[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 4, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24876-24904]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-9893]



[[Page 24875]]

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

Part III





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 17



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

  Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 86 / Tuesday, May 4, 2004 / Proposed 
Rules  

[[Page 24876]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Species 
That Are Candidates or Proposed 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 2003 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 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 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.
    We request additional status information that may be available for 
the identified candidate species and information on additional species 
that we should include as candidates in future updates of this list. We 
will consider this information in preparing listing documents and 
future revisions to the notice of review. This information will help us 
in monitoring changes in the status of candidate species and also in 
conserving candidate species.
    As part of the CNOR, we announce the availability of Candidate and 
Listing Priority Assignment Forms (candidate forms) for each candidate 
species. The CNOR and the candidate forms constitute our findings as to 
the status and threats that we evaluated in order to assign a listing 
priority number to each species. This includes our findings on 
resubmitted petitions and describes our progress in revising the Lists 
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants during the period June 
13, 2002 through April 19, 2004.

DATES: We will accept comments on the Candidate Notice of Review at any 
time.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments regarding a particular species to the 
Regional Director of the Region identified in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
as having the lead responsibility for that species. You may submit 
comments of a more general nature to the Chief, Division of 
Conservation and Classification, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 
N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 (703/358-2171). Written 
comments and materials received in response to this notice will be 
available for public inspection by appointment at the Division of 
Conservation and Classification (for comments of a general nature only) 
or at the appropriate Regional Office listed in SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION.
    Copies of the candidate forms that contain information and 
references regarding the range, status, and habitat needs of and 
listing priority assignment for a particular species are available for 
review at the appropriate Regional Office listed below in SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION or at the Division of Conservation and Classification, 
Arlington, Virginia (see ADDRESSES above), or on our Internet Web site 
(http://endangered.fws.gov/).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Endangered Species Coordinator(s) 
in the appropriate Regional Office(s) or Chris Nolin, Chief, Division 
of Conservation and Classification (703-358-2171).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Candidate Notice of Review

Background

    The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.) (Act), requires that we identify species of wildlife and plants 
that are endangered or threatened, based on the best available 
scientific and commercial information. Through the Federal rulemaking 
process, we add these species to the List of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of Endangered and Threatened 
Plants at 50 CFR 17.12. As part of this program, we maintain a list of 
species that we regard as candidates for listing. A candidate species 
is one for which we have on file sufficient information on biological 
vulnerability and threats to support a proposal to list as endangered 
or threatened, but for which preparation and publication of a proposal 
is precluded by higher-priority listing actions. We maintain this list 
for a variety of reasons, including: 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 conservation efforts that will remove or reduce threats to 
these species; to solicit input from interested parties to identify 
those candidate species that may not require protection under the Act 
or additional species that may require the Act's protections; and to 
solicit information needed to prioritize the order in which we will 
propose species for listing.
    Table 1 of this CNOR includes 279 species that we regard as 
candidates for addition to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife and Plants (Lists), as well as 24 species for which we have 
published proposed rules to list as threatened or endangered species. 
Most of the proposed species were previously identified in the 2002 
CNOR (67 FR 40657, June 13, 2002). We encourage consideration of these 
species in conservation planning, as well as other environmental 
planning, such as in environmental impact analysis done under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (implemented at 40 CFR parts 
1500-1508) and in local and statewide land use planning. Table 2 of 
this notice contains 19 species we identified as candidates or as 
proposed species in the June 13, 2002, CNOR that we now no longer 
consider candidates. This includes fourteen species we have listed as 
threatened or endangered since June 13, 2002, one species that we are 
removing from candidacy through this notice, and four species for which 
we withdrew the proposed listing rule. The Regions identified as having 
lead responsibility for the particular species will maintain updated 
records of information on candidate species.
    Publication of this notice has been delayed due to efforts to 
resolve outstanding issues. As a result, many of the candidate forms 
reflect that our formal analysis was conducted in late winter/early 
spring of 2003, as shown by the approval date of the Regional Director 
on each form. However, we were able to update a small subset of the 
candidate forms recently to reflect additional information we have 
obtained on those species. We intend to publish an updated combined 
CNOR for animals and plants that will update all of the candidate 
forms, including our findings on resubmitted petitions and a 
description of our progress on listing actions, within the next few 
months in the Federal Register.

Previous Notices of Review

    The Act directed the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to 
prepare a report on endangered and threatened

[[Page 24877]]

plant species, which was published as House Document No. 94-51. We 
published a notice in the Federal Register on July 1, 1975 (40 FR 
27823), in which we announced that we would review more than 3,000 
native plant species named in the Smithsonian's report and other 
species added by the 1975 notice for possible addition to the List of 
Endangered and Threatened Plants. A new comprehensive notice of review 
for native plants, which took into account the earlier Smithsonian 
report and other accumulated information, superseded the 1975 notice on 
December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82479). On November 28, 1983 (48 FR 53640), a 
supplemental plant notice of review announced changes in the status of 
various species. We published complete updates of the plant notice on 
September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184), 
September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144), and, as part of combined animal and 
plant notices, on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), September 19, 1997 
(62 FR 49398), October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534), October 30, 2001 (66 FR 
54808), and June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40657). Additionally, on January 8, 
2001 (66 FR 1295), we published our resubmitted petition finding for 
one plant species that had an outstanding ``warranted-but-precluded 
finding'' on a petition to list.
    We published earlier comprehensive reviews for vertebrate animals 
in the Federal Register on December 30, 1982 (47 FR 58454), and on 
September 18, 1985 (50 FR 37958). We published an initial comprehensive 
review for invertebrate animals on May 22, 1984 (49 FR 21664). We 
published a combined animal notice of review on January 6, 1989 (54 FR 
554), and with minor corrections on August 10, 1989 (54 FR 32833). We 
again published comprehensive animal notices on November 21, 1991 (56 
FR 58804), November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982), and, as part of combined 
animal and plant notices, on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), September 
19, 1997 (62 FR 49398), October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534), October 30, 
2001 (66 FR 54808), and June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40657). On January 8, 2001 
(66 FR 1295), we published our resubmitted petition findings for 25 
animal species that had outstanding ``warranted-but-precluded'' 
petition findings as well as notice of one candidate removal.
    This revised notice supersedes all previous animal, plant, and 
combined notices of review.

Summary

    Since publication of the 2002 CNOR, we reviewed the available 
information on candidate species to ensure that a proposed listing is 
justified for each species and to reevaluate the relative listing 
priority assignment of each species. We also evaluated whether we 
should emergency-list any of these species, particularly species with 
high priorities (i.e., species with listing priority numbers of 1, 2, 
or 3). We undertook this effort to ensure that we focus conservation 
efforts on those species at greatest risk. As of April 19, 2004, 20 
animals are proposed for endangered status; 3 animals are proposed for 
threatened status (not including proposed reclassifications of 
endangered species); 1 animal is proposed for threatened due to 
similarity of appearance; and 142 plant and 137 animal candidates are 
awaiting preparation of proposed rules (see Table 1). Table 2 includes 
19 species that we previously classified as either proposed for listing 
or candidates that we no longer classify in those categories.

Summary of New Candidates

    Below we present brief summaries of 24 new candidates. Complete 
information, including references, can be found in the candidate forms. 
You may obtain a copy of these forms from the Regional office that has 
the lead for the species, or from our Internet Web site (http://endangered.fws.gov).

Mammals

    Fisher, West Coast DPS (Martes pennanti)--See our initial 
``warranted-but-precluded'' finding signed on April 2, 2004, and 
published in the Federal Register on April 8, 2004 (68 FR 18770).

Birds

    Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris)--Kittlitz's 
murrelet is a small diving seabird whose entire North American 
population, and most of the world's population, inhabits Alaskan 
coastal waters discontinuously from Point Lay south to northern 
portions of Southeast Alaska. Kittlitz's murrelet is a relatively rare 
seabird. Most recent population estimates indicate that it has the 
smallest population of any seabird considered a regular breeder in 
Alaska (9,000 to 25,000 birds). This species appears to have undergone 
significant population declines in three of its core population 
centers--Prince William Sound, Malaspina Forelands, and Glacier Bay. As 
populations become smaller, they become increasingly vulnerable to 
events that may result in extirpation. Causes for the declines are not 
well known, but likely include: habitat loss or degradation, increased 
adult and juvenile mortality, and low recruitment and we believe that 
glacial retreat and oceanic regime shifts are the factors that are most 
likely causing population-level declines in this species. Existing 
regulatory mechanisms appear inadequate to stop or reverse population 
declines or to reduce the threats to this species. Due to the non-
imminent threats of high magnitude, we assign this species a listing 
priority number of 5.
    Xantus's murrelet (Synthliboramphus hypoleucus)--Xantus's murrelet 
is a small seabird of the Alcid family that occurs along the western 
coast of North America in the United States and Mexico. Xantus's 
murrelet populations in the United States and Mexico appear to have 
declined due to a wide variety of threats, with substantial declines 
evident at the largest known breeding population and extirpations on 
three of the Mexican islands. Data from the largest breeding population 
in the United States indicated a dramatic decline (up to 70 percent); 
data from other islands are scarce.
    Although the decline in Xantus's murrelet populations appears to 
have been substantial, the largest threats are being addressed, and, to 
some degree, ameliorated in the United States. Although predation is a 
large contributor to the current low population numbers of the Xantus's 
murrelet, it does not pose as imminent a threat as it once did. Cats 
and rats have been removed from many of the islands where they once 
occurred. Anacapa Island implemented a rat eradication program in 2001 
that seems to have been successful in removing that non-native predator 
of the Xantus's murrelet. Rats were eradicated in 1994 from San Roque 
Island. The Service has been working with the State of California, 
National Park Service, and National Marine Fisheries Service to address 
the threats of light pollution and human disturbance. To address this 
threat, the California Department of Fish and Game implemented 
regulations to require shielding and limit wattage of lights used by 
boats conducting nighttime fishing activities. Although these 
regulations do not remove the negative effects of this activity, they 
likely have resulted in a reduction of the impacts. Oil pollution may 
pose a potential threat to the survival of the Xantus's murrelet 
population, but is not likely responsible for the species' current low 
numbers. Due to the nonimminent threats of high magnitude, we assign 
this species a listing priority number of 5.

Clams

    Rayed bean (Villosa fabalis)--Once a common mussel species, the 
rayed bean

[[Page 24878]]

has disappeared from a large portion of its range, including the entire 
Tennessee River system and south of the Ohio River. The threats to the 
rayed bean appear significant and present throughout the species' 
range. Threats associated with habitat loss and degradation appear to 
include ongoing impoundments, channelization, chemical contaminants, 
mining, and sedimentation. Population losses due to impoundments appear 
to have contributed more to the decline and imperilment of the rayed 
bean than any other single factor. In addition, the invasive exotic 
zebra mussel has become established throughout the majority of the 
rayed bean's range and has the long-term potential of spreading 
throughout additional portions of the range. Remaining rayed bean 
populations are small and geographically isolated, making them 
susceptible to a single catastrophic event and making natural 
repopulation and genetic interchange impossible. The zebra mussel has 
already eliminated the rayed bean from Lakes Erie and Tippecanoe and 
the Detroit River and is posing an immediate threat to the rayed bean 
populations in the Lake St. Clair drainages, Allegheny and Tippecanoe 
Rivers, French Creek, and Lake Maxinkuckee. The resulting range 
restrictions and disjunct nature of the remaining populations may make 
the rayed bean subject to reductions in genetic diversity and limited 
natural reproduction. Because the threats appear to be imminent and of 
high magnitude, we assign this species a listing priority number of 2.
    Sheepnose mussel (Plethobasus cyphyus)--Historically, the sheepnose 
was fairly widespread in many Mississippi River system streams, 
although rarely very common. The sheepnose has apparently been 
eliminated from two-thirds of the total number of streams from which it 
was historically known (26 streams currently compared to 77 streams 
historically). Recruitment reduction or failure is a potential problem 
for many small sheepnose populations rangewide; this potential problem 
is exacerbated by the species' reduced range and increasingly isolated 
populations. The threats to the sheepnose appear include exotic species 
(especially zebra mussels), impoundments, fluctuating flow releases 
from dams, sedimentation, small population size, isolation of 
populations, gravel mining, channel dredging, municipal pollutants, 
agricultural runoff, nutrient enrichment, and coal processing 
pollution. These threats may be catastrophic, such as spills, or 
chronic, such as zebra mussel infestation and habitat quality 
degradation. Most extant populations have few individuals. Such 
populations may have extreme difficulty in successfully reproducing. 
Threats that affect the ability to reproduce over time could result in 
essentially sterile, aging, disjunct populations. Although there are 
ongoing attempts to alleviate some of these threats, there appear to be 
no populations without significant threats, and many threats are 
without obvious or readily available solutions. Due to high-magnitude 
threats that appear to be imminent, we assign this species a listing 
priority number of 2.
    Spectaclecase (Cumberlandia monodonta)--The currently accepted 
taxonomy places the spectaclecase in the monotypic genus, Cumberlandia. 
The spectaclecase occurred historically in at least 45 streams in the 
Mississippi, Ohio, and Missouri Rivers. Extant populations of the 
spectaclecase are known from 20 streams. Of the 20 extant populations, 
7 of those populations are represented by a single specimen each. Only 
three or four populations could be characterized as large. Threats to 
the continued existence of the spectaclecase appear to include exotic 
species, especially zebra mussels; delivery and deposition of fine 
sediments; small population sizes; isolation of populations; livestock 
grazing; wastewater effluents; mine runoff; unstable and coldwater 
flows downstream of dams; gravel mining; and channel dredging. Although 
there are ongoing attempts to alleviate some of these threats at some 
locations, there appear to be no populations without significant 
threats and many threats are without obvious or readily available 
solutions. In addition, the fish host of the spectaclecase is unknown; 
thus, propagation to reestablish the species in restored habitats and 
to maintain nonreproducing populations and focused conservation of its 
fish host are not yet possible. Therefore, we consider the threats to 
spectaclecase to be of high magnitude. However, 10 populations are 
reproducing or supported via immigration from large populations, and 
three or four of these populations may be described as large. We assign 
this species a listing priority number of 4.
    Round ebonyshell (Fusconaia rotulata)--The round ebonyshell is 
endemic to the Escambia River drainage and is only known from the main 
channel of the Conecuh/Escambia River (the river name changes across 
the Alabama/Florida State boundary). Only 3 of 9 historic locations 
appear to contain living individuals; thus, the number of sites known 
to support this species has declined by 67%. On average, only 2 live 
individuals were found at each of the remaining 3 sites. Threats 
associated with habitat loss and degradation appear to occur throughout 
the range of the seven Gulf-Coast mussel species discussed here and 
below. The river habitats of mussel species are vulnerable to habitat 
modification, sedimentation, and water quality degradation. Highway and 
reservoir construction, poorly managed logging practices, agricultural 
runoff, housing developments, pipeline crossings, and livestock grazing 
may result in physical disturbance of stream substrates or the riparian 
zone, and/or changes in water quality, temperature, or flow. 
Sedimentation can cause direct mortality of mussels by deposition and 
suffocation. Although the negative effects of point source discharges 
on aquatic communities in Alabama and Florida have been reduced over 
time due to compliance with State and Federal water quality 
regulations, there has been less success in dealing with non-point 
source pollution impacts, particularly sediments, on small stream 
drainages. The round ebonyshell is restricted to a few populations with 
few individuals. Due to the high magnitude and immediacy of the 
threats, we assign the round ebonyshell a listing priority number of 2.
    Southern kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus jonesi)--The southern 
kidneyshell is endemic to the Escambia and Yellow river drainages in 
Alabama, and the Choctawhatchee river drainage in Alabama and Florida. 
Currently, of 20 sites for which we have recent data, southern 
kidneyshells were only found at 1or 2 sites, representing at least a 
78% decline in the number of sites supporting this species. The threats 
associated with habitat loss and degradation are described in the above 
paragraph for the round ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf Coast candidate 
mussel species appear to share the same threats. The southern 
kidneyshell is restricted to a few populations with very few 
individuals. Due to the high magnitude and immediacy of the threats, we 
assign the southern kidneyshell a listing priority number of 2.
    Narrow pigtoe (Fusconaia escambia)--The narrow pigtoe is endemic to 
the Escambia River drainage in Alabama and Florida and the Yellow River 
drainage in Florida. Twenty-one locations currently support narrow 
pigtoes, although in very low numbers, with an average of 3 live 
individuals found per site. The threats associated with habitat loss 
and degradation are described in the above paragraph for the round 
ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf

[[Page 24879]]

Coast candidate mussel species appear to share the same threats. 
However, the narrow pigtoe is spread among a number of populations, 
with each population containing few individuals. Since we consider 
threats to be of a high magnitude and but nonimminent, we assigned the 
narrow pigtoe a listing priority number of 5.
    Southern sandshell (Lampsilis australis)--The southern sandshell is 
endemic to the Escambia River drainage in Alabama, and the Yellow and 
Choctawhatchee River drainages in Alabama and Florida. Recent mussel 
surveys found that live populations of the southern sandshell have 
declined from a total of 51 historic sites to its current distribution 
of 30 active sites and 5 sites with unknown population status. It 
appears to have been extirpated from approximately 31-41% of its 
historic range. Recent mussel surveys found an average of 2-3 live 
animals per site. Gravid females have been detected within the 2 larger 
populations found in the Choctawhatchee River basin. Low levels of 
recruitment are likely occurring within these two populations, although 
juvenile southern sandshells were not detected. The threats associated 
with habitat loss and degradation are described in the above paragraph 
for the round ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf Coast candidate mussel 
species appear to share the same threats. The southern sandshell is 
spread among a number of populations, with each population containing 
few individuals. Because we consider threats to be of high magnitude 
and nonimminent, we assign the southern sandshell a listing priority 
number of 5.
    Fuzzy pigtoe (Pleurobema strodeanum)--The fuzzy pigtoe is endemic 
to the Escambia and Choctawhatchee Rivers in Alabama and Florida, and 
the Yellow River in Alabama. Recent mussel status surveys found that 
the populations of the fuzzy pigtoe (represented by live animals and 
shell material) have declined from a total of 86 historic sites to its 
remaining distribution of 58 sites, representing an approximate 22% 
decline in its historic range. Four populations were as large as 10-20 
individuals; most supported only 1 or 2 individuals. The threats 
associated with habitat loss and degradation are described in the above 
paragraph for the round ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf Coast candidate 
mussel species appear to share the same threats. The fuzzy pigtoe is 
spread among a number of populations with each population containing 
few individuals. We consider threats to be of high magnitude and 
nonimminent. We assign the fuzzy pigtoe a listing priority number of 5.
    Choctaw bean (Villosa choctawensis)--The Choctaw bean is endemic to 
the Escambia, Yellow, and Choctawhatchee River drainages in Alabama and 
Florida. Recent mussel status surveys found that populations (live and 
shell material only) of the Choctaw bean have declined from a total of 
45 historic sites to its remaining distribution of 34 sites. It appears 
to have been extirpated from approximately 11% of its historic range. 
An average of two individuals were found live per site. The threats 
associated with habitat loss and degradation are described in the above 
paragraph for the round ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf Coast candidate 
mussel species appear to share the same threats. The Choctaw bean is 
spread among a number of populations, with each population containing 
few individuals. Threats appear to be of high magnitude and 
nonimminent, and we assign the Choctaw bean a listing priority number 
of 5.
    Tapered Pigtoe (Quincuncina burkei)--The tapered pigtoe is endemic 
to the Choctawhatchee River drainage in Alabama and Florida. During 
recent status surveys, the tapered pigtoe was found live and as shell 
material at 33 of 54 historical sites with an average of 7 individuals 
per site. Only four populations contained as many as 10-20 individuals. 
The tapered pigtoe has been extirpated from approximately 28% of its 
historic range. The threats associated with habitat loss and 
degradation are described in the above paragraph for the round 
ebonyshell; all seven new Gulf Coast candidate mussel species appear to 
share the same threats. The threats to the tapered pigtoe appear to be 
moderate-to-low magnitude and nonimminent, and we assign the tapered 
pigtoe a listing priority number of 11.

