[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4973-4980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2135]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2011-0114; 4500030113]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on 
a Petition to List the San Bernardino Flying Squirrel as Endangered or 
Threatened With Critical Habitat

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 
90-day finding on a petition to list the San Bernardino flying squirrel 
(Glaucomys sabrinus californicus) as endangered or threatened and to 
designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petition presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that 
listing the San Bernardino flying squirrel may be warranted. Therefore, 
with the publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the 
status of the species to determine if listing the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel is warranted. To ensure that this status review is 
comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and 
other information regarding this subspecies. Based on the status 
review, we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, which will 
address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in 
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.

DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request 
that we receive information on or before April 2, 2012. The deadline 
for submitting an electronic comment using the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. 
After April 2, 2012, you must submit information directly to the Field 
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, below). Please note that 
we might not be able to address or incorporate information that we 
receive after the above requested date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Keyword or ID box, enter FWS-R8-ES-
2011-0114, which is the docket number for this action. Then, in the 
Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type 
heading, click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You 
may submit a comment by clicking on ``Submit a Comment.''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2011-0114; Division of Policy and 
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
    We will post all information we receive on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see Request for Information 
section below for more details).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad 
Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6010 Hidden 
Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011, by telephone at 760-431-
9440, or by facsimile to 760-431-9624. If you use a telecommunications 
device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay 
Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Information

    When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial 
information indicating that listing a species may be warranted, we are 
required to promptly initiate review of the status of the species 
(status review). For the status review to be complete and based on the 
best available scientific and commercial information, we request 
information on the San Bernardino flying squirrel from governmental 
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry, 
and any other interested parties. We seek information on:
    (1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
    (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its 
habitat, or both.
    (2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing 
determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.), which are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range;
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes;
    (c) Disease or predation;
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence.
    (3) The potential effects of climate change on the species and its 
habitat, including information on the upwards shifts in high-elevation 
forest habitat and changes in the availability of food resources.
    If, after the status review, we determine that listing the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel is warranted, we will propose critical 
habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), under section 4 
of the Act, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time 
we propose to list the species. Therefore, we also request data and 
information on:
    (1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential 
to the conservation of the species'' within the geographical area 
currently occupied by the species;
    (2) Where these features are currently found;

[[Page 4974]]

    (3) Whether any of these features may require special management 
considerations or protection;
    (4) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species that are ``essential for the conservation of the species''; and
    (5) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for 
designation if the species is proposed for listing, and why such 
habitat meets the requirements of section 4 of the Act.
    Please include sufficient information with your submission, such as 
scientific journal articles, other supporting publications, or data, to 
allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you 
include.
    Submissions merely stating support for, or opposition to, the 
action under consideration without providing supporting information, 
although noted, will not be considered in making a determination. 
Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether 
any species is an endangered or threatened species must be made 
``solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data 
available.''
    You may submit your information concerning this status review by 
one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit information via 
http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--including any 
personal identifying information--will be posted on the Web site. If 
your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal 
identifying information, you may request at the top of your document 
that we withhold this personal identifying information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We 
will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
    Information and supporting documentation that we received and used 
in preparing this finding is available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours, 
at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife 
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on 
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on 
information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted 
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files. To 
the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 
days of our receipt of the petition and publish our notice of the 
finding promptly in the Federal Register.
    Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information 
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day 
petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a 
reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition 
may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial 
scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to 
promptly initiate a species status review, which we subsequently 
summarize in our 12-month finding.

Petition History

    On August 25, 2010, we received a petition dated August 24, 2010, 
from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), requesting that the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel be listed as endangered or threatened and to 
designate critical habitat concurrent with listing under the Act. The 
petition clearly identified itself as a petition, was dated, and 
included the requisite identification information required at 50 CFR 
424.14(a). On October 5, 2010, we sent the petitioner a letter 
acknowledging our receipt of the petition, and responded that we had 
reviewed the information presented in the petition and determined that 
issuing an emergency regulation temporarily listing the species under 
section 4(b)(7) of the Act was not warranted. We also stated that due 
to court orders and court-approved settlement agreements for other 
listing and critical habitat determinations under the Act, our listing 
and critical habitat funding for Fiscal Year 2011 was committed to 
other projects. We said that we would be unable to address the petition 
at that time, but would complete the action when workload and funding 
allowed. This finding addresses the petition.

