joinvilleaceae.  `Ohe...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              ascendens
                                              ascendens.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Leavenworthia     Brassicaceae...  Gladecress,      U.S.A. (AL).
                                              crassa.                            unnamed.
C............  3............  R4...........  Leavenworthia     Brassicaceae...  Gladecress,      U.S.A. (KY).
                                              exigua var.                        Kentucky.
                                              laciniata.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Leavenworthia     Brassicaceae...  Gladecress,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                              texana.                            Texas golden.
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Lepidium ostleri  Brassicaceae...  Peppergrass,     U.S.A. (UT).
                                                                                 Ostler's.
C*...........  5............  R4...........  Linum arenicola.  Linaceae.......  Flax, sand.....  U.S.A. (FL).
C*...........  3............  R4...........  Linum carteri     Linaceae.......  Flax, Carter's   U.S.A. (FL).
                                              var. carteri.                      small-flowered.
C............  3............  R8...........  Mimulus           Phrymaceae.....  Monkeyflower,    U.S.A. (CA).
                                              fremontii var.                     Vandenberg.
                                              vandenbergensis.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Mucuna sloanei    Fabaceae.......  Sea bean.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              var. persericea.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Myrsine           Myrsinaceae....  Kolea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              fosbergii.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Myrsine           Myrsinaceae....  Kolea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              vaccinioides.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Nothocestrum      Solanaceae.....  `Aiea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              latifolium.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Ochrosia          Apocynaceae....  Holei..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              haleakalae.
PE...........  3............  R2...........  Pediocactus       Cactaceae......  Cactus,          U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              peeblesianus                       Fickeisen
                                              var.                               plains.
                                              fickeiseniae.
PT...........  2............  R6...........  Penstemon         Scrophulariacea  Beardtongue,     U.S.A. (CO,
                                              grahamii.         e.               Graham's.        UT).
C*...........  9............  R6...........  Penstemon         Scrophulariacea  Beardtongue,     U.S.A. (CO,
                                              scariosus var.    e.               White River.     UT).
                                              albifluvis.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Peperomia         Piperaceae.....  `Ala `ala wai    U.S.A. (HI).
                                              subpetiolata.                      nui.
C............  5............  R8...........  Phacelia          Hydrophyllaceae  Phacelia,        U.S.A. (CA),
                                              stellaris.                         Brand's.         Mexico.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Phyllostegia      Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              bracteata.
PE...........  8............  R1...........  Phyllostegia      Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              floribunda.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Phyllostegia      Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              haliakalae.

[[Page 70058]]