Insects

    Coleman cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus colemanensis)--The Coleman 
Cave beetle is only known from Coleman Cave, Montgomery County, 
Tennessee. Most members of the insect genus Pseudanophthalmus are cave 
dependent (troglobites) and are not found outside the cave environment. 
Due to the Coleman's cave beetle's limited distribution, it is 
vulnerable to isolated events. Events such as toxic chemical spills, 
discharges of large amounts of polluted water, closure of entrances, 
alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have 
serious adverse impacts on the Coleman Cave beetles and could result 
its extinction. The Coleman Cave beetle currently receives some 
protection under a formal Cooperative Management Agreement; 
consequently the threats it faces are more moderate. Due the moderate 
magnitude of the nonimminent threats, we assign the Coleman Cave beetle 
a listing priority number of 11.
    Fowler's cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus fowlerae)--Fowler's cave 
beetle was described from 11 specimens collected from 1959 through 1965 
from Sheals Cave, Clay County, Tennessee. The species is not known from 
any other caves. Fowler's cave beetle has not been observed or 
collected since 1965, but species experts presume that it still exists 
in low numbers. The limited distribution of Fowler's cave beetle makes 
it vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a minimal effect 
on the more wide-ranging members of the genus. Events such as toxic 
chemical spills, discharges of large amounts of polluted water, closure 
of entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances 
could have serious adverse impacts on cave beetles and could result in 
their extinction. Due to the high magnitude of the nonimminent threats, 
we assign the Fowler's cave beetle a listing priority number of 5.
    Insular cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus insularis)--The insular cave 
beetle is known from only one cave. In 1988, this cave was searched in 
1998 for additional specimens of this species but none were found. 
Although the species has not been observed since 1957, species experts 
presume that it still exists in low numbers. The limited distribution 
of the insular cave beetle makes it vulnerable to isolated events that 
would only have a minimal effect on the more wide-ranging members of 
the genus. Events such as toxic chemical spills, discharges of large 
amounts of polluted water, closure of entrances, alteration of 
entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have serious adverse 
impacts on the insular cave beetle and could result in their 
extinction. Due the high magnitude of the nonimminent threats, we 
assign the insular cave beetle a listing priority number of 5.
    Soothsayer cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus tiresias)--The soothsayer 
cave beetle is known to occur in two caves. The original description of 
this taxon was based upon six specimens collected from Indian Grave 
Point Cave, DeKalb County, Tennessee, in 1956. These specimens were 
collected near the cave's entrance sink in an area that had high 
humidity, stable temperatures, and

[[Page 24880]]

a few fragments of rotten wood that had fallen into the sink. Four 
specimens were later collected from nearby Fox Cave. Three searches 
were conducted between 1997 and 1999, but no additional specimens of 
this species have been found. Despite the recent failures to find the 
species, species experts believe that the soothsayer cave beetle is 
still present in Indian Grave Point and Fox caves, in at least very low 
numbers. The limited distribution of soothsayer cave beetle makes it 
vulnerable to isolated events that would only have a minimal effect on 
the more wide-ranging members of the genus. Events such as toxic 
chemical spills, discharges of large amounts of polluted water, closure 
of entrances, alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances 
could have serious adverse impacts on cave beetles and could result in 
their extinction. Due the high magnitude of the nonimminent threats, we 
assign the soothsayer cave beetle a listing priority number of 5.
    Noblett's cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus paulus)--Noblett's Cave 
beetle was described from two specimens collected in 1967 from 
Noblett's Cave, Monroe County, Tennessee. Despite several searches 
conducted in this cave and in other caves in the vicinity, no 
additional specimens have been found. However, species experts believe 
that it probably still exists in low numbers. Noblett's Cave is a small 
(about 500 feet long) muddy cave with a stream flowing through it. The 
limited distribution of Noblett's Cave beetle makes it vulnerable to 
isolated events that would only have a minimal effect on the more wide-
ranging members of the genus. Events such as toxic chemical spills, 
discharges of large amounts of polluted water, closure of entrances, 
alteration of entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have 
serious adverse impacts on cave beetles and could result in their 
extinction. Due to the high magnitude of the nonimminent threats, we 
assign the Noblett's Cave beetle a listing priority number of 5.
    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, in Inyo County, California, where surveys indicate that 
it is extremely rare component of 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. 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 stream environments were eliminated or 
reduced in extent. The effects of water diversion activities are also 
most pronounced during the summer months when aquatic habitats and the 
species that occupy those habitats are most restricted, and therefore 
vulnerable to perturbation. Nevares Spring naucorid bugs are also 
likely to experience direct predation by mosquitofish and compete with 
these fish for limited food resources. Due the high magnitude and 
nonimminent threats, we assign the Nevares Spring naucorid bug a 
listing priority number of 5.

Flowering Plants

    Hala pepe (Pleomele fernaldii)--We accidentally removed this 
species from the June 13, 2002, list of candidates and are now 
restoring it to the list of candidates.
    Brand's phacelia (Phacelia stellaris)--Brand's phacelia was 
historically found in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, 
and in coastal northern Baja California, Mexico. Only 3 of the 15 sites 
in the United States ever known to support populations of this species 
still remain. Two of the three known extant populations in the United 
States are from coastal San Diego County. The other is in western 
Riverside County. Two populations may remain in Mexico, although one 
has not been verified since 1975. The apparent threats to this species 
include trampling or habitat degradation by foot or vehicular traffic 
and the invasive spread of non-native iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis). 
Therefore, with imminent threats of high magnitude, we assign this 
species a listing priority number of 2.
    Churchill Narrows buckwheat (Eriogonum diatomaceum)--Churchill 
Narrows buckwheat is restricted to chalky, diatomaceous outcrops 
between 1,311 and 1,390 meters (m) (4,300 and 4,560 feet (ft)) 
elevation in the Churchill Narrows located in the Pine Nut Mountains, 
Lyon County, Nevada. The habitat of all but 3 of the 15 occurrences of 
Churchill Narrows buckwheat is subject to imminent exploration and 
potential development of existing mining claims. Observations in 2003 
confirmed that mining activities have had direct and indirect impacts 
on Churchill Narrows buckwheat in the recent past and these impacts are 
likely to increase. A Notice of Operation for the exploration and 
development of a mining claim within the largest occurrence of the 
species has been filed with the BLM. Threats on the species from 
mining, trampling and soil disturbance by livestock habitat occur 
rangewide, populations are small and somewhat fragmented, and 
inadequate regulatory mechanisms are in place to protect this species 
throughout its range. Due to the imminent threats of high magnitude, we 
assign this species a listing priority number of 2.
    Orcutt's hazardia (Hazardia orcuttii)--Orcutt's hazardia is a 
shrubby species in the Asteraceae (sunflower family). Although once 
described as fairly common in open habitats along coastal plains from 
Colonet to Tijuana in Baja California, Mexico, only one occurrence in 
Mexico has been confirmed since 1975. The only known extant occurrence 
in the United States of this species is in Encinitas, California, 
primarily within the Manchester Conservation Area (MCA) managed by 
Center for Natural Lands Management. Apparent threats on the species 
include ongoing, direct impacts from unauthorized access to MCA. 
Impacts include pedestrian trespass, creation of bicycle trails, and 
unauthorized fire suppression training (without the permission of the 
land owners). Introduced invasive exotic plants may also pose a 
significant threat. With imminent threats of high magnitude, we assign 
this species a priority number of 2.
    Everglades bully (Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense)--
The Everglades bully is a shrub restricted to the tropical pinelands of 
Miami-Dade County, Florida. Outside of Everglades National Park, only 
about 1 percent of the Miami Pine Rock Ridge pinelands remain, and much 
of what is left is in small remaining blocks isolated from other 
natural areas. Everglades bully is known to occur on conservation lands 
only at Long Pine Key (8,029 ha or 19,839 acres) in Everglades National 
Park, Larry and Penny Thompson Park (93 hectares or 229 acres), and the 
privately owned Pine Ridge Sanctuary (5.7 ha or 14 acres). Fire 
suppression and exotic plant invasions are the greatest threats to 
Everglades bully and other pineland understory plants. Historically, 
pine rocklands had an open low understory where natural fires remained 
patchy, with relatively low temperatures, thus sparing many native 
grasses and shrubs. Dense exotic plant

[[Page 24881]]

growth can create much higher temperature fires and longer burning 
periods. Pine rockland plants cannot tolerate these extreme conditions. 
Among the exotic pest plants present in the Everglades National Park is 
Old World climbing fern, Lygodium microphyllum, which is capable of 
smothering vegetation and is spreading rapidly in Florida. It is 
spreading into southernmost Florida, and is already a very serious 
problem in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. Based on the moderate 
magnitude of the imminent threats, we assign a listing priority number 
of 9.

Summary of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates

Mammals

    Southern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus endemicus)--A 
dramatic population decline of the southern Idaho ground squirrel has 
occurred during the past 30 years. Scientists attribute the decline to 
invasive non-native plants associated with a change in the fire 
frequency, and the lack of reclamation or restoration of habitat by 
various land management agencies and private landowners. Even though 
habitat degradation is pervasive in many areas of this species' range, 
suitable habitat areas that can support southern Idaho ground squirrels 
still persist. Conservation and habitat rehabilitation actions have 
begun in some areas, and in 2001 and 2002, over 100 squirrels were 
captured from the Weiser Golf Course (the largest known colony site) 
and translocated to suitable habitat on lands covered by a Candidate 
Conservation Agreement with Assurances. These actions, in combination 
with other conservation and research actions described in the candidate 
form, lead us to conclude that the magnitude of threats, while still 
high, is trending toward a moderate-to-low range. While there is still 
concern for genetic constriction and isolation due to generally low 
numbers of individuals at existing sites, natural dispersal is 
occurring at some sites, and translocation efforts are being 
implemented each year. Based on the recent conservation efforts 
described above, it seems apparent there is now some commitment by 
various agencies and parties to initiate and implement conservation 
actions on behalf of the southern Idaho ground squirrel. These actions, 
in combination with other conservation and research actions described 
above, lead us to change the imminence of threats to non-imminent. 
Thus, the listing priority number is changed from a 3 to a 6.

Birds

    Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus)--The range of the 
Gunnison sage-grouse has been reduced to less than 25 percent of its 
historical range. Size of the range and quality of its habitat have 
been reduced by direct habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation 
from building development, road and utility corridors, fences, energy 
development, conversion of native habitat to hay or other crop fields, 
alteration or destruction of wetland and riparian areas, inappropriate 
livestock management, competition for winter range by big game, and 
creation of large reservoirs. Other factors affecting the Gunnison 
sage-grouse include fire suppression, overgrazing by elk (Cervus 
elaphus) and deer (Odocoileus hemionus), drought, disturbance or death 
by off-highway vehicles, harassment from people and pets, noise that 
impairs acoustical quality of leks (courtship areas), genetic 
depression, pesticides, pollution, and competition for habitat from 
other species. For greater detail, see 65 FR 82310 (December 28, 2000).
    Numerous conservation actions have occurred and funding and plans 
for additional conservation actions are in place. However, threats to 
the sage-grouse currently have not been eliminated or reduced enough 
through conservation actions to remove the potential need for listing. 
With population numbers already low, the threat of drought-related 
declines, coupled with other threats, are of concern. Not only have 
sage-grouse numbers declined in 2003 and may decline in 2004 due to the 
2002 drought, it is unknown how long drought conditions may last. Based 
on information available to date, including continued and significant 
population declines in 2003, threats to the sage-grouse have increased 
in the last year due to drought-related effects to the habitat and 
effects to chick survival and recruitment, and relaxation of 
restrictions on land use in Gunnison County, which harbors the only 
large population of the bird. Given these ongoing high magnitude 
threats, we are elevating the listing priority from a 5 to a 2. 
However, we do not believe that emergency listing is warranted at this 
time based on the size of the population remaining in the Gunnison 
Basin and continued pre-listing conservation actions.

Fish

    Fluvial arctic grayling, upper Missouri River DPS (Thymallus 
arcticus)--The fluvial arctic grayling distinct vertebrate population 
segment (DPS) once ranged throughout the upper Missouri River drainage, 
but now the only remnant population is restricted to the upper Big Hole 
River, an area estimated to be less than 5 percent of the species' 
historical range. In fall of 2002, the remnant grayling population in 
the Big Hole River apparently had declined to such a low level that not 
enough fish were captured to estimate population density. The spring 
2002 spawning surveys captured the lowest number of grayling in the 
past 14 years of sampling, and the spawning population was skewed to 
older fish, indicating limited recruitment for the past 2 years. In 
2003, abundant numbers of grayling were found in the lower reaches of 
tributaries with the coolest water temperatures.
    Efforts to reestablish grayling populations within the historic 
range in the upper Missouri River basin began in 1997. At this time, 
there is no evidence that these efforts have been successful in 
reestablishing self-sustaining populations at any of four 
reintroduction sites. Drought conditions since 1999 have increased 
water temperatures, reduced flows, and exacerbated the effects of 
ongoing threats such as flow reductions from irrigation and stock water 
withdrawals, locally degraded habitat conditions, and potential 
competition or predation from non-native fish. Cooperative, community-
based efforts have focused primarily on working with water users to 
leave water in the Big Hole River to increase flows and reduce water 
temperatures during periods of drought. The Big Hole Watershed 
Committee, the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department, and the 
Service's Partners for Fish and Wildlife program are committed to 
ongoing, on-the-ground conservation efforts for grayling. Despite these 
efforts, there continue to be periods when flows are well below those 
considered ``survival'' flows for grayling and water temperatures 
exceed the thermal tolerance of grayling. Based on the 2002 grayling 
population surveys, we are elevating the listing priority number for 
this population from a 9 to 3 because the threats continue to be 
imminent and the magnitude is now high. However, these threats do not 
rise to the level that emergency listing is necessary, since, among 
other things, biologists found increased population numbers in the 
lower, cooler reaches of tributaries to the mainstem Big Hole River, in 
2002 and 2003, hopefully mitigating for the low numbers of grayling 
found in the mainstem Big Hole River.

[[Page 24882]]

Snails

    Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--The Page springsnail is 
known to exist only within a complex of springs located within an 
approximately 1.5-kilometer (0.93-mile) stretch along the west side of 
Oak Creek around the community of Page Springs, Yavapai County, 
Arizona. Many of the springs where the Page springsnail occurs have 
been subjected to some level of modification to meet domestic, 
agricultural, ranching, fish hatchery, and recreational needs. Arizona 
Game and Fish Department (AGFD) management plans for the Bubbling Ponds 
and Page Springs fish hatcheries included commitments to replace lost 
habitat and to monitor remaining populations of invertebrates such as 
the Page springsnail. Based on recent survey data, it appears that the 
Page springsnail is abundant within its habitats and is more widely 
distributed than previously known. Monitoring by AGFD and Service 
biologists no longer entails snail removal, which appears to have had a 
temporary impact on population numbers. In addition, the threat of 
ground water withdrawal is not considered imminent because recent 
studies indicate that the groundwater system of the Verde Valley has 
not yet been affected by development and base flow in the Verde River 
Valley has remained virtually unchanged since 1915. Because these 
threats are nonimminent, we changed the listing priority number from 2 
to 5 for this species.

Insects

    The Surprising Cave beetle (Pseudanophthalmus inexpectatus)--This 
species was described from specimens collected in the historic section 
of Mammoth Cave and White Cave, Mammoth Cave National Park (MCNP), 
Edmonston County, Kentucky. Subsequent to these original discoveries, 
the species was also found in MCNP's Great Onyx Cave. In 2002, MCNP 
discovered a previously unknown population of this species in a fourth 
MCNP cave. The insect genus Pseudanophthalmus is in the predatory-
ground-beetle family Carabidae. Most members of this genus are cave 
dependent (troglobites) and are not found outside the cave environment. 
Their limited distributions make these species vulnerable to isolated 
events that would only have a minimal effect on the more wide-ranging 
members of the genus. Events such as toxic chemical spills, discharges 
of large amounts of polluted water, closure of entrances, alteration of 
entrances, or the creation of new entrances could have serious adverse 
impacts on these cave beetles and could result in their extinction. In 
September 2001, MCNP and the Service entered into a Candidate 
Conservation Agreement for the surprising cave beetle. The Agreement 
will ensure that all habitat components required to protect and improve 
the conservation status of this species, especially an adequate food 
source, are provided through the MCNP's management of the caves that 
support the species. Under this agreement MCNP has developed and 
implemented a monitoring program for the species and its habitat. Thus, 
the magnitude of the threat to the surprising cave beetle is reduced 
because of its location on Federal land and the formal commitment 
through a Candidate Conservation Agreement between MCNP and the Service 
to protect the species. Therefore, we changed the listing priority 
number for the surprising cave beetle from a 5 to an 11.