Previous Federal Actions

    The San Bernardino flying squirrel is a subspecies that was 
previously recognized in four Notices of Review published in the 
Federal Register. On September 18, 1985, the Service issued the first 
Notice of Review identifying vertebrate animal taxa native to the 
United States being considered for possible addition to the List of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (List), including the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel (50 FR 37958). Subsequently, three additional Notices 
of Review dated January 6, 1989 (54 FR 554), November 21, 1991 (56 FR 
58804), and November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982), were issued and presented 
an updated compilation of vertebrate and invertebrate animal taxa 
native to the United States, including the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel, that were being reviewed for possible addition to the List. 
This subspecies was categorized in these reviews as a ``C2'' taxon, 
meaning that listing was possibly appropriate but for which more 
information was needed before a final decision to list could be made. 
In 1996 the Service ceased using the C2 list. Subsequent Notices of 
Review contained only taxon for which the Service has on file 
sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to 
support proposals to list the species as endangered or threatened, but 
for which listing is precluded at present by other listing activity. 
These species are known as candidate species. Thus, the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel is not a candidate species.

Species Information

    The San Bernardino flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus 
californicus) is 1 of 25 subspecies of northern flying squirrel 
(Glaucomys sabrinus). There has been little research done on the 
subspecies (G. s. californicus); therefore, much of the biological 
information presented is based on other closely related subspecies of 
northern flying squirrel. The species (G. sabrinus) is a small gliding 
tree squirrel that lives in mixed-conifer forests (Weigl 2007, p. 898).
    The northern flying squirrel's geographic range encompasses 
southern portions of the Appalachian Mountains in the east and the 
Rocky Mountains, Sierra Nevada mountain range, and San Bernardino 
Mountains in the west (Smith 2007, p. 862). The San Bernardino flying 
squirrel is the most southerly distributed subspecies of northern 
flying squirrel on the western coast of the United States. It is 
separated and isolated geographically from the Sierra Nevada subspecies 
by 164 miles (265 kilometers) and the Mojave Desert (Brylski et al. 
1998, p. 90). Historically, the San Bernardino flying squirrel was 
observed in the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains of southern 
California (San Bernardino County and Riverside County; Grinnell and 
Swarth 1913, p. 328). The San Gorgonio pass, which probably linked the 
two ranges during the last ice age, now forms a barrier between the San 
Bernardino Mountains and San Jacinto Mountains (USFS 2005a, p. 1127). 
During the last ice age, the northern flying squirrel would have 
existed farther south than its observed range of the San Bernardino

[[Page 4975]]