 
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Phyllostegia      Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              pilosa.
PT...........  9............  R1...........  Physaria          Brassicaceae...  Bladderpod,      U.S.A. (WA).
                                              douglasii                          White Bluffs.
                                              tuplashensis.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Physaria globosa  Brassicaceae...  Bladderpod,      U.S.A. (IN, KY,
                                                                                 Short's.         TN).
C*...........  2............  R6...........  Pinus albicaulis  Pinaceae.......  Pine, whitebark  U.S.A. (CA, ID,
                                                                                                  MT, NV, OR,
                                                                                                  WA, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada (AB,
                                                                                                  BC).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Pittosporum       Pittosporaceae.  Hoawa..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              halophilum.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Pittosporum       Pittosporaceae.  Hoawa..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hawaiiense.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Platanthera       Orchidaceae....  Orchid, white    U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                              integrilabia.                      fringeless.      KY, MS, NC,
                                                                                                  SC, TN, VA).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Platydesma remyi  Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Pleomele          Agavaceae......  Hala pepe......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              fernaldii.
C*...........  11...........  R8...........  Potentilla        Rosaceae.......  Cinquefoil,      U.S.A. (NV).
                                              basaltica.                         Soldier Meadow.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Pritchardia       Arecaceae......  Loulu..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              lanigera.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Pseudognaphalium  Asteraceae.....  `Ena`ena.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              (= Gnaphalium)
                                              sandwicensium
                                              var.
                                              molokaiense.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Ranunculus        Ranunculaceae..  Makou..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hawaiensis.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Ranunculus        Ranunculaceae..  Makou..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              mauiensis.
C*...........  8............  R8...........  Rorippa           Brassicaceae...  Cress, Tahoe     U.S.A. (CA,
                                              subumbellata.                      yellow.          NV).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Schiedea diffusa  Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              macraei.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Schiedea          Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hawaiiensis.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Schiedea jacobii  Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Schiedea laui...  Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Schiedea          Caryophyllaceae  Ma`oli`oli.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              pubescens.
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Schiedea          Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              salicaria.
C*...........  5............  R8...........  Sedum             Crassulaceae...  Stonecrop, Red   U.S.A. (CA).
                                              eastwoodiae.                       Mountain.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Sicyos            Cucurbitaceae..  `Anunu.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              macrophyllus.
C............  12...........  R4...........  Sideroxylon       Sapotaceae.....  Bully,           U.S.A. (FL).
                                              reclinatum                         Everglades.
                                              austrofloridens
                                              e.
C*...........  2............  R4...........  Solanum           Solanaceae.....  Bacora, marron.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                              conocarpum.
C*...........  8............  R1...........  Solanum nelsonii  Solanaceae.....  Popolo.........  U.S.A. (HI).
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Solidago plumosa  Asteraceae.....  Goldenrod,       U.S.A. (NC).
                                                                                 Yadkin River.
PE...........  2............  R2...........  Sphaeralcea       Malvaceae......  Mallow,          U.S.A. (AZ,
                                              gierischii.                        Gierisch.        UT).
PE...........  2............  R1...........  Stenogyne         Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              cranwelliae.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Stenogyne         Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              kauaulaensis.
C............  8............  R2...........  Streptanthus      Brassicaceae...  Twistflower,     U.S.A. (TX).
                                              bracteatus.                        bracted.
C*...........  8............  R4...........  Symphyotrichum    Asteraceae.....  Aster, Georgia.  U.S.A. (AL, FL,
                                              georgianum.                                         GA, NC, SC).
C*...........  8............  R6...........  Trifolium         Fabaceae.......  Clover, Frisco.  U.S.A. (UT).
                                              friscanum.
PE...........  .............  R1...........  Wikstroemia       Thymelaeaceae..  Akia...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              villosa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                FERNS AND ALLIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C*...........  8............  R1...........  Cyclosorus        Thelypteridacea  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              boydiae.          e.
C*...........  2............  R1...........  Huperzia (=       Lycopodiaceae..  Wawae`iole.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              Phlegmariurus)
                                              stemmermanniae.
C*...........  3............  R1...........  Microlepia        Dennstaedtiacea  Palapalai......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              strigosa var.     e.
                                              mauiensis (=
                                              Microlepia
                                              mauiensis).
C............  3............  R4...........  Trichomanes       Hymenophyllacea  Florida bristle  U.S.A. (FL).
                                              punctatum         e.               fern.
                                              floridanum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 70059]]