Flowering Plants

    San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. 
fernandina)--San Fernando Valley spineflower is currently known from 
only two populations. The plants are under threat by habitat loss due 
to residential development, competition from non-native plants (e.g., 
several non-native grasses), stochastic events, such as erosion and 
fire, and the potential loss of the native pollinator community due to 
competition with and predation by the non-native Argentine ants 
(Linepithema humilis). The site in Los Angeles County, the Newhall 
Ranch, is proposed for residential development that has the potential 
to cause the loss of most, if not all, of the remaining plants at that 
site. Development at this site is expected to begin in 2004. While the 
landowner has approached us with the idea to enter into a Candidate 
Conservation Agreement, no documents have been submitted nor any 
agreement processed, so we cannot assume that the immediate threats 
from the Newhall Ranch development are gone. However, the site in 
Ventura County, the former Ahmanson Ranch, is now under the auspices of 
the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy; a joint powers authority 
operated by the State to conserve lands within the Conservancy's sphere 
of influence. We believe the direct threats to the species from the 
former Ahmanson Ranch development plan have been eliminated, and we are 
working with the new landowners to manage the site for the benefit of 
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina. Since the threats to Chorizanthe 
parryi var. fernandina from habitat destruction or modification are 
less than they were 2 years ago, we are lowering the listing priority 
number from a 3 to a 6 reflecting threats that are high but 
nonimmenent.
    Whorled sunflower (Helianthus verticillatus)--This species is found 
in moist, prairie-like openings in woodlands and along adjacent creeks 
in northwest Georgia, Alabama, and Tennessee. This species appears to 
be a narrow habitat specialist occurring in natural wet meadows or 
prairies and calcareous barrens. The greatest threat to this species 
appears to be from industrial forestry practices. The largest 
population is permanently protected through a conservation easement 
with The Nature Conservancy. The magnitude of threat is now considered 
moderate due to this recent development. The threats are viewed as not 
imminent, in that the species is able to withstand some disturbance and 
we know of no projects/activities at this time that imminently threaten 
the other populations. Thus, we changed the listing priority number 
from a 5 to an 11.
    Graham beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii)-Penstemon grahamii 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. The species population is estimated at about 7,000 
individuals with 36 known occurrences. Most of the occupied habitat of 
P. grahamii is within developed and expanding oil and gas fields with 
several wells and access roads within the species' occupied habitat. 
The location of P. grahamii habitat exposes it to possibility of 
habitat destruction from off-road vehicle (ORV) use and road, pipeline, 
and well-site construction in connection with oil and gas development. 
With such a small population and limited occupied habitat, any 
destruction, modification, or curtailment of the habitat could 
negatively impact the species. Collection of plants and seeds is a 
significant threat due to the desire of rock-garden enthusiasts to 
obtain this very attractive plant. The species is heavily grazed by 
wildlife (rodents, rabbits, and possibly deer) and by livestock 
(primarily sheep). Livestock trampling is affecting some populations. 
Historical overgrazing is thought to have caused the extirpation of 
some P. grahamii populations. The potential threats associated with oil 
and gas development within the habitat of P. grahamii are considered to 
be imminent in light of the increased seismic survey and petroleum 
leasing. Therefore, we have elevated the LPN for this species

[[Page 24883]]

from 5 to 2 because the threats continue to be of high magnitude, and 
are now considered imminent.

Ferns and Allies

    Palapali (Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis)--This fern was 
formally known as the full species Microlepia mauiensis. In a recent 
review of the taxonomy of Hawaiian ferns, it was changed to a variety 
of M. strigosa. This fern, now classified as a variety, continues to be 
a candidate; however, this taxonomic change changes the priority number 
from a 2 to a 3.
    Christella boydiae--This Hawaiian fern species (no common name) was 
originally described in 1897 in the genus Christella. It was then 
placed in the genus Thelypteris. More recently, in 1999, it was placed 
in the genus Cyclosorus and split into two varieties (var. 
kipahuluensis and var. boydiae). Both of these varieties were 
recognized in the June 13, 2002, CNOR as candidates, each with the 
priority number of 6. In a 2002 review of Hawaiian ferns, the species 
was returned to the genus Christella. The most recent taxonomic 
description removes recognition of the two former varieties within the 
species of Christella boyidae; however, the entire species remains a 
candidate. Therefore, the priority number moves from 6 to 5.

Other Taxonomic Changes in Candidates

    Sheath-tailed bat (Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata and E. 
semicaudata rotensis)--This species was included in the 2002 CNOR as a 
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment within the U.S. Territories, 
which encompasses a subspecies and a Distinct Population Segment of a 
second subspecies: E. semicaudata rotensis, endemic to the Mariana 
Islands; and the American Samoa DPS of E. semicaudata semicaudata, 
endemic to Western and American Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu. In 
1997, Koopman described four subspecies to E. semicaudata, which are 
now widely accepted. The sheath-tailed bats that continue to warrant 
candidacy are within E. semicaudata rotensis and the American Samoa DPS 
of Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata. Thus, with this 2003 CNOR and 
accompanying candidate form, we are renaming the continuing candidate 
entity as the following two entities: the subspecies historically found 
in the Marianas Islands (E. s. rotensis) and the American Samoan DPS of 
E. s. semicaudata that was historically found in Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, 
and Vanuatu. In addition, due to a clerical error, we previously 
identified this species being subject to an active petition and 
therefore requiring a ``resubmitted warranted-but-precluded'' 12-month 
petition finding. In this notice we do not treat the sheath-tailed bat 
among the petitioned candidates.
    Populations of E. s. rotensis on the Mariana Islands of Guam and 
Rota have been extirpated and the Mariana population on Aguijan has 
been reduced to approximately 10 individuals. A similar drastic decline 
has occurred in American Samoa where populations of E. s. semicaudata 
were estimated at over 10,000 in 1976. In 1993, only four bats were 
recorded. E. s. semicaudata occurs only on Tutuila Island and is 
probably extirpated from Western Samoa. The nearest population is in 
Tonga.
    Tutuila is within the U.S. territory of American Samoa, thus this 
DPS is delimited by international government boundaries. The sheath-
tailed bat resides in caves and is very susceptible to disturbance. 
Roost sites have been rendered unsuitable for bats by human intrusion 
into caves and the use of some caves as garbage dumps. Typhoons have 
also damaged some caves by blocking entrances or by flooding coastal 
caves. No single threat appears to be the cause of the reduced range of 
the sheath-tailed bat in the Marianas and in American Samoa. The loss 
of roosting caves, the loss of foraging habitat due to deforestation, 
disturbance by feral ungulates, introduced predators, and possibly 
pesticide use are appear to be the primary factors. In addition, small 
populations and limited numbers of populations place these two 
candidate sheath-tailed bats at great risk of extinction from 
inbreeding, random events, and storms. Based on immediate threats of a 
high magnitude, we retained the listing priority number of the sheath-
tailed bat for the two candidate entities: E. s. rotensis and the 
American Samoa DPS of E. s. semicaudata, each a listing priority number 
of 3.

Candidate Removals

Ferns and Allies

    Hohiu kilau (Dryopteris glabra var. pusilla (formerly Dryopteris 
tenebrosa))--This recently discovered small terrestrial fern was 
previously treated as one of six separate species that are now all 
recognized as varieties of one species, Dryopteris glabra, which occurs 
widely through Hawaii. It is believed that the variety pusilla is more 
widespread than currently recorded, and additional surveys are needed. 
Therefore, we are removing it from candidate status.

Petition for a Candidate Species

    The Act provides two mechanisms for considering species for 
listing. First, the Act requires us to identify and propose for listing 
those species that require listing under the standards of section 
4(a)(1). We implement this through the candidate program, discussed 
above. Second, the Act provides a mechanism for the public to petition 
us to add a species to the Lists. Under section 4(b)(3)(A), when we 
receive such a petition, we must determine within 90 days, to the 
maximum extent practicable, whether the petition presents substantial 
information that listing may be warranted (a ``90-day finding''). If we 
make a positive 90-day finding, under section 4(b)(3)(B) we must make 
one of three possible findings within 12 months of the receipt of the 
petition (a ``12-month finding'').
    The first possible 12-month finding is that listing is not 
warranted, in which case we need take no further action on the 
petition. Second, we may find that listing is warranted, in which case 
we must promptly publish a proposed rule to list the species. Once we 
publish a proposed rule for a species, section 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) 
govern further procedures, regardless of whether or not we issued the 
proposal in response to a petition. Third, we may find that listing is 
warranted but precluded. Such a finding means that immediate 
publication of a proposed rule to list the species is precluded by 
higher priority listing proposals, and that we are making expeditious 
progress to add and remove species from the Lists, as appropriate.
    On December 5, 1996, we made a final decision to redefine 
``candidate species'' to mean those species for which the Service has 
on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and 
threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but for which 
issuance of the proposed rule is precluded (61 FR 64481, December 6, 
1996). Therefore, the standard for making a species a candidate 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 subject to a ``warranted-but-precluded'' 12-month finding to 
the candidate list.
    This publication also provides notice of both the positive 90-day 
finding and the warranted but precluded 12-month findings pursuant to 
section 4(b)(3) for candidate species listed on Table 1 that have been 
the subject of a petition to list. Even though all candidate species 
have warranted but precluded status (and thus the equivalent of 
positive 90-

[[Page 24884]]

day and warranted but precluded 12-month findings), we will continue to 
publish specific section 4(b)(3) findings on subsequent petitions to 
list candidate species in the first CNOR following receipt of the 
petition.
    In addition, pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act, once a 
petition is filed regarding a candidate species, the Service must make 
a 12-month petition finding in compliance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of 
the Act at least once a year, until the Service proposes the species 
for listing or makes a final ``not-warranted'' finding. Section 
4(b)(3)(C)(iii) of the Act requires the Service to ``implement a system 
to monitor effectively the status of all species'' subject to a 
``warranted-but-precluded'' 12-month finding, and to ``make prompt use 
of the [emergency listing] authority [under section 4(b)(7)] to prevent 
a significant risk to the well being of any such species.'' The CNOR 
plays a crucial role in the Service's monitoring of all candidate 
species by seeking information regarding the status of those species. 
The Service reviews all new information on candidate species as it 
becomes available, and identifies any species for which emergency 
listing may be appropriate. If the Service determines that emergency 
listing is appropriate for any candidate, the Service will make prompt 
use of its authority under section 4(b)(7). We have been reviewing and 
will continue to review at least annually the status of all candidates 
whether or not we receive a petition. Thus, the CNOR and accompanying 
candidate forms also constitute the Service's annual finding on the 
status of petitioned species pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i).
    On June 20, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 
Circuit held that the 1999 CNOR (64 FR 57534, October 25, 1999) did not 
fulfill the second component of ``warranted but precluded'' 12-month 
petition findings for the Gila chub and Chiracahua leopard frog (Center 
for Biological Diversity v. Norton, 254 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 2001)). In 
particular, while the Court found designation as a candidate arguably 
constitutes a 90-day finding that there is substantial information that 
listing may be warranted and the first prong of a 12-month finding that 
protection is warranted, the Court also found that the one line 
designation in the table of candidates in the 1999 CNOR, with no 
further explanation, did not satisfy section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii)'s 
requirement that the Service publish a finding pursuant to section 4 of 
the Act. The Court suggested that this one-line statement of candidate 
status also precluded meaningful judicial review and may have 
diminished the obligation to monitor the species on an annual basis.
    We have drafted subsequent CNORs (including this one) to address 
the Court's concerns. We have included below a description of why the 
listing of every petitioned candidate species is both warranted and 
precluded at this time. Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(ii) and the 
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. section 206), any party with 
standing may challenge the merits of any ``not warranted'' or 
``warranted but precluded'' petition findings incorporated in this 
CNOR. The analysis included herein, together with the administrative 
record for the decision at issue (particularly the supporting candidate 
form), will provide an adequate basis for a court to review the 
petition finding. Finally, nothing in this document or any of our 
policies should be construed as in any way modifying the Act's 
requirement that we make a new 12-month petition finding for each 
petitioned candidate within 1 year of the date of publication of this 
CNOR. If we fail to make any such finding on a timely basis, whether 
through publication of a new CNOR or some other form of notice, any 
party with standing may seek judicial review.
    We reviewed the current status of and threats to the 42 candidates 
and 5 listed species for which we have received a petition and for 
which we have found listing or reclassification from threatened to 
endangered to be warranted but precluded. This includes 43 candidate or 
listed species for which we previously have published findings. For 42 
of these 43 species, we have incorporated any new information we have 
gathered since the prior finding (for black-tailed prairie dog, see 
below) and, as a result of this review, we made continued ``warranted-
but-precluded'' 12-month findings on the petitions for these species. 
There also are 3 new candidate species for which we have received 
petitions, and for which we are announcing initial ``warranted-but-
precluded'' findings in this CNOR. Additionally, for one new candidate 
species for which we have received a petition, we recently published a 
separate initial ``warranted-but-precluded'' finding.
    We have identified the 41 species that are candidates and for which 
we received petitions by the code ``C*'' in the category column on the 
left side of Table 1. As discussed above, this finding means that the 
immediate publication of proposed rules to list these species was 
precluded by our work on the higher priority listing actions, listed 
below, during the period from June 13, 2002 through April 19, 2004. We 
will continue to monitor the status of all candidate species, including 
petitioned species, as new information becomes available. This review 
will determine if a change in status is warranted, including the need 
to emergency-list a species under section 4(b)(7) of the Act.
    In addition to identifying petitioned candidate species in Table 1, 
we also present brief summaries of why these particular candidates 
warrant listing. More complete information, including references, is 
found in the candidate forms. You may obtain a copy of these forms from 
the Regional office that has the lead for the species, or from the Fish 
and Wildlife Service's Internet Web site: http://endangered.fws.gov/.
    We find that the immediate issuance of a proposed rule and timely 
promulgation of a final rule for each of these actions has been, for 
the preceding months, and continues to be, precluded by higher priority 
listing actions. As described in section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act, in 
order for us to make a ``warranted but precluded'' finding on a 
petitioned action, we must be making expeditious progress to add 
qualified species to the Lists and to remove from the Lists species for 
which the protections of the Act are no longer necessary. This notice 
describes our progress in revising the lists since our June 13, 2002, 
publication of the last CNOR. We intend to publish these descriptions 
annually.
    On February 20, 2003, the President signed into law the Fiscal Year 
(FY) 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill (Omnibus Bill), which 
appropriates funding to many Federal agencies and programs, including 
the Service's program for completing listing and critical habitat rules 
pursuant to Section 4 of the ESA (Listing Program), for the period from 
October 1, 2002, through September 30, 2003. Through the Omnibus Bill, 
Congress specified that the Service could not spend more than 
$9,077,000 on Listing Program actions in FY 2003. Of that total, 
Congress also specified that the Service could not spend more than $6 
million on designating critical habitat for already-listed species, 
leaving $3,077,000 for other listing activities. The Service has worked 
to ensure that Congress understands the level of funding necessary to 
comply with all of the Service's statutory requirements. In a January 
7, 2003, Effects Statement to Conference Managers, the Department of 
the Interior informed Congress about these listing program requirements 
and requested an increase in the FY 2003 listing budget to $11.8 
million.

[[Page 24885]]

Congress, nevertheless, retained the $9 million limit for spending.
    For Fiscal Year (FY) 2004, the President requested an increase of 
$3,209,000 above the FY 2003 request to bring the Listing Program 
budget to $12,286,000. The request included $8,900,000 for designation 
of critical habitat for already-listed species, and $3,386,000 to 
conduct other Listing Program work. Subsequent to the President's FY 
2004 budget request, a number of factors increased the amount of 
funding needed to complete judicially-mandated critical habitat work in 
FY 2004. Most significantly, the work that the Service was compelled to 
defer from FY 2003 had to be funded under the FY 2004 budget, at an 
estimated cost of $2,000,000. The Service also received several 
additional court orders requiring the Service to perform critical 
habitat work in FY 2004. In an October 2003 Effect Statement to the 
Conference managers, the Department of the Interior informed Congress 
that, because of these additional obligations, the Service needed an 
additional $2.5 million for the Listing Program in FY 2004.
    Congress did not approve a Listing Program appropriation for FY 
2004 until November 7, 2003, more than a month after the start of the 
fiscal year. On November 10, 2003, the President signed the 2004 
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, which funded nearly 
fully the amount of the President's request (Pub. L. 108-108 (Nov. 10, 
2003)). However, the bill did not address the Service's request for an 
additional $2.5 million to fully fund the Listing Program in FY 2004.
    Thus, we anticipate that most or all of listing actions for the 
candidate species included in this CNOR will continue to be precluded 
by higher priority listing actions. The Service allocates the listing 
appropriation by task, rather than by region as we have done in the 
past. Thus, listing prioritization is accomplished at the national 
scale. However, the $3,386,000 is fully allocated to fund any emergency 
listings, and essential litigation-related, administrative, and program 
management functions and to comply with court orders and court-approved 
settlement agreements requiring petition findings or listing 
determinations. We are funding actions on the following species this 
fiscal year: California tiger salamander--central DPS, Boreal toad, 
Miami blue butterfly, Sacramento Mountians checkerspot butterfly, four 
subspecies of the skipper Pseudocipaeodes eunus, Rota bridled white-
eye, eastern sage grouse, greater sage grouse, Salt Creek tiger beetle, 
Bromus arizonicus, Nasselia cernua, Nesogenes rotensis, Osmoxylon 
mariannense, Tabernaemontana rotensis, Lepidium papilliferum, 
Cymopterus deserticola, Midvalley fairy shrimp, pacific fisher, Florida 
black bear, New England cottontail, Mariana fruit bat, white-tailed 
prairie dog, wolverine, Santa Catalina Island fox, Santa Rosa Island, 
San Miguel Island fox, Santa Cruz Island fox, northern sea otter--
southwest Alaska DPS, and Colorado river cutthroat trout. We do still 
allocate a small amount of funding ($100,000) that is not earmarked for 
particular listing actions to each of the Regions. This funding is 
referred to ``capability funding.'' With respect to Regions with 
relatively few court-mandated deadlines, this funding ensures that 
those Regions will maintain the expertise to take listing actions in 
the future. When any of this capability funding is available, we may 
use it for other high-priority listing actions. We generally prioritize 
these other listings by each Region in order of the highest listing 
priority number; we fund petition findings for outstanding petitions 
regarding species that are not already on the candidate list, and 
generally, we fund older petitions before newer ones.
    Our progress in listing and delisting qualified species since June 
13, 2002, is represented by the publication in the Federal Register of 
final listing actions for 14 species; proposed listing actions for the 
Gila chub, Southwest Alaska DPS of the northern sea otter, slickspot 
peppergrass, and the California tiger salamander; withdrawal of a 
proposed listing for the westslope cutthroat trout, flat-tailed horned 
lizard, slickspot peppergrass and Tabernaemontana rotensis; final 
reclassification for the gray wolf; proposed reclassification of 
endangered to threatened for the Missouri bladderpod; proposed 
delisting actions for the Truckee barberry; and final delisting actions 
for Robbins' cinquefoil. In addition, we proposed critical habitat for 
13 listed species, and finalized critical habitat for 323 listed 
species. ``Expeditious progress'' is a function of the resources that 
are available and the way in which those resources are used. As 
discussed above, the bulk of the funds that would be otherwise 
available for adding qualified species to the list in FY 2003 and FY 
2004 have been spent or will be spent on complying with court orders 
and court-approved settlement agreements to designate critical habitat 
and make petition findings. Nonetheless, the Service has endeavored to 
make its designations and other listing actions as efficient and timely 
as possible, given the requirements of the relevant law, regulations, 
and policy and constraints relating to workload and personnel. The 
Service is continually considering ways to streamline processes or 
achieving economies of scale, such as by batching related actions 
together. Given our limited budget for implementing section 4 of the 
Act, these achievements constitute expeditious progress.
    Given the recent decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. 
Badgley, 284 F. 3d 1046 (9th Cir. 2002), which held that the Act 
requires that 90-day petition findings be made no later than 12 months 
after receipt of the petition, regardless of whether it is practicable 
to do so, we may need to make petition findings on most or all of the 
outstanding petitions for those species that we have not previously 
determined to warrant candidate status. If over the next year we can 
devote any resources to issuing proposed rules for the highest-priority 
candidates without jeopardizing our ability to comply with court 
orders, court-approved settlement agreements, or unqualified statutory 
deadlines, we will do so.
    Work on proposed rules for candidates with lower priority (i.e., 
those that have listing priority numbers of 4-12) is also precluded by 
the need to issue proposed rules for higher-priority species facing 
high-magnitude, imminent threats (i.e., listing priority numbers of 1, 
2, or 3). Table 1 shows the listing priority number for each candidate 
species. Finally, 12-month ``warranted but precluded'' petition 
findings for reclassification of threatened species to endangered are 
lower priority, since the listing of the species already affords the 
protection of the Act and implementing regulations.