and San Jacinto Mountains, and it is believed that the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel represents ancestral populations that have been 
isolated in forested, higher elevation refugia by a warming climate 
(Butler et al. 1991, p. 4; Arbogast 2007, p. 844; Weigl 2007, p. 897).
    The subspecies was first described by Rhoads (1897) based on four 
specimens collected near Squirrel Inn in the San Bernardino Mountains 
at 5,200 feet (ft) (1585 meters (m)). Grinnell and Swarth (1913, p. 
328) also trapped a San Bernardino flying squirrel in the San Jacinto 
Mountains in the unincorporated community of Idyllwild. Since 1913, 
there have been anecdotal sightings of San Bernardino flying squirrels 
in the San Jacinto Mountains, but no verified sightings or trapping 
records (USFS 2005a, p. 1228). A study of owl pellets from the San 
Jacinto Mountains did not find any San Bernardino flying squirrel 
remains (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999, p. 204). Additionally, the San 
Jacinto Centennial Resurvey by the San Diego Natural History Museum has 
failed to detect San Bernardino flying squirrels in their trapping 
efforts thus far (San Diego Natural History Museum 2011). Therefore, 
this historical habitat in the San Jacinto Mountains may no longer by 
occupied by the San Bernardino flying squirrel.
    The San Bernardino flying squirrel is genetically distinct from 
other subspecies of northern flying squirrels (Arbogast 2007, p. 844), 
and is morphologically different from other flying squirrels. The San 
Bernardino flying squirrel is paler in color and the smallest in size 
on a spectrum of subspecies from Alaska to the San Bernardino 
Mountains. The San Bernardino flying squirrel is an animal that belongs 
to the Order Rodentia, Family Sciuridae, and Subfamily Petauristinae 
(Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 1). It is designated as a species of 
special concern by the California Department of Fish and Game and 
identified as a sensitive species by the U.S. Forest Service (U.S. 
Forest Service [USFS] 2005a, p. 1127).
    The San Bernardino flying squirrel is an arboreal (lives in trees) 
rodent that is active year-round and primarily nocturnal (Smith 2007, 
p. 862). Mature squirrels are typically 11-12 inches (in) (28-31 
centimeters (cm)) in length and 3.5-5.5 ounces (98-158 grams) in weight 
(Grinnell and Swarth 1913, p. 329; Sumner 1927, p. 316; Butler et al. 
1991, p. 12). The San Bernardino flying squirrel's coloration is gray 
to wood-brown to cinnamon on the upper side of the body and pale cream 
or white on the underside (Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 2). As a 
subspecies of northern flying squirrel, it uses a furred membrane 
called a patagium that extends from wrist to ankle, thus enabling it to 
glide between trees (Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 2). The San 
Bernardino flying squirrel can easily glide over 60-ft (18-m) expanses 
and has been known to glide more than 300 ft (91 m) (Butler et al. 
1991, p. 19). This species tends to be long-lived with individuals 
living 4-7 years or more (Weigl 2007, p. 900). Northern flying 
squirrels are considered seasonal breeders (March through May) with 
typically one small litter (two to four young) per year; substantial 
energy is put into each offspring (Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 4; 
Smith 2007, p. 862). Two types of nests are normally used by northern 
flying squirrels: External leaf nests constructed on branches and nests 
in cavities of trees (Smith 2007, p. 866) that protect the squirrels 
from the elements, particularly during cold winters.
    The main food preference for San Bernardino flying squirrels is 
truffles, a type of hypogeous (underground) fungi that occurs 2-6 in 
(5-15 cm) below the surface of the forest floor. San Bernardino flying 
squirrels have been found to eat fungi from three genera: Melanogaster, 
Hymenogaster, and Gymnomyces (Butler et al. 1991, p. 20). These fungi 
form symbiotic relationships with the roots of trees under the surface 
of the soil. Squirrels digest the nutrients from the truffle while 
simultaneously spreading the truffle spores and inoculating trees 
throughout the forest and habitat of the squirrel (Pyare and Longland 
2001, p. 681; Weigl 2007, p. 900). When snow covers this food resource 
in the winter, the squirrels eat arboreal lichens and vegetation (Hall 
1991, p. 616, Pyare and Longland 2001, p. 684; Smith 2007, p. 869).
    San Bernardino flying squirrels are also hunted as prey by other 
species. Wells-Gosling and Heaney (1984, p. 4) identified the following 
known predators of northern flying squirrels: barn owls (Tylo alba), 
great horned owls (Bubo virginianus), red-tailed hawks (Buteo 
jamaicensis), spotted owls (Strix occidentalis), martens (Martes 
americana), domestic house cats (Felis catus), wolves (Canis lupus), 
weasels (Mustela spp.), and foxes (Vulpes spp. and Urocyon spp.) 
(Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 4). Identification of San Bernardino 
flying squirrel remains have been found in spotted owl pellets in the 
San Bernardino Mountains, making the spotted owl a known predator of 
the subspecies (Butler et al. 1991, p. 19; Smith et al. 1999, p. 24).
    We found no information in the petition or our files on the amount 
of space required by the San Bernardino flying squirrel. Other 
subspecies of northern flying squirrel have a range of 5-148 acres (ac) 
(2-60 hectares (ha)) of forest needed to support individuals of flying 
squirrels (Weigl 2007, p. 900). Typically, squirrels do not use all of 
this area on a daily basis, but can make longer journeys when searching 
for mates and food (Weigl 2007, p. 900). The San Bernardino flying 
squirrel inhabits high-elevation mixed-conifer forests approximately 
4,000-8,500 ft (1,585-2,590 m) in elevation (Grinnell 1933, p. 136; 
Butler et al. 1991, p. 2; USFS 2005a, p. 1127). The vegetation of these 
areas commonly includes Abies concolor (white fir), Quercus kelloggii 
(black oak), and Pinus jeffreyi (Jeffrey pine) (Rhoads 1897, p. 323; 
Sumner 1927, p. 315; Grinnell 1933, p. 136; Butler et al. 1991, pp. 2, 
5).
    San Bernardino flying squirrels are typically found in mature old-
growth forests, although second-growth stands may still support 
relatively high densities of the subspecies (Butler et al. 1991, p. 5). 
Microhabitat factors related to mature forests (such as stumps, snags, 
and dead trees) are used by the squirrel for nesting and foraging 
habitat (Butler et al. 1991, p. 5). The subspecies also tends to choose 
trees for dens or nests that are over 100 ft (30 m) tall with diameters 
(at breast height) greater than 30 in (76 cm) (Butler et al. 1991, p. 
17). Moisture is also a key factor in San Bernardino flying squirrel 
habitat, especially within the drier forests found in southern 
California (Smith 2007, p. 866). San Bernardino flying squirrels tend 
to occur more often in riparian areas, such as near a stream or spring 
(USFS 2005a, p. 1129), which retain an increased level of moisture that 
helps promote the growth of truffles (Meyer and North 2005, p. 1015). 
The canopy of a mature forest also helps to retain moisture and provide 
both shelter and protection from predators (USFS 2005a, p. 1129). 
Larger and older trees with associated woody debris and decaying logs 
also tend to be correlated with more abundant truffles in the soil 
(Weigl 2007, p. 900). Therefore, the San Bernardino flying squirrel's 
habitat seems to be related to conditions that are optimal for nesting 
and provide an ample supply of food.
    Trapping efforts historically detected low numbers of flying 
squirrels in the San Bernardino Mountains (Sumner 1927, p. 316). In our 
available information, we found only two recent trapping surveys (1991 
and 1998) that