                Table 2--Animals and Plants Formerly Candidates or Formerly Proposed for Listing
         [Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Status
-----------------------------  Lead region    Scientific name       Family        Common name       Historical
     Code          Expl.                                                                              range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    REPTILES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rp...........  U............  R2...........  Sceloporus        Iguanidae......  Lizard, sand     U.S.A. (TX,
                                              arenicolus.                        dune.            NM).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   AMPHIBIANS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R3...........  Cryptobranchus    Crytobranchidae  Hellbender,      U.S.A. (AR,
                                              alleganiensis                      Ozark.           MO).
                                              bishopi.
E............  L............  R4...........  Eleutherodactylu  Leptodactylidae  Coqui, Llanero.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                              s juanariveroi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      CLAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R4...........  Villosa           Unionidae......  Bean, Choctaw..  U.S.A. (AL,
                                              choctawensis.                                       FL).
E............  L............  R3...........  Villosa fabalis.  Unionidae......  Bean, rayed....  U.S.A. (IL, IN,
                                                                                                  KY, MI, NY,
                                                                                                  OH, TN, PA,
                                                                                                  VA, WV),
                                                                                                  Canada (ON).
E............  L............  R4...........  Fusconaia         Unionidae......  Ebonyshell,      U.S.A. (AL,
                                              rotulata.                          round.           FL).
E............  L............  R4...........  Ptychobranchus    Unionidae......  Kidneyshell,     U.S.A. (AL,
                                              jonesi.                            southern.        FL).
E............  L............  R3...........  Plethobasus       Unionidae......  Mussel,          U.S.A. (AL, IA,
                                              cyphyus.                           sheepnose.       IL, IN, KY,
                                                                                                  MN, MO, MS,
                                                                                                  OH, PA, TN,
                                                                                                  VA, WI, WV).
E............  L............  R4...........  Margaritifera     Margaritiferida  Pearlshell,      U.S.A. (AL).
                                              marrianae.        e.               Alabama.
T............  L............  R4...........  Pleurobema        Unionidae......  Pigtoe, fuzzy..  U.S.A. (AL,
                                              strodeanum.                                         FL).
T............  L............  R4...........  Fusconaia         Unionidae......  Pigtoe, narrow.  U.S.A. (AL,
                                              escambia.                                           FL).
T............  L............  R4...........  Fusconaia (=      Unionidae......  Pigtoe, tapered  U.S.A. (AL,
                                              Quincuncina)                                        FL).
                                              burkei.
T............  5............  R4...........  Hamiota (=        Unionidae......  Sandshell,       U.S.A. (AL,
                                              Lampsilis)                         southern.        FL).
                                              australis.
E............  L............  R3...........  Epioblasma        Unionidae......  Snuffbox.......  U.S.A. (IN, MI,
                                              triquetra.                                          NY, OH, PA,
                                                                                                  WV), Canada
                                                                                                  (ON).
E............  L............  R3...........  Cumberlandia      Margaritiferida  Spectaclecase..  U.S.A. (AL, AR,
                                              monodonta.        e.                                IA, IN, IL,
                                                                                                  KS, KY, MO,
                                                                                                  MN, NE, OH,
                                                                                                  TN, VA, WI,
                                                                                                  WV).
E............  L............  R4...........  Elliptio spinosa  Unionidae......  Spinymussel,     U.S.A. (GA).
                                                                                 Altamaha.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     SNAILS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R2...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ),
                                              bernardina.                        San Bernardino.  Mexico
                                                                                                  (Sonora).
E............  L............  R2...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NM).
                                              chupaderae.                        Chupadera.
Rc...........  U............  R8...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NV).
                                              notidicola.                        elongate mud
                                                                                 meadows.
E............  L............  R2...........  Pyrgulopsis       Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              trivialis.                         Three Forks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     INSECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R1...........  Megalagrion       Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                              nigrohamatum                       blackline
                                              nigrolineatum.                     Hawaiian.
E............  L............  R1...........  Megalagrion       Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                              leptodemas.                        crimson
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
E............  L............  R1...........  Megalagrion       Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                              oceanicum.                         oceanic
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
Rc...........  U............  R1...........  Polites mardon..  Hesperiidae....  Skipper, Mardon  U.S.A. (CA, OR,
                                                                                                  WA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                FLOWERING PLANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R8...........  Arctostaphylos    Ericaceae......  Manzanita,       U.S.A. (CA).
                                              franciscana.                       Franciscan.
Rc...........  U............  R1...........  Castilleja        Scrophulariacea  Paintbrush,      U.S.A. (ID).
                                              christii.         e.               Christ's.
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyanea calycina.  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              lanceolata.
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyanea            Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              purpurellifolia.
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              gracilis.
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              kaulantha.
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              sessilis.

[[Page 70060]]

 
E............  L............  R1...........  Cyrtandra         Gesneriaceae...  Ha`iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              waiolani.
Rc...........  A............  R2...........  Erigeron          Asteraceae.....  Fleabane,        U.S.A. (AZ).
                                              lemmonii.                          Lemmon.
E............  L............  R1...........  Korthalsella      Viscaceae......  Hulumoa........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              degeneri.
E............  L............  R1...........  Melicope          Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              christopherseni
                                              i.
E............  L............  R1...........  Melicope hiiakae  Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
E............  L............  R1...........  Melicope makahae  Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
Rc...........  A............  R5...........  Narthecium        Liliaceae......  Asphodel, bog..  U.S.A. (DE, NC,
                                              americanum.                                         NJ, NY, SC).
E............  L............  R1...........  Platydesma        Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              cornuta var.
                                              cornuta.
E............  L............  R1...........  Platydesma        Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              cornuta var.
                                              decurrens.
E............  L............  R1...........  Pleomele          Agavaceae......  Hala pepe......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              forbesii.
E............  L............  R1...........  Psychotria        Rubiaceae......  Kopiko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              hexandra
                                              oahuensis.
E............  L............  R1...........  Pteralyxia        Apocynaceae....  Kaulu..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              macrocarpa.
E............  L............  R1...........  Tetraplasandra    Araliaceae.....  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              lydgatei.
E............  L............  R1...........  Zanthoxylum       Rutaceae.......  A`e............  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              oahuense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                FERNS AND ALLIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E............  L............  R1...........  Doryopteris       Pteridaceae....  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                              takeuchii.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2012-28050 Filed 11-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P