Summary of Petitioned Candidates

Mammals

    Black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus)--We have not 
updated our finding with regard to the black-tailed prairie dog in this 
notice. In the 2002 CNOR, we found that a listing proposal for this 
species was still warranted but precluded by higher priorities, and we 
assigned the species a listing priority number of 8. We have since 
received significant new information about this species from the 
National Wildlife Federation, Forest Guardians, and the States of 
Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. We are considering this 
information and, upon completion, we intend to publish

[[Page 24886]]

a finding for this species in the Federal Register.
    Fisher, west coast DPS (Martes pennanti)--See our initial 
``warranted-but-precluded'' finding signed on April 2, 2004, and 
published in the Federal Register on April 8, 2004 (68 FR 18770).
    Southern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus endemicus)--
See above in ``Summary of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The 
above summary is based on information contained in our files and the 
petition received on January 29, 2001.
    Washington ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on March 2, 2000. The Washington ground squirrel 
is endemic to the Columbia Plateau, south of the Columbia River and 
east of the John Day River. The historical range of the species, 
distributed over much of the shrub-steppe habitat of southeastern 
Washington and northeastern Oregon, has been modified and reduced to 
three disjunct areas. The greatest threat to the species is loss of 
habitat. Habitat is destroyed through commercial, residential, and 
agricultural development, and the conversion of suitable habitat to 
agricultural uses is an ongoing practice. Disturbance through 
activities such as tilling and irrigation of the appropriate soil types 
renders the habitat unsuitable and can result in loss of occupied 
colonies. The soil types used by the squirrels are distributed 
sporadically within the species' range and have been seriously 
fragmented by human development in the Columbia Basin, particularly 
conversion to agricultural use. Where agriculture occurs, little 
evidence of ground squirrel use has been documented, and reports 
indicate that ongoing agricultural conversion permanently eliminates 
Washington ground squirrel habitat.
    Given the lack of substantial dispersal movements, isolation and 
fragmentation of colonies and habitat can severely affect Washington 
ground squirrels by limiting genetic exchange and reproduction, 
exposing small colonies to destruction from unpredictable catastrophic 
events such as fire or drought, and limiting habitat available for 
escape if occupied habitat becomes unsuitable. Badgers (Taxidea taxus) 
appear to be an important predator of Washington ground squirrels. Some 
colonies appeared to have been eliminated by badgers on the Boeing 
Tract, and badger-digging activity is common within Washington ground 
squirrel colonies. In Washington, recent declines have been precipitous 
and for unknown reasons. The causes of starvation, lack of 
reproduction, and colony losses are unknown. Subjective observations of 
habitat conditions did not appear to be substantially different from 
previous years, but biologists observed that colonies with higher 
survival, reproduction, and average body mass may have benefited from 
presence of non-native bulbous bluegrass (Poa bulbosa), whereas non-
native cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) predominates at colony sites with 
poor reproduction, body mass, or survival.
    The Service is working with the State of Oregon to pursue 
cooperative agreements primarily with the Navy to conserve the species 
on the Boardman Bombing Range. Three Mile Canyon Farms has recently 
purchased the Boeing tract from the State of Oregon and, in 
coordination with the Service, is in the process of developing a 
Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for this property. 
Based on our current evaluation of threats, we assigned a listing 
priority number of 2 to this species.

Birds

    Band-rumped storm-petrel, Hawaii DPS (Oceanodroma castro)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on May 8, 1989. The band-rumped storm-petrel is a 
small, widespread seabird found in the subtropics of the 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. 
Estimates of the total Statewide population could exceed 100 pairs if 
viable breeding populations exist on Maui and Hawaii. Although small 
populations do occur on Maui and Hawaii, we have been unable to 
determine if they are viable; certainly they are not large and they 
represent a fraction of prehistoric distribution. Predation by 
introduced species is believed to have played a significant role in 
reducing storm-petrel numbers and in exterminating colonies in the 
Pacific and other locations worldwide. Additionally, artificial lights 
have had a significant negative effect on fledgling young and, to a 
lesser degree, adults. Artificial lighting of roadways, resorts, 
ballparks, residences, and other development in lower elevation areas 
attracts and confuses night-flying storm-petrel fledglings, resulting 
in ``fallout'' and collisions with buildings and other objects. 
Currently, the species is not known to be taken or used for commercial, 
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes. During 1992 surveys 
on Mauna Loa, Hawaii, several caches of Hawaiian dark-rumped petrel 
carcasses associated with feral cat predation were recorded in areas 
where band-rumped storm-petrel vocalizations were recorded. Based on 
imminent threats of a high magnitude, we assigned this Hawaii DPS of 
the band-rumped storm-petrel a listing priority number of 3.
    Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus)--See above in ``Summary 
of Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based 
on information contained in our files and the petition received on 
January 25, 2000.
    Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition 
received on October 5, 1995. Biologists estimate that the occupied 
range has declined by at least 78 percent since 1963 and by 92 percent 
since the 1800s. The most serious threats to the lesser prairie-chicken 
are loss of habitat from conversion of native rangelands to introduced 
forages and cultivation, and cumulative habitat degradation caused by 
severe grazing, fire suppression, herbicides, and structural 
developments. Many of these threats may exacerbate the normal effects 
of periodic drought on lesser prairie-chicken populations. We view 
current and continued habitat fragmentation to be a serious ongoing 
threat that facilitates the extinction process through several 
mechanisms: Remaining habitat patches may become smaller than necessary 
to meet the yearlong requirements of individuals and populations; 
necessary habitat heterogeneity may be lost to large areas of 
monoculture vegetation and/or homogenous habitat structure; areas 
between habitat patches may harbor high levels of predators or brood 
parasites; and the probability of recolonization decreases as the 
distance between suitable habitat patches expands. At present, all 
States within occupied range are committing significant resources via 
personnel, outreach, and habitat improvement incentives to landowners 
to optimize habitat in currently occupied range and adjacent lands to 
recover the species. We recognize that measurable increases in 
populations often come years after certain habitat improvements occur. 
However, we will continue to monitor potential effects of emerging 
habitat fragmentation threats, in the form of

[[Page 24887]]

commercial wind-power facilities and extensive oil and gas exploration 
and development.
    We have determined that the overall magnitude of threats to the 
lesser prairie-chicken throughout its range is moderate. The magnitude 
of threats to lesser prairie-chickens is primarily based on the quality 
and scale of existing habitat. The majority of threats to remaining 
lesser prairie-chicken populations are ongoing, and thus they are 
considered imminent. We will continue to monitor the effectiveness of 
the current conservation efforts to stabilize and increase existing 
populations throughout significant portions of the species range. Based 
on all currently available information, we assigned the lesser prairie-
chicken a listing priority number of 8.
    Yellow-billed cuckoo, western continental U.S. DPS (Coccyzus 
americanus)--The following summary is based on information contained in 
our files and the petition received on February 9, 1998. Also see our 
12-month petition finding published on July 25, 2001 (66 FR 38611). 
While the cuckoo is still relatively common east of the crest of the 
Rocky Mountains, biologists estimate that more than 90 percent of the 
bird's riparian (streamside) habitat in the West has been lost or 
degraded. These modifications, and the resulting decline in the 
distribution and abundance of yellow-billed cuckoos throughout the 
western states, are believed to be due to conversion to agriculture; 
grazing; competition from non-native plants, such as tamarisk; river 
management, including altered flow and sediment regime; and flood 
control practices, such as channelization and bank protection. Based on 
ongoing but nonimminent threats of a high magnitude, we assigned a 
listing priority number of 6 to this DPS of yellow-billed cuckoo.
    Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris)--See above in 
``Summary of New Candidates.'' The above summary is based on 
information in our files and the petition received on May 9, 2001.
    Greater sage-grouse, Columbia Basin DPS (Centrocercus 
urophasianus)--The following summary is based on information in our 
files and the petition received on June 21, 1999. Currently, the AOU 
recognizes two subspecies of greater sage-grouse. Compared to the 
eastern subspecies (C. u. urophasianus), the western subspecies (C. u. 
phaios) has reduced white markings and darker grayish-brown feathering, 
resulting in a more dusky overall appearance. Based on recent 
communications with recognized experts, some disagreement as to the 
validity of these current subspecies designations exists. With regard 
to current taxonomic standards and information generated over the last 
few decades, these subspecies designations may be inappropriate. When 
informed taxonomic opinion is not unanimous, the Service evaluates the 
available information. The Service has conducted a detailed analysis of 
available information and has determined that the subspecies 
designations for greater sage-grouse are inappropriate given current 
taxonomic standards (68 FR 6500, February 7, 2003). However, the 
Service still considers the Columbia Basin population to be a Distinct 
Population Segment. The abundance of greater sage-grouse within the 
Columbia Basin DPS declined by approximately 30 percent between 2000 
and 2001. Of even greater concern is the estimated reduction in size of 
the larger subpopulation in Douglas and Grant Counties, Washington, 
which accounted for the majority of the decline (dropping from 684 in 
2000 to 395 in 2001, or approximately 42 percent). The current, overall 
population estimate of roughly 700 individuals is the lowest ever 
recorded for the Columbia Basin DPS, although it is just slightly lower 
than the previous lowest estimate recorded in 1994. Since 1970, the 
estimated population lows for the Columbia Basin DPS have occurred 
``regularly'' over a 3- to 4-year period at mid-decade (e.g., 1975-78, 
1985-87, and 1993-96). Should this cyclical pattern in population 
abundance hold, we may expect further significant declines in the 
Columbia Basin DPS over the next several years.
    Military training constitutes the primary threat to the southern 
subpopulation, while habitat conversion is the primary threat impacting 
the northern subpopulation. However, we conclude that threats related 
to military training are not imminent, based on the implementation of 
the Army's conservation measures and considerably less-than-planned 
training activities occurring in Yakima and Kittitas Counties. Large 
areas of privately owned lands in Douglas County are currently 
withdrawn from crop production and planted to native and non-native 
cover under the Federal Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), established 
in 1985. Lands under the CRP are very important to the northern 
subpopulation of the Columbia Basin DPS. Much of the CRP acreage that 
could have expired was re-enrolled and total CRP acreage increased in 
1998 in Douglas County. As such, we conclude that the high-magnitude, 
nonimminent threats to the Columbia Basin DPS of the greater sage 
grouse, leading to the assignment of a listing priority number of 6.
    Xantus's murrelet (Synthilboramphus hypoleucus)--See above in 
``Summary of New Candidates.'' The above summary is based on 
information in our files and the petition received on April 16, 2002.

Reptiles

    Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis ruthveni)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on July 19, 2000. The Louisiana pine snake historically occurred in 
portions of west-central Louisiana and extreme east-central Texas. 
Louisiana pine snakes have not been documented in over a decade in some 
of the best remaining habitat within their historical range. Surveys 
and results of Louisiana pine snake trapping and radio-telemetry 
suggest that extensive population declines and local extirpations have 
occurred during the last 50 to 80 years. Most of the longleaf pine 
habitat of the Louisiana pine snake has been destroyed and the quality 
of remaining Louisiana pine snake habitat has been degraded due to 
logging, fire suppression, short-rotation silviculture, and conversion 
of habitat to other uses such as grazing. Louisiana pine snake habitat 
loss is continuing, albeit at a slower rate than in the past. Also, a 
comprehensive partnership that is attempting to address the species, 
its status, and threats to the species and habitat has had some recent 
successes. Other factors affecting Louisiana pine snakes include low 
fecundity (reproductive output), which magnifies other threats and 
increases the likelihood of local extinctions, and vehicular mortality, 
which may cause significant impacts to the Louisiana pine snake's 
population numbers and community structure. Due to nonimminent threats 
of a high magnitude, we assigned a listing priority number of 5 to this 
species.
    Cagle's map turtle (Graptemys caglei)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on April 26, 1991. Cagle's map turtle occurs in scattered sites in 
seven counties in Texas on the Guadalupe, San Marcos, and Blanco 
Rivers. Loss and degradation of riverine habitat from large and/or 
small impoundments (dams or reservoirs) is the primary threat to 
Cagle's map turtle. One detrimental effect of impoundment is the loss 
of riffle and riffle/pool transition areas

[[Page 24888]]

used by males for foraging. Depending on its size, a dam itself may be 
a partial or complete barrier to Cagle's map turtle movements and could 
fragment a population. Construction of smaller impoundments and human 
activities on the river has likely eliminated or reduced foraging and 
basking habitats. Cagle's map turtle is also vulnerable to 
overcollecting and target shooting. Due to nonimminent threats of a 
high magnitude, we assigned a listing priority number of 5 to this 
species.
    Sand dune lizard (Sceloporus arenicolus)--The following summary is 
based on information in our files and the petition received on June 6, 
2002. The sand dune lizard is endemic to a small area in southeastern 
New Mexico (Chaves, Eddy, Lea, and Roosevelt Counties) and adjacent 
west Texas (Andrews, Crane, Ward, and Winkler Counties). Within this 
area, the known occupied and potentially occupied habitat is only 1,697 
kilometers \2\ (655 miles \2\) in New Mexico, and an unknown amount in 
west Texas. The sand dune lizard has the second-most restricted range 
of any native lizard in the United States. The lizard's distribution is 
localized and fragmented (i.e., known populations are separated by vast 
areas of unoccupied habitat), and the species is restricted to sand 
dune blowouts associated with active sand dunes with shinnery oak 
(Quercus harvardii) and scattered sandsage (Artemisia filifolia). Sand 
dune lizards are not found at sites lacking shinnery oak dune habitat. 
Extensive surveys within New Mexico, conducted in conjunction with a 5-
year study, documented sand dune lizards at only half of the sites 
surveyed. It is clear that shinnery oak removal (e.g., by treating with 
herbicides), for livestock range improvements, results in dramatic 
reductions and extirpation of sand dune lizards. Scientists repeatedly 
confirmed the extirpation of sand dunes lizards from areas with 
herbicide treatment to remove shinnery oak. Biologists estimate that 
about 25 percent of the total sand dune lizard habitat in New Mexico 
has been eliminated in the last 10 years. The population of sand dune 
lizards has been affected by the spraying of the herbicide Tebuthiuron 
to control shinnery oak, and also by oil and gas field development. An 
estimated 50-percent decline in sand dune lizard populations can be 
expected in areas with at least 30 oil and/or gas wells per section. 
The distribution of sand dune lizards is localized and fragmented and 
this species is a habitat specialist; therefore, impacts to its habitat 
will most likely greatly decrease populations. If current herbicide 
application continues and oil and gas development progresses as 
expected, the magnitude of threat to sand dune lizards remains high. 
Continued pressure to develop oil and gas resources in areas with sand 
dune lizards poses an imminent threat to the species. Therefore, this 
species is assigned a priority number of 2.

Amphibians

    Columbia spotted frog, Great Basin DPS (Rana luteiventris)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on May 1, 1989. Currently, Columbia spotted frogs 
appear to be widely distributed throughout southwestern Idaho and 
eastern Oregon, but local populations within this general area appear 
to be isolated from each other. Recent work by researchers in Idaho and 
Nevada has documented the loss of historically known sites, reduced 
numbers of individuals within local populations, and declines in the 
reproduction of those individuals. Habitat degradation and 
fragmentation is probably a combined result of past and current 
influences of heavy livestock grazing, spring alterations, agricultural 
development, urbanization, and mining activities. Fragmentation of 
habitat may be one of the most significant barriers to Columbia spotted 
frog recovery and population persistence. Loss of vegetation and/or 
lowering of the water table as a result of the above-mentioned 
activities can significantly threaten frogs moving from one area to 
another. Likewise, fragmentation and loss of habitat can prevent frogs 
from colonizing suitable sites elsewhere. Based on imminent threats of 
high magnitude, we assigned a listing priority number of 3 to this DPS 
of the Columbia spotted frog.
    Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files and the petition received on May 
4, 1989. Historically, the Oregon spotted frog ranged from British 
Columbia to the Pit River drainage in northeastern California. Based on 
surveys of historical sites, the Oregon spotted frog is now absent from 
at least 76 percent of its former range. The threats to the species' 
habitat include development, livestock grazing, introduction of non-
native plant species, changes in hydrology due to construction of dams 
and alterations to seasonal flooding, and poor water quality. 
Additional threats to the species are predation by non-native fish and 
introduced bullfrogs. The high magnitude of threat is due to small 
populations with patchy and isolated distributions; and the wide range 
of threats to both individuals and their habitats. Habitat restoration 
and management actions have not prevented a decline in the reproductive 
rates in some populations. Each population is faced with multiple 
actual and potential threats that could seriously reduce or eliminate 
any of these isolated populations and further reduce the range of the 
species. Based on these threats, we assigned the Oregon spotted frog a 
listing priority number of 2.
    Boreal toad, Southern Rocky Mountains DPS (Bufo boreas boreas)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on September 30, 1993. See also our 12-month 
petition finding published on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15281). Boreal 
toads of the Southern Rocky Mountain DPS were once common throughout 
much of the high elevations in Colorado, in the Snowy and Sierra Madre 
Ranges of southeast Wyoming, and at three breeding localities at the 
southern periphery of their range in the San Juan Mountains of New 
Mexico. In the late 1980s, boreal toads were found to be absent from 83 
percent of breeding localities in Colorado and 94 percent of breeding 
localities in Wyoming previously known to contain toads. In 1999, the 
number of known breeding localities increased from 33 to 50, with 1 in 
Wyoming, none in New Mexico, and the remaining sites in Colorado. This 
increase in known breeding localities, however, was likely due to 
increased survey efforts rather than expansion of the population.
    Land use in boreal toad habitat includes recreation, timber 
harvesting, livestock grazing, and watershed alteration activities. 
Though declines in toad numbers have not been directly linked to 
habitat alteration, activities that destroy, modify, or curtail habitat 
likely contribute to the continued decline in toad numbers. The current 
and future use of water rights in the Southern Rocky Mountains may 
affect boreal toads. Increased demands on limited water resources can 
result in water level drops in reservoirs that toads are using. 
Transferring rights from one user group to another (e.g., agricultural 
to municipal) also could reduce toad habitat, particularly if 
dewatering of reservoir sites resulted from these transfers. Additional 
threats to the boreal toad include a chytrid fungus, which likely 
caused the boreal toad to decline in the 1970s and continues to cause 
declines. Despite numerous conservation actions funded and implemented 
to date, additional populations or breeding localities of the

[[Page 24889]]

toad being found in the last several years, and protection of the toad 
afforded by State and Federal laws, we continue to give the toad a 
listing priority of 3. The chytrid fungus infection is an ongoing 
threat of high magnitude and is likely to extirpate additional infected 
boreal toad populations.
    Yosemite toad (Bufo canorus)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files and the petition received on April 
3, 2000. See also our 12-month petition finding published on December 
10, 2002 (67 FR 75834). The historical range of Yosemite toads in the 
Sierra Nevada occurs from the Blue Lakes region north of Ebbetts Pass 
to 5 kilometers (km) (3.1 miles (mi)) south of Kaiser Pass in the 
Evolution Lake/Darwin Canyon area. Alteration and loss of habitat due 
to grazing, timber management, water diversion, recreation, and 
vegetative/fire management are threats. The decline of some populations 
of Yosemite toad has been attributed to the effects of poorly managed 
livestock grazing. The levels of timber harvest and road construction 
have declined substantially since implementation of the California 
Spotted Owl Sierran Province Interim Guidelines in 1993, and some 
existing roads have been, or are scheduled for, decommissioning. 
Therefore, the risks posed by new roads and timber harvests have 
declined, but those already existing still pose risks to the species 
and its habitat through erosion, roadkill, and contaminant 
introduction. Reservoirs represent both a loss of habitat and a barrier 
to dispersal and gene flow. In addition, the evidence of an adverse 
physiologic effect of pesticides on Sierra Nevada amphibians in the 
field indicates that contaminants may be a risk to the Yosemite toad 
and may have contributed to the species' decline. These factors have 
probably contributed to the decline of Yosemite toads and continue to 
pose a risk to the species. We determined the magnitude of threats to 
be moderate, rather than high, because almost all of the species' range 
occurs on Federal land, which facilitates management of the species by 
Federal agencies. We determined the threats to the Yosemite toad to be 
nonimminent. Therefore, we assign the Yosemite toad a listing priority 
number of 11.
    Mountain yellow-legged frog, Sierra Nevada DPS (Rana muscosa)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on February 8, 2000. Also see our 12-month 
petition finding published on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2283). The 
mountain yellow-legged frog is restricted to two disjunct areas in 
California and a portion of Nevada. One area is in the Sierra Nevada 
and the other area is in southern California (Los Angeles, San 
Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego counties). The southern California 
population is isolated from the Sierra Nevada population by the 
Tehachapi mountain range, with a distance of about 225 kilometers (km) 
(140 miles (mi)) between the two populations. The distribution of the 
Sierra Nevada mountain yellow-legged frog is restricted primarily to 
publicly managed lands at high elevations, including streams, lakes, 
ponds, and meadow wetlands located in national forests and national 
parks. Rangewide, it is estimated that the number of mountain yellow-
legged frog populations have undergone a 50- to 80- percent reduction. 
Direct predation by non-native fishes has resulted in rangewide 
population declines and local extirpations.
    Furthermore, the result of these extirpations is that the remaining 
populations are fragmented and isolated, making them vulnerable to 
further declines and local extirpations caused by other factors such as 
disease. For example, in reviewing documented mountain yellow-legged 
frog declines over the last 5 years in Sequoia and Kings National 
Parks, we found the frog suffered a 39-percent extinction rate of the 
frog where fish have not been stocked since the late 1970s. In 
comparison, over the last 7 years, in the Sierra National Forest's John 
Muir Wilderness Area there has been a 61-percent extinction rate where 
fish stocking has continued. The rate of extinction observed by Knapp 
over a 5- to 7-year time frame suggests the species' extinction within 
a few decades (assuming that the rate of extinction and recolonization 
observed over this time period accurately reflects the long-term 
rates). It is likely that disease, specifically chytrid fungus, has 
caused these recently observed declines. Although the life history and 
modes of transmission of chytrid fungus are not well understood, it 
appears that this pathogen is widespread throughout the range of the 
mountain yellow-legged frog within the Sierra Nevada, it is persistent 
in ecosystems, and it is resilient to environmental conditions such as 
drought and freezing. Therefore, we conclude that all remaining 
mountain yellow-legged frog populations within the Sierra Nevada are at 
risk to declines and extirpation as a result of infection by this 
pathogen. The overall magnitude and immediacy of threats to the Sierra 
Nevada distinct population segment of the mountain yellow-legged frog 
is high. Therefore, we assigned this species a listing priority of 3.
    Relict leopard frog (Rana onca)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files and the petition received on May 9, 
2002. Relict leopard frogs are currently known to occur only in two 
general areas in Nevada: near the Overton Arm area of Lake Mead, and 
Black Canyon below Lake Mead. The Service estimates that the current 
distribution is less than 20 percent of the historical distribution. As 
habitat generalists, relict leopard frogs historically likely occupied 
a variety of habitats including springs, streams, and wetlands 
characterized by clean, clear water, in both deep and shallow water, 
and cover/forage such as submerged, emergent, and perimeter vegetation. 
The causes for the population declines of this species are not entirely 
clear, but suggested factors include alteration of aquatic habitat due 
to agriculture and water development, and the introduction of exotic 
predators and competitors. The magnitude of threats to the relict 
leopard frog are high based on its limited numbers and distribution, 
the presence of non-native predators, potential alteration of remaining 
habitat including groundwater pumping, and diversion of surface water. 
We do not consider threats to be imminent at this time. Although the 
numbers are low and distribution is limited, efforts are underway to 
improve habitat and increase numbers through captive rearing and 
translocation. There are no proposed projects that may result in 
further habitat degradation. Therefore, we assigned the relict leopard 
frog a listing priority number of 5.

Fishes

    Fluvial arctic grayling, upper Missouri River DPS (Thymallus 
arcticus)--See above in ``Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 
Candidates.'' The above summary is based on information contained in 
our files and the petition received on October 2, 1992. See also our 
12-month petition finding published on July 25, 1994 (59 FR 37738).

Snails

    Chupadera springsnail (Pyrgulopsis chupaderae)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition 
received on November 20, 1985. See also our 12-month petition finding 
published on October 4, 1988 (53 FR 38969). This aquatic species is 
endemic to Willow Spring on the Willow Spring Ranch

[[Page 24890]]

(formerly Cienega Ranch) at the south end of the Chupadera Mountains in 
Socorro County, New Mexico. The Chupadera springsnail has been 
documented from two hillside groundwater discharges that flow through 
grazed areas among rhyolitic gravels containing sand, mud, and 
hydrophytic plants. Regional and local groundwater depletion, springrun 
dewatering, and riparian habitat degradation represent the principal 
threats. The survival and recovery of the Chupadera springsnail is 
contingent upon protection of the riparian corridor immediately 
adjacent to Willow Spring and the availability of perennial, oxygenated 
flowing water within the species' thermal range. Several factors--the 
extremely localized distribution of the snail, its occurrence only on 
private property, the lack of regulatory protection of its habitat, and 
the inability of land managers to participate in its management--
indicate that the magnitude of threat to this species is high. Either 
human-caused disturbance (grazing of cattle, water withdrawal) or 
natural disturbance (drought or fire) could eliminate this species. 
Therefore, there is an immediate threat to this species and we assigned 
this species a listing priority number of 2.
    Gila springsnail (Pyrgulopsis gilae)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on November 20, 1985. Also see our 12-month petition finding published 
on October 4, 1988 (53 FR 38969). The Gila springsnail is an aquatic 
species known from 13 populations in New Mexico. The long-term 
persistence of the Gila springsnail is contingent upon protection of 
the riparian corridor immediately adjacent to springhead and springrun 
habitats, thereby ensuring the maintenance of perennial, oxygenated 
flowing water within the species' required thermal range. Sites on both 
private and Federal lands are subject to uncontrolled recreational use 
and livestock grazing, thus placing the long-term survival of the Gila 
springsnail at risk. Natural events such as drought, forest fire, 
sedimentation, and flooding; wetland habitat degradation by 
recreational bathing in thermal springs; and poor watershed management 
practices represent the primary threats to the Gila springsnail. Fire 
suppression and retardant chemicals have potentially deleterious 
effects on this species. Because several of the springs occur on Forest 
Service land, management options for the protection of the snail should 
be possible. However, stochastic events, especially fire and drought, 
could have a major impact on the species. Moderate use by 
recreationalists and livestock is ongoing. If use by these groups 
remains at current or lower levels, it will not pose an imminent threat 
to the species. Of greater concern is the current drought that could 
impact spring discharge and increases the potential for fire. 
Catastrophic fires have occurred in the Gila National Forest, and 
subsequent floods and ash flows have decimated aquatic life in streams. 
If the drought continues or worsens, the imminence of threat (decreased 
discharge, fire) will increase. Based on these nonimminent threats of a 
low magnitude, we assigned a listing priority number of 11 to this 
species.
    New Mexico springsnail (Pyrgulopsis thermalis)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition 
received on November 20, 1985. Also see our 12-month petition finding 
published on October 4, 1988 (53 FR 38969). The New Mexico springsnail 
is an aquatic species known from only two separate populations 
associated with a series of spring-brook systems along the Gila River 
in the Gila National Forest in Grant County, New Mexico. The long-term 
persistence of the New Mexico springsnail is contingent upon protection 
of the riparian corridor immediately adjacent to springhead and 
springrun habitats, thereby ensuring the maintenance of perennial, 
oxygenated flowing water within the species-required thermal range. 
While the New Mexico springsnail populations may be stable, the sites 
inhabited by the species are subject to uncontrolled recreational use 
and livestock grazing. Wetland habitat degradation via recreational use 
and overgrazing in or near the thermal springs and/or poor watershed 
management practices represent the primary threats to the New Mexico 
springsnail. Moderate use by recreationalists and livestock is ongoing. 
If use by these groups remains at the current or lower levels, it will 
not pose an imminent threat to the species. Of greater concern is the 
current drought, which could impact spring discharge and increases the 
potential for fire. Catastrophic fires have occurred in the Gila 
National Forest and subsequent floods and ash flows have decimated 
aquatic life in streams. If the drought continues or worsens, the 
imminence of threat (decreased discharge, fire) will increase. Based on 
these nonimminent threats of a low magnitude, we assigned this species 
a listing priority number of 11.
    Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni)--See above in ``Summary of 
Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based on 
information contained in our files and the petition received on April 
12, 2002.

Insects

    Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle (Cicindela limbata albissima)--
The following summary is based on information contained in our files, 
including information from the petition received on April 21, 1994. The 
Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle is known to occur only at Coral Pink 
Sand Dunes, about 7 miles west of Kanab, Kane County, in south-central 
Utah. It is restricted mostly to a small part of the approximately 13-
kilometer (8-mile) long dune field, situated at an elevation of about 
1,820 m (6,000 ft). The beetle's habitat is being adversely affected by 
ongoing recreational off-road vehicle (ORV) use. The ORV activity is 
destroying and degrading the beetle's habitat, especially the 
interdunal swales used by the larval population. Having the greatest 
abundance of suitable prey species, the interdunal swales are the most 
biologically productive areas in this ecosystem. The continued survival 
of the beetle depends on the preservation of its habitat at its only 
breeding site and probably requires the establishment or 
reestablishment of additional reproductive subpopulations in other 
suitable habitat sites. The beetle's population is also vulnerable to 
overcollecting by professional and hobby tiger beetle collectors, 
although quantification of this threat is difficult without continuous 
monitoring of the beetle's population. The recreational ORV use threat 
is currently managed by active measures taken by both the Utah 
Department of Parks and Recreation and the BLM, which reduces the 
threat from high to moderate. The subspecies population is still at low 
levels and has only recently improved. Based on imminent threats of a 
low to moderate magnitude, we assigned this subspecies a listing 
priority number of 9.
    Wekiu bug (Nysius wekiuicola)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files, including information from the 
petition received on May 22, 2003. The wekiu bug, first discovered in 
1979 on the summit cinder cone of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii, is 
a flightless insect in the seed bug family. This species is only found 
on Mauna Kea and is believed to inhabit sites no lower than 
approximately 3,658 meters in elevation. Threats to this species 
include past and potential habitat destruction from building and 
updating of facilities for astronomical study. Resultant impacts have 
included road

[[Page 24891]]

construction, parking areas, tourist facilities, temporary storage 
areas, substrate removal, and oil spills, and constant traffic to the 
summit with the concomitant human dispersal of trash and debris; more 
than two thirds of the wekiu's potential range is unprotected from 
astronomical development. In addition, introductions of alien 
arthropods and parasites may also negatively affect this species. For 
example, the wekiu bug now competes with at least one introduced 
species of Linyphiidae (small sheetweb) spiders which have become 
established on the summit.
    The summit area where wekiu bug habitat occurs lies within a State 
conservation district and any construction in the area requires a 
permit from the State Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). 
Prior to development of the Mauna Kea Science Reserve, a development 
plan for the summit area was written that addressed the sensitivity of 
the wekiu bug and its habitat. Despite the fact that important wekiu 
bug habitat was identified as sensitive in the 1983 plan and was to be 
avoided in the development of the facilities, a lack of communication 
and insufficient monitoring of construction activities at the summit 
during construction of the Subaru telescope facility resulted in the 
loss of most wekiu bug habitat in Puu Hau Oki. Currently, the Institute 
for Astronomy is developing a new Mauna Kea Science Reserve master plan 
and is funding a series of surveys to determine how the impact of 
future development might impact the flora and fauna (particularly the 
wekiu bug) of the summit area. Under the current management plan, the 
number of telescopes is limited to 13. However, old facilities could be 
torn down and replaced with submillimeter arrays which can have up to 
20 times the surface impact of construction of a standard telescope and 
still count as one telescope. Furthermore, development of 
interferometers on Mauna Kea may continue under the current management 
plan since they do not count as ``telescopes.'' Interferometers are 
specialized antennae for observing astronomical occurrences, and the 
resulting structure impacts at least as much surface area as a large 
telescope. Based on imminent threats of a high magnitude, we assigned 
this species a listing priority number of 2.
    Whulge checkerspot butterfly (Euphydrayas editha taylori)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on December 24, 2002. Whulge checkerspots are 
small, colorfully checkered butterflies that, historically, were known 
from more than 70 locations: 23 in British Columbia, 34 in Washington, 
and 13 in Oregon. In Fall 2002, only five populations were known; four 
are located in the south Puget Sound region and one is in the 
Willamette Valley. Surveys in 2001 and 2002 of the three known British 
Columbia sites failed to locate any Whulge checkerspots. Whulge 
checkerspots are threatened by changes in the vegetation structure and 
composition of native grassland-dominated plant communities. Native 
grassland communities have been lost to conversion for agriculture and 
development for residential and commercial purposes. Threats to 
grassland vegetation also threaten habitat for the Whulge checkerspot. 
Habitat has been degraded and encroached on by nonnative woody shrubs, 
including Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius) and several species 
identified by Washington State as noxious weeds, such as leafy spurge 
(Euphorbia esula) and knapweed (Centaurium). As grasslands have been 
converted, the availability of host plants for feeding and nectaring by 
larvae and adults has declined. The application of Bacillus 
thuringiensis var kurstaki (Btk) for control of the Asian gypsy moth 
(Lymantria dispar) likely contributed to the extirpation of three 
historic locales for this subspecies in Pierce County. Spraying of Btk 
is known to have adverse affects to nontarget lepidopteran species 
(butterflies and moths). The Whulge checkerspot was designated a 
candidate species by Washington State in 1991. However, candidate 
status within Washington State has no protective measures associated 
with it. No protection or restrictions on direct take is provided to 
these butterflies on any lands administered by any city, county, State 
or Federal agencies. Because of the extremely small size of remaining 
populations and the reduction in distribution of the species from its 
former range, there is the potential for one episode of any of several 
potential threats to occur at any time (e.g., a single period of severe 
weather at a critical life stage of the Whulge checkerspot) that could 
eliminate the entire subspecies. Therefore, due to imminent threats of 
a high magnitude, we assigned this subspecies a listing priority number 
of 3.
    Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files, including information from the 
petition received on May 12, 2003. The Dakota skipper is a small-to 
mid-sized butterfly that inhabits high-quality tallgrass and mixed 
grass prairie in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and the 
provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada. The species appears 
to have been extirpated from Iowa and Illinois, as well as many sites 
within States with extant locations. The species is threatened by the 
large-scale conversion of native prairie to agricultural purposes, as 
well as fire management, grazing, plant invasion, and fragmentation of 
habitat leading to local extirpations. Although the species is listed 
as threatened by the State of Minnesota, this designation lacks the 
habitat protections needed for long-term conservation. The species is 
listed as endangered by the province of Manitoba. However, the 
protections in Manitoba are not sufficient to remove the threats to the 
species. Due to efforts that have been made to preserve habitat through 
conservation easements at some of the known locations, the threats to 
the species are low to moderate and nonimminent. Therefore, we assigned 
a listing priority number of 11 to the species.
    Mardon skipper (Polites mardon)--The following summary is based on 
information contained in our files and the petition received on 
December 24, 2002. The Mardon skipper (Polites mardon) is a small, 
nonmigratory butterfly species and is currently known from four widely 
separated locations: the southern Puget Trough region, the southern 
Washington Cascades, the Siskiyou Mountains in southern Oregon, and 
coastal northern California. In Washington, the historic range and 
abundance of Mardon skippers is not known, and there are no known 
estimates of abundance prior to 1980, but Mardon skippers are 
apparently extirpated from five historic sites (four in the Puget 
Prairie and one in the South Cascades). Oregon populations occupy small 
(less than 0.25-4 ha (0.5-10 ac)) high-elevation (1,372-1,555 m (4,500-
5,100 ft)) grassy meadows within mixed conifer forests. The California 
population is located on a serpentine bald dominated by Festuca spp. 
Mardon skippers were present at the California site in 1997, but there 
were no surveys in 1998. In good years, dozens of individuals are found 
in the 0.4 to 0.8 ha (1 to 2 ac) core area and along a ridge for 3-5 km 
(2-3 mi). Because the Mardon skipper is nonmigratory, and thus 
relatively sedentary, maintaining occupied habitat quality is 
essential. Threats to the Mardon skipper include any factor that 
degrades its obligate grassland habitats, including

[[Page 24892]]

development, overgrazing, herbicides, the encroachment of invasive 
nonnative and native vegetation, and succession from grassland to 
forest. Prairies, which once covered hundreds of thousands of acres of 
the southern Puget Sound region prior to settlement, have been lost to 
development, fire suppression, and invasion by native and nonnative 
plant species. Today, less than 3 percent of the original prairie 
landscape remains, and much of this has competing human uses. 
Additionally, insect collecting is a potential threat since rare 
butterflies, such as the Mardon skipper, are desirable to collectors, 
and most skipper populations are small and easily accessible. Because 
of the small size of all populations and their disjunct distribution, 
loss of any population could lead to extirpation of the species at any 
of these locations. Based on nonimminent threats of a high magnitude, 
we assigned this species a listing priority number of 5.

Flowering Plants

    Christ's paintbrush (Castilleja christii)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on January 2, 2001. Christ's paintbrush is endemic to subalpine meadow 
and sagebrush habitats in the upper elevations of the Albion Mountains, 
Cassia County, Idaho. The single population of this species, which 
covers only 81 ha (200 ac), is restricted to the summit of Mount 
Harrison. The population appears to be stable, although the species is 
threatened by a variety of activities, including unauthorized ORV use 
that results in erosion of the plant's habitat and mortality of 
individual plants. Livestock grazing can adversely affect Christ's 
paintbrush by allowing trampling and consuming of plants, which results 
in reduced reproductive success. In addition, road maintenance 
activities and trampling by hikers potentially affect this species. 
Most threats involve seasonal impacts from off-road travel and 
occasional livestock trespass. The Forest Service is proposing to 
construct additional fencing that, when completed, would eliminate the 
threat of seasonal livestock trespass impacts for most of the Mt. 
Harrison summit area. The Forest Service is also adding more rock 
barriers along the unpaved road through Christ's paintbrush habitat to 
further discourage off-road vehicle use. Because the nonimminent 
threats are of a low to moderate magnitude, we assigned this species a 
listing priority number of 11.
    San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. 
fernandina)--See above in ``Summary of Listing Priority Changes in 
Candidates.'' The above summary is based on information contained in 
our files and the petition received on December 14, 1999.
    Graham beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii)--See above in ``Summary of 
Listing Priority Changes in Candidates.'' The above summary is based on 
information contained in our files and the petition received on October 
8, 2002.
    White River beardtongue (Penstemon scariosus albifluvis)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on October 27, 1983. The White River beardtongue 
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 three known populations. 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 ORV use, and road, pipeline, and well-
site construction in connection with oil and gas development. With such 
a small population and limited occupied habitat, any destruction, 
modification, or curtailment of the habitat could have a highly 
negative impact on the species. Additionally, the species is heavily 
grazed by wildlife and livestock and is vulnerable to livestock 
trampling. Based on current information, we are retaining the listing 
priority number of 6.
    Lemmon fleabane (Erigeron lemmonii)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files and the petition received in July 
1975. The species is now known only from one site on the Fort Huachuca 
Military Reservation of southeastern Arizona. Approximately 70 
individuals are at this site. The single largest threat to the species 
is from catastrophic wildfire in the canyon where the plant occurs. An 
intense wildfire in the narrow canyon would almost certainly desiccate 
plants on the cliff face, possibly directly killing individuals or 
stressing plants thereby leading to lower reproductive output. Ft. 
Huachuca is willing to develop a conservation agreement for this 
species. Measures have been taken to reduce the threat of wildfire and 
also the threats from recreational rappelling, which is not allowed on 
the cliff faces occupied by the plant. Therefore, due to the 
nonimminent threats of high magnitude, we assigned this species a 
listing priority number of 5.
    Guadalupe fescue (Festuca ligulata)--The following summary is based 
on information contained in our files and the petition received in July 
1975. The only known U. S. population (which has fluctuated from 51 to 
several hundred individuals), is in Big Bend National Park (BBNP). 
Historically, this fescue was reported in the Guadalupe Mountains as 
well. There are also two historical records and two known extant 
populations in Coahuila, Mexico. In both Mexico and the U.S., plants 
are found scattered in patches in the dense understory of pine-oak-
juniper woodlands around 5,000 ft. The status of the two populations in 
Mexico, which occur on private land, is unknown. There is a 1998 
conservation agreement between BBNP and the Service, but this does not 
remove the need to consider listing. Over a 10-year period, 1993-2002, 
monitoring data have revealed that numbers have steadily declined at 
BBNP. In both the U. S. and Mexico, individuals are uncommon. Even 
though there is only one U. S. population, it does occur on protected 
National Park land, hence the magnitude has been considered moderate to 
low. We will be assessing the threat posed by fire, as there is 
uncertainty whether it is a fire-dependent plant species. Due to the 
nonimminent threats of moderate magnitude, we assigned this species a 
listing priority number of 11.
    Parish's checkerbloom (Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. parishii)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received in 1975. Parish's checkerbloom is known from 
three counties in southern California. The only San Bernardino County 
location is within a 2-hour drive of 14 million people and is popular 
with recreationalists. No more than a dozen plants have been found at 
this location in the last decade. Recreational use and development in 
San Bernardino National Forest and adjacent private inholdings 
continues in a manner that is likely to preclude the opportunity to 
preserve existing plants and conduct prescribed burns to promote the 
persistence of this species. The populations in Santa Barbara and San 
Luis Obispo Counties are more remote from developed recreational areas. 
In these locations, opportunities still exist to conduct prescribed 
burns in a manner that would promote the persistence of this species. 
Because this portion of the species' range is exposed to less severe 
threats, we conclude that the magnitude of threat is moderate to low. 
However, we conclude these pose an imminent threat to this species in 
the

[[Page 24893]]

southernmost portion of its range. Therefore, we assigned this species 
a listing priority number of 9.
    Acuna cactus (Echinomastus erectrocentrus var. acunensis)--The 
following summary is based on information contained in our files and 
the petition received on October 30, 2002. This cactus is known only 
from six sites on well-drained gravel ridges and knolls on granite 
soils in Sonoran Desert scrub association at 1300-2000 feet elevation. 
Habitat destruction has been and will continue to be a threat to this 
cactus. New roads and other illegal activities have not yet directly 
affected the populations at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument 
(OPCNM), but areas very close to known populations have been altered. 
Populations that exist in the Florence area have not been monitored, 
but the area is experiencing urban growth and populations may be in 
danger of habitat loss. Urban development, in the Ajo, Arizona, area as 
well as in Sonoyta, Mexico, will continue to be a significant threat to 
this species. Populations of the Acuna cactus on OPCNM have shown a 50 
percent mortality rate in recent years. The reason(s) for the mortality 
are not known, but continuing drought conditions are thought to play a 
role. Arizona Plant Law and the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora protect this cactus. 
However, illegal collection is a primary threat to this cactus variety, 
as has been documented on OPCNM. Due to the nonimminent threats of high 
magnitude, we assigned this species a listing priority number of 6.
    Orcutt's hazardia (Hazardia orcuttii)--See above in ``Summary of 
New Candidates.'' The above summary is based on information contained 
in our files and the petition received on March 8, 2001.
    Tahoe yellow cress (Rorippa subumbellata)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on December 27, 2000. Tahoe yellow cress is a small perennial herb 
known only from the shores of Lake Tahoe in California and Nevada. 
Based on presence/absence information, it has been determined that the 
Tahoe yellow cress has been extirpated from 10 of 52 historical 
locations. Data collected over the last 24 years suggest a relationship 
between lake level and site occupancy by Tahoe yellow cress. The data 
generally indicate that species occurrence fluctuates yearly as a 
function of both lake level and the amount of exposed habitat. Records 
kept since 1900 indicate preponderance of years with high lake levels 
that would isolate and reduce Tahoe yellow cress 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. In addition, there has been widespread and intensive use 
of the shore zone since European settlement. Today, use of the 
shoreline is from heavy recreational use, boating, construction of 
piers and boat launches, and dam operations that change the lake 
elevation. In 1993, a low-water year when lake elevation averaged 1,897 
m (6,223 ft), plants numbering in the thousands were documented at 35 
general locations, the largest number of occurrences ever documented in 
one year, until 2002. Subsequent years saw higher lake levels and the 
number of occupied sites declined, apparently due in part to habitat 
inundation. Factors other than inundation played a part in the decline, 
because populations were also absent from some higher elevation sites 
that were not inundated.
    Most of the remaining 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. Both 
the U.S. Forest Service and California Department of Parks and 
Recreation have management programs for Tahoe yellow cress that include 
monitoring, fenced exclosures, 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 completed conservation strategy contains 
goals and objectives for the strategy, a research and monitoring 
agenda, and will serve as the foundation for an adaptive management 
program. Efforts to minimize or eliminate impacts to this species and 
its habitat are ongoing; however, at this time, there is no evidence to 
suggest that the threats to the species have been adequately addressed. 
Despite the relatively high number of populations observed during the 
2001 and 2002 surveys, the increasing and intense recreational use and 
further development of the shore zone at Lake Tahoe are current, high-
magnitude threats; therefore, the Service is maintaining the current 
LPN of 2 for the Tahoe yellow cress.
    Siskiyou mariposa lily (Calochortus persistens)--The following 
summary is based on information contained in our files and the petition 
received on September 10, 2001. Siskiyou mariposa lily is a narrow 
endemic that is restricted to two disjunct ridge tops in the Klamath-
Siskiyou Range on the California-Oregon border. In California, this 
species is currently found at nine separate sites on approximately 10 
hectares (ha) (24.7 acres (ac)) of Klamath National Forest and 
privately owned lands that stretch for 6 kilometers (km) (3.7 miles 
(mi)) along the Gunsight-Humbug Ridge. In 2002, four Siskiyou mariposa 
lily plants at the Oregon site were located. These are the first plants 
reported from that area since the population was discovered in 1998. 
Major threats include fire suppression resulting in shading; 
competition by native and non-native species; increased fuel loading; 
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 and exotic weed and grass species introduction as 
a result of heavy recreational use. Dyer's woad (Isatis tinctoria), a 
plant thought to prevent Siskiyou mariposa lily seedling establishment, 
is now found throughout the California population, affecting 90 percent 
of the known lily habitat. 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.
    Unpublished data show that there has been no successful 
reproduction of Siskiyou mariposa lily in the last 5 years. The 
combination of restricted range, apparent loss of one of two disjunct 
populations, poor competitive ability, short seed dispersal distance, 
slow growth rates, extremely low or absent seed production, and 
competition from exotic plants threaten the continued existence of this 
species. Due to imminent threats of a high magnitude, we assigned a 
listing priority number of 2 to this species.

Ferns and Allies

    Slender moonwort (Botrychium lineare)--The following summary is 
based on information contained in our files and the petition received 
on July 28, 1999. See also the 12-month petition finding published on 
June 6, 2002 (67 FR 39035). The slender moonwort is currently known 
from a total of 12 widely disjunct populations in six states: three in 
Colorado (El Paso and Lake Counties), one in Idaho (Custer County), two 
in Oregon (Wallowa County), three in Montana (Glacier County), two in 
Nevada (Clark County) and one in Washington (Ferry County). Historic 
populations, previously known from Idaho (Boundary County),

[[Page 24894]]

Montana (Lake County), California (Fresno County), Colorado (Boulder 
County), and Canada (Quebec and New Brunswick), have not been seen for 
several years and may be extirpated. The total number of individuals 
observed at the 12 extant population sites varies, with observations 
ranging from 2 to 162 individuals. Identifiable threats to various 
populations of this species include road maintenance, herbicide 
application, recreation, timber harvest, trampling, and development. 
The slender moonwort may also be affected by grazing from livestock or 
wildlife, but specific effects of grazing on the species are unknown. 
However, if grazing by livestock or wildlife species occurs prior to 
the maturation and release of spores, the capacity for sexual 
reproduction of affected plants may be compromised.
    The slender moonwort is considered a sensitive species in Regions 
2, 5, and 6 of the U. S. Forest Service, which include extant and 
historical slender moonwort sites found in Colorado, Oregon, 
Washington, and California. Regional sensitive species lists fall under 
Forest Service regulations that address protection of sensitive 
species. Forest Service Regions 1 and 4, which include extant and 
historical sites found in Montana and Idaho, do not have slender 
moonwort on their regional sensitive species lists and it is, 
therefore, not given any special consideration. Although the slender 
moonwort is considered to be rare and imperiled by the State Natural 
Heritage Programs in Colorado, Montana, Oregon, and Washington, the 
State Natural Heritage Program rankings are not legal designations and 
do not confer State regulatory protection to this species. Because we 
concluded that the overall magnitude of threats to the slender moonwort 
throughout its range is moderate and the overall immediacy of these 
threats is non-imminent, we assigned this species a listing priority 
number of 11.

Petitions To Reclassify Species Already Listed

    We have also previously made ``warranted but precluded'' findings 
on five petitions that sought to reclassify threatened species to 
endangered status. Because these species are already listed, they are 
not technically candidates for listing and are not included in Table 1. 
However, this notice and associated assessment forms also constitutes 
the resubmitted petition findings for these species. We find that 
reclassification to endangered status for the species listed below is 
currently warranted but precluded by work identified above (see 
``Petition for a Candidate Species'' above). In addition, these species 
are currently listed as threatened under the Act and therefore receive 
protection under the Act. The Service promulgated regulations extending 
take prohibitions for endangered species under section 9 to threatened 
species (50 CFR 17.31). Prohibited actions under section 9 include, but 
are not limited to, take (i.e., harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in such 
activity). Other protections include those under section 7 of the Act 
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.
    (1) North Cascades ecosystem DPS of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos 
horribilis) (Region 6) (see 63 FR 30453, June 4, 1998, and the 
candidate form (see ADDRESSES) for a discussion on why reclassification 
is warranted);
    (2) Cabinet-Yaak DPS of the grizzly bear (Region 6) (see 64 FR 
26725, May 17, 1999, and the candidate form (see ADDRESSES) for a 
discussion on why reclassification is warranted);
    (3) Selkirk grizzly DPS of the grizzly bear (Region 6) (see 64 FR 
26725, May 17, 1999, and the candidate form (see ADDRESSES) for a 
discussion on why reclassification is warranted);
    (4) Spikedace (Meda fulgida) (Region 2) (see 59 FR 35303, July 11, 
1994, and the candidate form (see ADDRESSES) for a discussion on why 
reclassification is warranted); and
    (5) Loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) (Region 2) (see 59 FR 35303, 
July 11, 1994, and the candidate form (see ADDRESSES) for a discussion 
on why reclassification is warranted).

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. This notice identifies 
those species that we currently regard as candidates for addition to 
the Lists. These species include species and subspecies of fish, 
wildlife, or plants and distinct population segments (DPSs) of 
vertebrate animals. In issuing this compilation, we rely 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 are arranged list animals alphabetically by common 
names under the major group headings, then 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: flowering plants and 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 sorted 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 species that we regard as candidates for listing 
and all species proposed for listing under the Act. We emphasize that 
we are not proposing these candidate species for listing by this 
notice, but we anticipate developing and publishing 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.
    Species in Table 1 of this notice are assigned to several status 
categories, noted in the ``category'' column at the left side of the 
table. We explain the codes for the Table 1 category status column of 
species below:
    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, exclusive of 
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-

[[Page 24895]]

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 on 
Resubmitted Petitions'' section for additional information). We 
identify the species for which we are not making a ``warranted-but-
precluded'' finding on a resubmitted petition by the code ``C+'' in the 
category column. We have not updated our finding with regard to these 
species since we have received important new information that we are 
currently analyzing.
    The column labeled ``Priority'' indicates the listing priority 
number (LPN) for each candidate species. We use LPNs to determine the 
most appropriate use of our available resources, with the lowest 
numbers having 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 comments or questions (see addresses at the 
end of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section). We provided the comments 
received in response to the 2002 CNOR to the Region having lead 
responsibility for each candidate species mentioned in the comment. 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 pursuant to section 4(b)(7) of the Act is appropriate). 
Comments received will become part of the administrative record for the 
species, which is maintained at the appropriate Regional Office.
    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 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 species we included either as 
proposed species or as candidates in the 2002 CNOR. Since the 2002 
CNOR, we added 14 of these species to the Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants, we removed the 1 species from candidate 
status, and we withdrew 4 proposed rules to list for the reasons as 
indicated by the codes. The first column indicates the present status 
of the 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 the candidate list 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. The reduction in threats could be due, in 
part or entirely, to actions taken under a conservation agreement.
    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 Act's 
definition of ``species'' and current taxonomic understanding.
    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;
    (8) Noting any mistakes, such as errors in the indicated historical 
ranges.
    Submit your 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. California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, 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 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 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, New Mexico 87102 (505/248-6920).
    Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, 
Ohio, and Wisconsin. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, One Federal Drive, Fort 
Snellling, Minnesota 55111-4056 (612/13-5334).
    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, Georgia 
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, Massachusetts 01035-9589 (413/253-615).
    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, 
Colorado 80225-0486 (303/236-7400).
    Region 7. Alaska. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503-6199 (907/786-
3505).
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public inspection. Individual 
respondents may

[[Page 24896]]

request that we withhold their home address from the public record, 
which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. In some 
circumstances, we can also withhold from the public record a 
respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish for us to 
withhold your name and/or address, you must state this request 
prominently at the beginning of your comments. However, we will not 
consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

Authority

    This document is published under the authority of the Endangered 
Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: April 19, 2004.
Steve Williams,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. ,

                                      Table 1.--Candidate Notice of Review
                                              [Animals and plants]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Status
------------------------------  Lead  region  Scientific name       Family        Common name     Historic range
     Category       Priority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Mammals
PT...............           3  R1             Pteropus         Pteropodidae...  Bat, Mariana     Western Pacific
                                               mariannus                         fruit            Ocean, U.S.A.
                                               mariannus.                        (=Mariana        (GU, MP).
                                                                                 flying fox)
                                                                                 (Aguijan,
                                                                                 etc.).
C................           3  R1             Emballonura      Emballonuridae.  Bat, sheath-     U.S.A. (MP,
                                               semicaudata                       tailed.          GU).
                                               rotensis.
C................           3  R1             Emballonura      Emballonuridae.  Bat, sheath-     U.S.A. (AS).
                                               semicaudata                       tailed
                                               semicaudata.                      (American
                                                                                 Samoa DPS).
C*...............           6  R1             Martes pennanti  Mustelidae.....  Fisher, (west    U.S.A. (CA, OR,
                                                                                 coast DPS).      WA).
PT...............           3  R7             Enhydra lutris   Mustelidae.....  Otter, Northern  U.S.A. (AK).
                                               kenyoni.                          Sea (southwest
                                                                                 Alaska DPS).
C................           6  R1             Thomomys mazama  Geomyidae......  Pocket gopher,   U.S.A. (WA).
                                                                                 Mazama.
C+...............          11  R6             Cynomys          Sciuridae......  Prairie dog,     U.S.A. (AZ, CO,
                                               ludovicianus.                     black-tailed.    KS, MT, NE,
                                                                                                  NM, ND, OK,
                                                                                                  SD, TX, WY),
                                                                                                  Canada,
                                                                                                  Mexico.
C................           6  R1             Spermophilus     Sciuridae......  Squirrel,        U.S.A. (CA).
                                               tereticaudus                      Coachella
                                               chlorus.                          Valley round-
                                                                                 tailed ground.
C*...............           6  R1             Spermophilus     Sciuridae......  Squirrel,        U.S.A. (ID).
                                               brunneus                          Southern Idaho
                                               endemicus.                        ground.
C*...............           2  R1             Spermophilus     Sciuridae......  Squirrel,        U.S.A. (WA,
                                               washingtoni.                      Washington       OR).
                                                                                 ground.
      Birds
C................           6  R1             Porzana          Rallidae.......  Crake, spotless  U.S.A. (AS),
                                               tabuensis.                        (American        Fiji,
                                                                                 Samoa pop.).     Marquesas,
                                                                                                  Polynesia,
                                                                                                  Philippines,
                                                                                                  Australia,
                                                                                                  Society
                                                                                                  Islands,
                                                                                                  Tonga, Western
                                                                                                  Samoa.
C................           5  R1             Oreomystis       Fringillidae...  Creeper, Kauai.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               bairdi.
C*...............           6  R1             Coccyzus         Cuculidae......  Cuckoo, yellow-  U.S.A. (AZ, CA,
                                               americanus.                       billed           CO, ID, MT,
                                                                                 (Western U.S.    NM, NV, OR,
                                                                                 DPS).            TX, UT, WA,
                                                                                                  WY), Canada,
                                                                                                  Mexico,
                                                                                                  Central and
                                                                                                  South America.
C................           6  R1             Gallicolumba     Columbidae.....  Dove, friendly   U.S.A. (AS),
                                               stairi.                           ground           Fiji, Tonga,
                                                                                 (American        Western Samoa.
                                                                                 Samoa DPS).
C................           6  R1             Ptilinopus       Columbidae.....  Dove, many-      U.S.A. (AS).
                                               perousii                          colored fruit.
                                               perousii.
C*...............           2  R6             Centrocercus     Phasianidae....  Grouse,          U.S.A (AZ, CO,
                                               minimus.                          Gunnison sage.   KS, OK, NM,
                                                                                                  UT).
C*...............           6  R1             Centrocercus     Phasianidae....  Grouse, greater  U.S.A. (OR,
                                               urophasianus.                     sage (Columbia   WA), Canada
                                                                                 basin DPS).      (BC).
C................           6  R1             Eremophila       Alaudidae......  Horned lark,     U.S.A. (OR,
                                               alpestris                         streaked.        WA), Canada
                                               strigata.                                          (BC).
C*...............           5  R7             Brachyramphus    Alcidae........  Murrelet,        U.S.A. (AK),
                                               brevirostris.                     Kittlitz's.      Russia.
C*...............           5  R1             Synthilboramphu  Alcidae........  Murrelet,        U.S.A. (CA),
                                               s hypoleucus.                     Xantus's.        Mexico.

[[Page 24897]]

 
C*...............           8  R2             Tympanuchus      Phasianidae....  Prairie-         U.S.A. (CO, KA,
                                               pallidicinctus.                   chicken,         NM, OK, TX).
                                                                                 lesser.
C*...............           3  R1             Oceanodroma      Hydrobatidae...  Storm-petrel,    U.S.A. (HI).
                                               castro.                           band-rumped
                                                                                 (Hawaii DPS).
C................           5  R4             Dendroica        Emberizidae....  Warbler, elfin   U.S.A. (PR).
                                               angelae.                          woods.
PE...............           6  R1             Zosterops        Zosteropidae...  White-eye, Rota  U.S.A. (MP).
                                               rotensis.                         bridled.
     Reptiles
C*...............           2  R2             Sceloporus       Iguanidae......  Lizard, sand     U.S.A. (TX,
                                               arenicolus.                       dune.            NM).
C................           9  R3             Sistrurus        Viperidae......  Massasauga       U.S.A. (IA, IL,
                                               catenatus                         (=rattlesnake)   IN, MI, MO,
                                               catenatus.                        , eastern.       MN, NY, OH,
                                                                                                  PA, WI),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C................           6  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*...............           5  R2             Graptemys        Emydidae.......  Turtle, Cagle's  U.S.A. (TX).
                                               caglei.                           map.
C................           3  R2             Kinosternon      Kinosternidae..  Turtle, Sonoyta  U.S.A. (AZ),
                                               sonoriense                        mud.             Mexico.
                                               longifemorale.
    Amphibians
C*...............           3  R1             Rana             Ranidae........  Frog, Columbia   U.S.A. (ID, NV,
                                               luteiventris.                     spotted (Great   OR).
                                                                                 Basin DPS).
C*...............           3  R1             Rana muscosa...  Ranidae........  Frog, mountain   U.S.A. (CA,
                                                                                 yellow-legged    NV).
                                                                                 (Sierra Nevada
                                                                                 DPS).
C*...............           2  R1             Rana pretiosa..  Ranidae........  Frog, Oregon     U.S.A. (CA, OR,
                                                                                 spotted          WA), Canada
                                                                                 (Entire).        (BC).
C*...............           5  R1             Rana onca......  Ranidae........  Frog, relict     U.S.A. (AZ, NV,
                                                                                 leopard.         UT).
C................           6  R4             Cryptobranchus   Crytobranchidae  Hellbender,      U.S.A. (AR,
                                               alleganiensis                     Ozark.           MO).
                                               bishopi.
C................           2  R2             Eurycea          Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               waterlooensis.                    Austin blind.
PT...............           3  R1             Ambystoma        Ambystomatidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (CA).
                                               californiense.                    California
                                                                                 tiger (Entire).
C................           2  R2             Eurycea          Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               naufragia.                        Georgetown.
C................           2  R2             Eurycea          Plethodontidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               chisholmensis.                    Salado
                                                                                 (Entire).
C*...............           3  R6             Bufo boreas      Bufonidae......  Toad, boreal     U.S.A. (CO, NM,
                                               boreas.                           (Southern        WY).
                                                                                 Rocky
                                                                                 Mountains DPS).
C*...............          11  R1             Bufo canorus...  Bufonidae......  Toad, Yosemite.  U.S.A. (CA).
C................           5  R4             Necturus         Proteidae......  Waterdog, black  U.S.A. (AL).
                                               alabamensis.                      warrior
                                                                                 (Sipsey Fork).
      Fishes
PE...............           3  R1             Gila bicolor     Cyprinidae.....  Chub, Cowhead    U.S.A. (CA).
                                               vaccaceps.                        Lake tui.
PE...............           2  R2             Gila intermedia  Cyprinidae.....  Chub, Gila.....  U.S.A. (AZ,
                                                                                                  NM), Mexico.
C................          11  R6             Etheostoma       Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (AR, CO,
                                               cragini.                          Arkansas.        KS, MO, OK).
C................           6  R4             Etheostoma       Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (KY,
                                               nigrum susanae.                   Cumberland       TN).
                                                                                 johnny.
C................           5  R4             Percina aurora.  Percidae.......  Darter, Pearl..  U.S.A. (LA,
                                                                                                  MS).
C................           5  R4             Etheostoma       Percidae.......  Darter, rush...  U.S.A. (AL).
                                               phytophilum.
C................           2  R4             Etheostoma       Percidae.......  Darter,          U.S.A. (AR).
                                               moorei.                           yellowcheek.
C*...............           3  R6             Thymallus        Salmonidae.....  Grayling,        U.S.A. (MT,
                                               arcticus.                         Fluvial arctic   WY).
                                                                                 (upper
                                                                                 Missouri River
                                                                                 DPS).
C................           2  R4             Noturus sp.....  Ictaluridae....  Madtom, chucky   U.S.A. (TN).
                                                                                 (Entire).
C................           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         Cyprinidae.....  Shiner,          U.S.A. (TX).
                                               buccula.                          smalleye.
C................           3  R2             Catostomus       Catostomidae...  Sucker, Zuni     U.S.A. (AZ,
                                               discobolus                        bluehead.        NM).
                                               yarrowi.
PSAT.............         N/A  R1             Salvelinus       Salmonidae.....  Trout, Dolly     U.S.A. (AK, OR,
                                               malma.                            Varden.          WA), Canada,
                                                                                                  East Asia.
      Clams
C................           5  R4             Villosa          Unionidae......  Bean, Choctaw..  U.S.A. (AL,
                                               choctawensis.                                      FL).

[[Page 24898]]

 
C................           2  R3             Villosa fabalis  Unionidae......  Bean, rayed....  U.S.A. (AL, IL,
                                                                                                  IN, KY, MI,
                                                                                                  NY, OH, TN,
                                                                                                  PA, VA, WV),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C................           5  R4             Pleurobema       Unionidae......  Clubshell,       U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                               troschelianum.                    Alabama.         TN).
C................           5  R4             Pleurobema       Unionidae......  Clubshell,       U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                               chattanoogaens                    painted.         TN).
                                               e.
C................           2  R4             Fusconaia        Unionidae......  Ebonyshell,      U.S.A. (AL,
                                               (=Obovaria)                       round.           FL).
                                               rotulata.
C................           2  R2             Popenaias popei  Unionidae......  Hornshell,       U.S.A. (NM,
                                                                                 Texas.           TX), Mexico.
C................           5  R4             Ptychobranchus   Unionidae......  Kidneyshell,     U.S.A. (AL, KY,
                                               subtentum.                        fluted.          TN, VA).
C................           2  R4             Ptychobranchus   Unionidae......  Kidneyshell,     U.S.A. (AL,
                                               jonesi.                           southern.        FL).
C................           5  R4             Lampsilis        Unionidae......  Mucket, Neosho.  U.S.A. (AR, KS,
                                               rafinesqueana.                                     MO, OK).
C................           2  R3             Plethobasus      Unionidae......  Mussel,          Entire.
                                               cyphyus.                          sheepnose.
C................           2  R4             Margaritifera    Margaritiferida  Pearlshell,      U.S.A. (AL).
                                               marrianae.       e.               Alabama.
C................           5  R4             Lexingtonia      Unionidae......  Pearlymussel,    U.S.A. (AL, KY,
                                               dolabelloides.                    slabside.        TN, VA).
C................           5  R4             Pleurobema       Unionidae......  Pigtoe, fuzzy..  U.S.A. (AL,
                                               strodeanum.                                        FL).
C................           5  R4             Pleurobema       Unionidae......  Pigtoe, Georgia  U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                               hanleyanum.                                        TN)
C................           5  R4             Fusconaia        Unionidae......  Pigtoe, narrow.  U.S.A. (AL,
                                               escambia.                                          FL).
C................          11  R4             Quincuncina      Unionidae......  Pigtoe, tapered  U.S.A. (AL,
                                               burkei.                                            FL).
C................           5  R4             Lampsilis        Unionidae        U.S.A. (AL,
                                               australis.       Sandshell,       FL)..
                                                                southern.
C................           4  R3             Cumberlandia     Margaritiferida  Spectaclecase..  U.S.A. (AL, AR,
                                               monodonta.       e.                                IA, IN, IL,
                                                                                                  KY, MO, NE,
                                                                                                  OH, TN, VA,
                                                                                                  WI).
C................           5  R4             Elliptio         Unionidae......  Spinymussel,     U.S.A. (GA)
                                               spinosa.                          Altamaha.
      Snails
C................           9  R6             Oreohelix        Oreohelicidae..  Mountainsnail,   U.S.A. (UT)
                                               peripherica                       Ogden Deseret.
                                               wasatchensis.
C................           2  R6             Stagnicola       Lymnaeidae.....  Pondsnail,       U.S.A. (UT).
                                               bonnevilensis.                    Bonneville.
C................           2  R1             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Pyrg, elongate   U.S.A. (NV).
                                               notidicola.                       mud meadows.
C................           5  R4             Leptoxis downei  Pleuroceridae..  Rocksnail,       U.S.A. (GA,
                                                                                 Georgia.         AL).
C................           2  R1             Ostodes          Potaridae......  Sisi...........  U.S.A. (AS).
                                               strigatus.
C................           2  R2             Tryonia          Hydrobiidae....  Snail, Diamond   U.S.A. (TX)
                                               adamantina.                       Y Spring.
C................           2  R1             Samoana          Partulidae.....  Snail, fragile   U.S.A. (GU,
                                               fragilis.                         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  R2             Tryonia kosteri  Hydrobiidae....  Snail, Koster's  U.S.A. (NM).
                                                                                 tryonia.
C................           2  R1             Partulina        Achatinellidae.  Snail, Lanai     U.S.A. (HI).
                                               semicarinata.                     tree.
C................           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             Assiminea pecos  Assimineidae...  Snail, Pecos     U.S.A. (NM,
                                                                                 assiminea.       TX), Mexico
C................           2  R2             Cochliopa        Hydrobiidae....  Snail, Phantom   U.S.A. (TX).
                                               texana.                           Lake cave.
C................           2  R1             Eua zebrina....  Partulidae       U.S.A. (AS)....
                                                                Snail, Tutuila
                                                                tree.
C*...............           2  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NM).
                                               chupaderae.                       Chupadera.
C*...............          11  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NM).
                                               gilae.                            Gila.
C................           2  R2             Tryonia          Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (TX).
                                               circumstriata(                    Gonzales.
                                               =stocktonensis
                                               ).
C................           5  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ),
                                               thompsoni.                        Huachuca.        Mexico.
C*...............          11  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NM).
                                               thermalis.                        New Mexico.
C*...............           5  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ).
                                               morrisoni.                        Page.
C................           2  R2             Tryonia          Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               cheatumi.                         (=Tryonia),
                                                                                 Phantom.

[[Page 24899]]

 
PE...............           2  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (NM).
                                               roswellensis.                     Roswell.
C................           2  R2             Pyrgulopsis      Hydrobiidae....  Springsnail,     U.S.A. (AZ).
                                               trivialis.                        Three Forks.
C................           5  R1             Newcombia        Achatinellidae.  Tree snail,      U.S.A. (Hl).
                                               cumingi.                          Newcomb's.
     Insects
C................          11  R6             Zaitzevia        Elmidae........  Beetle, Warm     U.S.A. (MT).
                                               thermae.                          Springs
                                                                                 Zaitzevian
                                                                                 Riffle.
C*...............           2  R1             Nysius           Lygaeidae......  Bug, Wekiu.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               wekiuicola.
C................           3  R1             Hypolimnas       Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (GU,
                                               octucula                          Mariana eight-   MP).
                                               mariannensis.                     spot.
C................           2  R1             Vagrans          Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (GU,
                                               egestina.                         Mariana          MP).
                                                                                 wandering.
PE...............         N/A  R2             Euphydryas       Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (NM).
                                               anicia                            Sacramento
                                               cloudcrofti.                      Mountains
                                                                                 checkerspot.
C*...............           6  R1             Euphydryas       Nymphalidae....  Butterfly,       U.S.A. (OR,
                                               editha taylori.                   whulge           WA), Canada
                                                                                 checkerspot      (BC)
                                                                                 (=Taylor's).
C................           5  R4             Glyphopsyche     Limnephilidae..  Caddisfly,       U.S.A. (TN).
                                               sequatchie.                       Sequatchie.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us major.                         beaver.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us caecus.                        Clifton.
C................          11  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us                                Coleman.
                                               colemanensis.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us fowlerae.                      Fowler's.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us pholeter.                      greater Adams.
C................           5  R5             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave Beetle,     U.S.A. (VA).
                                               us holsingeri.                    Holsinger's.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us frigidus.                      icebox.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us inquisitor.                    inquirer.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us insularis.                     Insular.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us cataryctos.                    lesser Adams.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us troglodytes.                   Louisville.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us paulus.                        Noblett's.
C................          11  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us                                surprising.
                                               inexpectatus.
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (TN).
                                               us tiresias.                      Soothsayer
                                                                                 (=Indian Grave
                                                                                 Point).
C................           5  R4             Pseudanophthalm  Carabidae......  Cave beetle,     U.S.A. (KY).
                                               us parvus.                        Tatum.
C................           9  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               nigrohamatum                      blackline
                                               nigrolineatum.                    Hawaiian.
C................           2  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               leptodemus.                       crimson
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C................           2  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               nesiotes.                         flying earwig
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C................           2  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               oceanicum.                        oceanic
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C................           8  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               xanthomelas.                      orangeblack
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C................           2  R1             Megalagrion      Coenagrionidae.  Damselfly,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               pacificum.                        Pacific
                                                                                 Hawaiian.
C................           5  R1             Phaeogramma sp.  Tephritidae....  Gall fly,        U.S.A. (HI).
                                                                                 Po'olanui.
C................           5  R1             Ambrysus         Naucoridae.....  Naucorid bug     U.S.A. (CA.).
                                               funebris.                         (=Furnace
                                                                                 Creek),
                                                                                 Nevares Spring.

[[Page 24900]]

 
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               aglaia.                           [unnamed].
C................           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               attigua.                          [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               differens.                        [unnamed].
C................           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               digressa.                         [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hemipeza.                         [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               heteroneura.                      [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               montgomeryi.                      [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               mulli.                            [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               musaphila.                        [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               neoclavisetae.                    [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               obatai.                           [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               ochrobasis.                       [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               substenoptera.                    [unnamed].
PE...............           2  R1             Drosophila       Drosophilidae..  Pomace fly,      U.S.A. (HI).
                                               tarphytrichia.                    [unnamed].
C................           5  R2             Heterelmis       Elmidae........  Riffle beetle,   U.S.A. (AZ).
                                               stephani.                         Stephan's.
C*...............          11  R3             Hesperia         Hesperiidae....  Skipper, Dakota  U.S.A. (MN, IA,
                                               dacotae.                                           SD, ND, IL),
                                                                                                  Canada.
C*...............           5  R1             Polites mardon.  Hesperiidae....  Skipper, Mardon  U.S.A. (CA, OR,
                                                                                                  WA).
C*...............           9  R6             Cicindela        Cicindelidae...  Tiger beetle,    U.S.A. (UT).
                                               limbata                           Coral Pink
                                               albissima.                        Sand Dunes.
C................           5  R4             Cicindela        Cicindelidae...  Tiger beetle,    U.S.A. (FL).
                                               highlandensis.                    highlands.
C................           3  R6             Cicindela        Cicindelidae...  Tiger beetle,    U.S.A. (NE).
                                               nevadica                          Salt Creek.
                                               lincolniana.
    Arachnids
C................           2  R2             Cicurina         Dictynidae.....  Meshweaver,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               wartoni.                          Warton's cave.
   Crustaceans
PE...............         N/A  R2             Gammarus         Gammaridae.....  Amphipod,        U.S.A. (NM).
                                               desperatus.                       Noel's.
C................          11  R4             Fallicambarus    Cambaridae.....  Crayfish, Camp   U.S.A. (MS).
                                               gordoni.                          Shelby
                                                                                 burrowing.
C................           2  R1             Metabetaeus      Alpheidae......  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                               lohena.                           anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C................           2  R1             Antecaridina     Atyidae........  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI),
                                               lauensis.                         anchialine       Mozambique,
                                                                                 pool.            Saudi Arabia,
                                                                                                  Japan.
C................           2  R1             Calliasmata      Alpheidae......  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI),
                                               pholidota.                        anchialine       Funafuti
                                                                                 pool.            Atoll, Saudi
                                                                                                  Arabia, Sinai
                                                                                                  Peninsula,
                                                                                                  Tuvalu.
C................           2  R1             Palaemonella     Palaemonidae...  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                               burnsi.                           anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C................           2  R1             Procaris         Procarididae...  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hawaiana.                         anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C................           2  R1             Vetericaris      Procaridae.....  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                               chaceorum.                        anchialine
                                                                                 pool.
C................           5  R4             Typhlatya monae  Atyidae........  Shrimp,          U.S.A. (PR),
                                                                                 troglobitic      Barbuda,
                                                                                 groundwater.     Dominican
                                                                                                  Republic.
 Flowering Plants
C................          11  R1             Abronia alpina.  Nyctaginaceae..  Sand-verbena,    U.S.A. (CA).
                                                                                 Ramshaw
                                                                                 Meadows.
C................          11  R6             Alicellia        Polemoniaceae..  Alice-flower,    U.S.A. (UT).
                                               caespitosa.                       wonderland.
C................          11  R4             Arabis           Brassicaceae...  Rockcress,       U.S.A. (AL,
                                               georgiana.                        Georgia.         GA).
C................          11  R4             Argythamnia      Euphorbiaceae..  Silverbrush,     U.S.A. (FL).
                                               blodgettii.                       Blodgett's.
C................           3  R1             Artemisia        Asteraceae.....  Wormwood,        U.S.A. (OR,
                                               campestris                        northern.        WA).
                                               var.
                                               wormskioldii.
C................           2  R1             Astelia          Liliaceae......  Pa'iniu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               waialealae.
C................           5  R4             Aster            Asteraceae.....  Aster, Georgia.  U.S.A. (AL, FL,
                                               georgianus.                                        GA, NC, SC).
C................           8  R6             Astragalus       Fabaceae.......  Milk-vetch,      U.S.A. (UT).
                                               equisolensis.                     horseshoe.
C................           8  R6             Astragalus       Fabaceae.......  Milk-vetch,      U.S.A. (CO).
                                               tortipes.                         Sleeping Ute.
C................           5  R1             Bidens           Asteraceae.....  Ko'oko'olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               amplectens.
C................           6  R1             Bidens           Asteraceae.....  Ko'oko'olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               campylotheca
                                               pentamera.
C................           3  R1             Bidens           Asteraceae.....  Ko'oko'olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               campylotheca
                                               waihoiensis.
C................           8  R1             Bidens           Asteraceae.....  Ko'oko'olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               conjuncta.

[[Page 24901]]

 
C................           6  R1             Bidens           Asteraceae.....  Ko'oko'olau....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               micrantha
                                               ctenophylla.
C................           5  R4             Brickellia       Asteraceae.....  Brickell-bush,   U.S.A. (FL).
                                               mosieri.                          Florida.
C................           5  R1             Calamagrostis    Poaceae........  Reedgrass,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               expansa.                          [unnamed].
C................           5  R1             Calamagrostis    Poaceae........  Reedgrass,       U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hillebrandii.                     [unnamed].
C................           5  R4             Calliandra       Mimosaceae.....  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                               locoensis.
C*...............           2  R1             Calochortus      Liliaceae......  Mariposa lily,   U.S.A. (CA,
                                               persistens.                       Siskiyou.        OR).
C................           5  R4             Calyptranthes    Myrtaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                               estremerae.
C................           5  R1             Canavalia        Fabaceae.......  'Awikiwiki.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               napaliensis.
C................           2  R1             Canavalia        Fabaceae.......  'Awikiwiki.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               pubescens.
C................           8  R6             Castilleja       Scrophulariacea  Paintbrush,      U.S.A. (UT).
                                               aquariensis.     e.               Aquarius.
C*...............          11  R1             Castilleja       Scrophulariacea  Paintbrush,      U.S.A. (ID).
                                               christii.        e.               Christ's.
C................           6  R4             Chamaecrista     Fabaceae.......  Pea, Big Pine    U.S.A. (FL).
                                               lineata                           partridge.
                                               keyensis.
C................           6  R4             Chamaesyce       Euphorbiaceae..  Sandmat,         U.S.A. (FL).
                                               deltoidea                         pineland.
                                               pinetorum.
C................           6  R4             Chamaesyce       Euphorbiaceae..  Spurge, wedge..  U.S.A. (FL).
                                               deltoidea
                                               serpyllum.
C................           5  R1             Chamaesyce       Euphorbiaceae..  'Akoko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               eleanoriae.
C................           6  R1             Chamaesyce       Euphorbiaceae..  'Akoko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               remyi var.
                                               kauaiensis.
C................           6  R1             Chamaesyce       Euphorbiaceae..  'Akoko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               remyi var.
                                               remyi.
C................           5  R1             Charpentiera     Amaranthaceae..  Papala.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               densiflora.
C*...............           6  R1             Chorizanthe      Polygonaceae...  Spineflower,     U.S.A. (CA).
                                               parryi var.                       San Fernando
                                               fernandina.                       Valley.
C................           5  R4             Chromolaena      Asteraceae.....  Thoroughwort,    U.S.A. (FL).
                                               frustrata.                        Cape Sable.
C................           2  R4             Consolea         Cactaceae......  Cactus, Florida  U.S.A. (FL).
                                               corallicola.                      semaphore.
C................           2  R4             Cordia rupicola  Boraginaceae...  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR),
                                                                                                  Anegada.
C................           2  R1             Cyanea           Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               asplenifolia.
C................           5  R1             Cyanea calycina  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           2  R1             Cyanea           Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               eleeleensis.
C................           2  R1             Cyanea kuhihewa  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           5  R1             Cyanea           Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               kunthiana.
C................           5  R1             Cyanea           Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               lanceolata.
C................           2  R1             Cyanea obtusa..  Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           5  R1             Cyanea           Campanulaceae..  Haha...........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               tritomantha.
C................           2  R1             Cyrtandra        Gesneriaceae...  Ha'iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               filipes.
C................           5  R1             Cyrtandra        Gesneriaceae...  Ha'iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               kaulantha.
C................           5  R1             Cyrtandra        Gesneriaceae...  Ha'iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               oenobarba.
C................           2  R1             Cyrtandra        Gesneriaceae...  Ha'iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               oxybapha.
C................           2  R1             Cyrtandra        Gesneriaceae...  Ha'iwale.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               sessilis.
C................           6  R4             Dalea            Fabaceae.......  Prairie-clover,  U.S.A. (FL).
                                               carthagenensis                    Florida.
                                               floridana.
C................           5  R4             Digitaria        Poaceae........  Crabgrass,       U.S.A. (FL).
                                               pauciflora.                       Florida
                                                                                 pineland.
C................           6  R1             Dubautia         Asteraceae.....  Na'ena'e.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               imbricata
                                               imbricata.
C................           3  R1             Dubautia         Asteraceae.....  Na'ena'e.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               plantaginea
                                               magnifolia.
C................           5  R1             Dubautia         Asteraceae.....  Na'ena'e.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               waialealae.
C*...............           6  R2             Echinomastus     Cactaceae......  Cactus, Acuna..  U.S.A. (AZ),
                                               erectocentrus                                      Mexico.
                                               var. acunensis.
C................          11  R1             Erigeron         Asteraceae.....  Daisy, basalt..  U.S.A. (WA).
                                               basalticus.
C*...............           5  R2             Erigeron         Asteraceae.....  Fleabane,        U.S.A. (AZ).
                                               lemmonii.                         Lemmon.
C................           2  R1             Eriogonum        Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat,       U.S.A. (WA).
                                               codium.                           Umtanum Desert.
C................           2  R1             Eriogonum        Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat,       U.S.A (NV).
                                               diatomaceum.                      Churchill
                                                                                 Narrows.
C................           5  R1             Eriogonum        Polygonaceae...  Buckwheat, Red   U.S.A. (CA).
                                               kelloggii.                        Mountain.
C................           5  R1             Festuca          Poaceae........  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hawaiiensis.
C*...............          11  R2             Festuca          Poaceae........  Guadalupe        U.S.A. (TX),
                                               ligulata.                         fescue.          Mexico.

[[Page 24902]]

 
C................           5  R1             Gardenia remyi.  Rubiaceae......  Nanu...........  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           5  R1             Geranium         Geraniaceae....  Nohoanu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hanaense.
C................           8  R1             Geranium         Geraniaceae....  Nohoanu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hillebrandii.
C................           2  R1             Geranium         Geraniaceae....  Nohoanu........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               kauaiense.
C................           5  R4             Gonocalyx        Ericaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (PR).
                                               concolor.
C*...............           2  R1             Hazardia         Asteraceae.....  Orcutt's         U.S.A. (CA),
                                               orcutti.                          hazardia.        Mexico.
C................           5  R1             Hedyotis         Rubiaceae......  Kampua'a.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               fluviatilis.
C................          11  R4             Helianthus       Asteraceae.....  Sunflower,       U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                               verticillatus.                    whorled.         TN).
C................           5  R2             Hibiscus         Malvaceae......  Rose-mallow,     U.S.A. (TX).
                                               dasycalyx.                        Neches River.
C................           6  R4             Indigofera       Fabaceae.......  Indigo, Florida  U.S.A. (FL).
                                               mucronata
                                               keyensis.
C................           5  R1             Ivesia webberi.  Rosaceae.......  Ivesia, Webber.  U.S.A. (CA,
                                                                                                  NV).
C................           3  R1             Joinvillea       Joinvilleaceae.  Ohe............  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               ascendens
                                               ascendens.
C................           5  R1             Korthalsella     Viscaceae......  Hulumoa........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               degeneri.
C................           5  R1             Labordia         Loganiaceae....  Kamakahala.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               helleri.
C................           5  R1             Labordia pumila  Loganiaceae....  Kamakahala.....  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           5  R1             Lagenifera       Asteraceae.....  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               erici.
C................           5  R1             Lagenifera       Asteraceae.....  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               helenae.
C................           2  R2             Leavenworthia    Brassicaceae...  Gladecress,      U.S.A. (TX).
                                               texana.                           Texas golden.
C................           5  R4             Lesquerella      Brassicaceae...  Bladderpod,      U.S.A. (IN, KY,
                                               globosa.                          Short's.         TN).
C................           5  R1             Lesquerella      Brassicaceae...  Bladderpod,      U.S.A. (WA).
                                               tuplashensis.                     White Bluffs.
C................           2  R4             Linum arenicola  Linaceae.......  Flax, sand.....  U.S.A. (FL).
C................           3  R4             Linum carteri    Linaceae.......  Flax, Carter's   U.S.A. (FL).
                                               carteri.                          small-flowered.
C................           5  R1             Lysimachia       Primulaceae....  Makanoe lehua..  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               daphnoides.
C................           5  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               christophersen
                                               ii.
C................           2  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               degeneri.
C................           2  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hiiakae.
C................           2  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               makahae.
C................           2  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               paniculata.
C................           5  R1             Melicope         Rutaceae.......  Alani..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               puberula.
C................           5  R1             Myrsine          Myrsinaceae....  Kolea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               fosbergii.
C................           2  R1             Myrsine mezii..  Myrsinaceae....   Kolea.........  U.S.A. (HI).
C................           5  R1             Myrsine          Myrsinaceae....  Kolea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               vaccinioides.
C................           8  R5             Narthecium       Liliaceae......  Asphodel, bog..  U.S.A. (DE, NC,
                                               americanum.                                        NJ, NY, SC).
C................           5  R1             Nothocestrum     Solanaceae.....  'Aiea..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               latifolium.
C................           2  R1             Ochrosia         Apocynaceae....  Holei..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               haleakalae.
C................           5  R5             Panicum hirstii  Poaceae........  Panic grass,     U.S.A. (DE, GA,
                                                                                 Hirsts'.         NC, NJ).
C................          11  R2             Paronychia       Caryophyllaceae  Whitlow-wort,    U.S.A. (TX).
                                               congesta.                         bushy.
C................           6  R2             Pediocactus      Cactaceae......  Cactus,          U.S.A. (AZ).
                                               peeblesianus                      Fickeisen
                                               fickeiseniae.                     plains.
C................           5  R6             Penstemon        Scrophulariacea  Beardtongue,     U.S.A. (CO).
                                               debilis.         e.               Parachute.
C*...............           2  R6             Penstemon        Scrophulariacea  Beardtongue,     U.S.A. (CO,
                                               grahamii.        e.               Graham.          UT).
C*...............           6  R6             Penstemon        Scrophulariacea  Beardtongue,     U.S.A. (CO,
                                               scariosus        e.               White River.     UT).
                                               albifluvis.
C................           2  R1             Peperomia        Piperaceae.....  'Ala 'ala wai    U.S.A. (HI).
                                               subpetiolata.                     nui.
C................           2  R1             Phacelia         Hydrophyllaceae  Brand's          U.S.A. (CA),
                                               stellaris.                        phacelia.        Mexico
C................          11  R6             Phacelia         Hydrophyllaceae  Phacelia,        U.S.A. (CO).
                                               submutica.                        DeBeque.
C................           2  R1             Phyllostegia     Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               bracteata.
C................           5  R1             Phyllostegia     Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               floribunda.
C................           2  R1             Phyllostegia     Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hispida.
C................           5  R1             Pittosporum      Pittosporaceae.  Ho'awa.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               napaliense.
C................           5  R4             Platanthera      Orchidaceae....  Orchid, white    U.S.A. (AL, GA,
                                               integrilabia.                     fringeless.      KY, MS, NC,
                                                                                                  SC, TN, VA).
C................           6  R1             Platydesma       Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               cornuta
                                               cornuta.
C................           6  R1             Platydesma       Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               cornuta
                                               decurrens.
C................           2  R1             Platydesma       Rutaceae.......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               remyi.

[[Page 24903]]

 
C................           5  R1             Platydesma       Rutaceae.......  Pilo kea lau     U.S.A. (HI).
                                               rostrata.                         lii.
C................           5  R1             Pleomele         Agavaceae......  Hala pepe......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               forbesii.
C................           2  R1             Pleomele         Agavaceae......  Hala pepe......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               fernaldii.
C................           5  R1             Potentilla       Rosaceae.......  Cinquefoil,      U.S.A. (NV).
                                               basaltica.                        Soldier
                                                                                 Meadows.
C................           5  R1             Pritchardia      Asteraceae.....  Lo'ulu,          U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hardyi.                           (=Na'ena'e).
C................           6  R1             Pseudognaphaliu  Asteraceae.....  'Ena'ena.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               m
                                               (=Gnaphalium)
                                               sandwicensium
                                               var.
                                               molokaiense.
C................           2  R1             Psychotria       Rubiaceae......  Kopiko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               grandiflora.
C................           3  R1             Psychotria       Rubiaceae......  Kopiko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hexandra
                                               oahuenis.
C................           2  R1             Psychotria       Rubiaceae......  Kopiko.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hobdyi.
C................           5  R1             Pteralyxia       Apocynaceae....  Kaulu..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               macrocarpa.
C................           5  R1             Ranunculus       Ranunculaceae..  Makou..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               hawaiensis.
C................           2  R1             Ranunculus       Ranunculaceae..  Makou..........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               mauiensis.
C*...............           2  R1             Rorippa          Brassicaceae...  Cress, Tahoe     U.S.A. (CA, NV)
                                               subumbellata.                     yellow.
C................           2  R1             Schiedea         Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               attenuata.
C................           2  R1             Schiedea         Caryophyllaceae  Ma'oli'oli.....  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               pubescens.
C................           2  R1             Schiedea         Caryophyllaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               salicaria.
C................           5  R1             Sedum            Crassulaceae...  Stonecrop, Red   U.S.A. (CA).
                                               eastwoodiae.                      Mountain.
C................           5  R1             Sicyos           Cucurbitaceae..  'Anunu.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               macrophyllus.
C*...............           9  R1             Sidalcea         Malvaceae......  Checkerbloom,    U.S.A. (CA).
                                               hickmanii                         Parish's.
                                               parishii.
C................           9  R4             Sideroxylon      Sapotaceae.....  Bully,           U.S.A. (FL).
                                               reclinatum                        Everglades.
                                               ssp.
                                               austrofloriden
                                               se.
C................           5  R1             Solanum          Solanaceae.....  Popolo.........  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               nelsonii.
C................           2  R1             Stenogyne        Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               cranwelliae.
C................           2  R1             Stenogyne        Lamiaceae......  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               kealiae.
C................           2  R1             Zanthoxylum      Rutaceae.......  'Ae............  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               oahuense.
 Ferns and Allies
C*...............          11  R1             Botrychium       Ophioglossaceae  Moonwort,        U.S.A. (CA, CO,
                                               lineare.                          slender.         ID, MT, OR,
                                                                                                  WA), Canada
                                                                                                  (BC, NB, QC).
C................           5  R1             Christella       Thelypteridacea  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               boydiae (=       e.
                                               Cyclosorus
                                               boydiae var.
                                               boydiae +
                                               Cyclosorus
                                               boydiae
                                               kipahuluensis).
C................           2  R1             Doryopteris      Pteridaceae....  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               takeuchii.
C................           3  R1             Microlepia       Dennstaedtiacea  Palipali.......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               strigosa var.    e.
                                               mauiensis
                                               (=Microlepia
                                               mauiensis).
C................           2  R1             Phlegmariurus    Lycopodiaceae..  Wawaeiole......  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               stemmermanniae.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.


                Table 2.--Animals and Plants Formerly Candidates or Formerly Proposed for Listing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Status
------------------------------  Lead  region  Scientific name       Family        Common name     Historic range
       Code           Expl.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Mammals
E................           L  R1             Brachylagus      Leporidae......  Rabbit, pygmy    U.S.A. (CA, ID,
                                               idahoensis.                       (Columbia        MT, NV, OR,
                                                                                 Basin DPS).      UT, WA, WY).
E................           L  R1             Urocyon          Canidae........  Fox, San Miguel  U.S.A. (CA).
                                               littoralis                        Island.
                                               littoralis.
E................           L  R1             Urocyon          Canidae........  Fox, Santa       U.S.A. (CA).
                                               littoralis                        Catalina
                                               catalinae.                        Island.
E................           L  R1             Urocyon          Canidae........  Fox, Santa Cruz  U.S.A. (CA).
                                               littoralis                        Island.
                                               santacruzae.

[[Page 24904]]

 
E................           L  R1             Urocyon          Canidae........  Fox, Santa Rosa  U.S.A. (CA).
                                               littoralis                        Island.
                                               santarosae.
                   Birds
Rp...............           A  R6             Charadrius       Charadriidae...  Plover,          U.S.A.
                                               montanus.                         mountain.        (western),
                                                                                                  Canada,
                                                                                                  Mexico.
                 Amphibians
E................           L  R1             Ambystoma        Ambystomatidae.  Salamander,      U.S.A. (CA).
                                               californiense.                    California
                                                                                 tiger (Sonoma
                                                                                 County DPS).
E................           L  R1             Rana muscosa...  Ranidae........  Frog, mountain   U.S.A. (CA, NV)
                                                                                 yellow-legged    including San
                                                                                 (southern        Diego, Orange,
                                                                                 California       Riverside, San
                                                                                 DPS).            Bernardino,
                                                                                                  and Los
                                                                                                  Angeles
                                                                                                  Counties.
                   Fishes
Rp...............           A  R1             Oncorhynchus     Salmonidae.....  Trout, coastal   U.S.A. (AK, CA,
                                               clarki clarki.                    cutthroat        OR, WA).
                                                                                 (southwestern
                                                                                 WA/Columbia
                                                                                 River DPS).
                   Snails
E................           L  R3             Antrobia         Hydrobiidae....  Cavesnail,       U.S.A. (MO).
                                               culveri.                          Tumbling Creek.
                  Insects
E................           L  R1             Pseudocopaeodes  Hesperiidae....  Skipper, Carson  U.S.A. (CA,
                                               eunus obscurus.                   wandering.       NV).
              Flowering Plants
E................           L  R1             Ambrosia pumila  Asteraceae.....  Ambrosia, San    U.S.A. (CA),
                                                                                 Diego.           Mexico.
Rp...............           A  R1             Lepidium.......  Brassicaceae     Peppergrass,     U.S.A. (ID)
                                                                papilliferum.    Slick spot.
E................           L  R1             Limnanthes       Limnanthaceae..  Meadowfoam,      U.S.A. (OR).
                                               floccosa                          large-flowered
                                               grandiflora.                      wooly.
E................           L  R1             Lomatium cookii  Apiaceae.......  Lomatium,        U.S.A. (OR).
                                                                                 Cook's.
E................           L  R1             Nesogenes        Verbenaceae....  No common name.  U.S.A. (MP).
                                               rotensis.
E................           L  R1             Osmoxylon        Araliaceae.....  No common name.  U.S.A. (MP).
                                               mariannense.
Rp...............           N  R1             Tabernaemontana  Apocynaceae....  No common name.  U.S.A. (GU,
                                               rotensis.                                          MP).
              Ferns and Allies
Rc...............           A  R1             Dryopteris       Dryopteridaceae  No common name.  U.S.A. (HI).
                                               glabra var.
                                               pusilla
                                               (=Dryopteris
                                               tenebrosa).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: See end of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for an explanation of symbols used in this table.

[FR Doc. 04-9893 Filed 5-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P