[[Page 4976]]

included searching for San Bernardino flying squirrels through the San 
Bernardino National Forest (Butler et al. 1991, p. 13; Driessen et al. 
1998, p. 4). Butler et al. (1991, p. 14) estimated the density of San 
Bernardino flying squirrels in the San Bernardino Mountains at 0.94 
flying squirrels per ha (2.5 ac) based on one trapping grid. This 
estimate is in the lower range of northern flying squirrel densities 
found in the western United States (0.9-3.07 squirrels per ha (2.5 ac); 
Butler et al. 1991, p. 6). Butler et al. (1991, p. 10) found 22 San 
Bernardino flying squirrels during trapping, with the greatest number 
of squirrels on the west side of the Bear Mountain Ski Area. A trapping 
effort in 1998 captured six San Bernardino flying squirrels at a site 
near the unincorporated community of Fawnskin and three squirrels at a 
site near Bear Mountain (Driessen et al. 1998, pp. 4-6). However, no 
recent studies have been done on the abundance of San Bernardino flying 
squirrels in the San Bernardino Mountains.
    Butler et al. (1991, p. 26) looked for remains of San Bernardino 
flying squirrels in spotted owl pellets to estimate distribution of the 
species within the San Bernardino National Forest. They found 172 
instances of San Bernardino flying squirrels within pellets from 43 owl 
nest sites between 1987 and 1991 (Butler et al. 1991, p. 19). Using 
these data, they extrapolated habitat occupied by San Bernardino flying 
squirrels to estimate the following range: Sugarpine Mountain and Lake 
Silverwood in the west, east to Lake Arrowhead and Big Bear Lake 
regions, and south to parts of San Gorgonio Wilderness, the Thurman 
Flats area along Mill Creek, and the Raywood Flat area along the 
Gorgonio River (Butler et al. 1991, pp. 19-26). Rangers and biologists 
of the Mountaintop Ranger District (San Bernardino National Forest) 
have received numerous anecdotal reports and photographs of San 
Bernardino flying squirrels in residential areas of the unincorporated 
communities of Big Bear, Angeles Oaks, Fawnskin, and Lake Arrowhead 
(USFS 2005a, p. 1128).

Evaluation of Information for This Finding

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species 
to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an 
endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors 
described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:
    (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range;
    (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes;
    (C) Disease or predation;
    (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
    (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence.
    In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information 
regarding potential threats to the San Bernardino flying squirrel, as 
presented in the petition and other information available in our files, 
is substantial, thereby indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted. In several instances, the petitioner associated a potential 
threat with a factor different than the factor under which the Service 
generally analyzes that threat; those particular instances are noted 
below where appropriate and the threats are analyzed under the factor 
consistent with Service guidance. Our evaluation of this information is 
presented below.

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range

Climate Change--Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition states that the ecological impacts of climate change 
are causing alterations in the habitat of many species in response to 
rising temperatures (Bonfils et al. 2008, pp. 6421, 6422; CBD 2010, p. 
26), changes in precipitation and precipitation extremes (Leung et al. 
2004, pp. 75, 109; CBD 2010, p. 36), reduced snowpack in California 
mountains (Pierce et al. 2008, p. 6425; CBD 2010, p. 32), and increased 
drought duration and severity causing lower soil moisture (CBD 2010, p. 
37; Dominguez et al. 2010, pp. 499, 500). The petition claims that 
these climate changes are leading to a loss of the mixed-conifer/black-
oak forest habitat used by the San Bernardino flying squirrel. Abies 
concolor (white fir) and Pinus jeffreyi (Jeffrey pine) trees in the 
adjacent Santa Rosa Mountains have shown an upslope shift over the past 
30 years, a trend that may suggest a similar change is also occurring 
in the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains (Kelly and Goulden 
2008, p. 11823; CBD 2010, p. 40). The petition states that high-
elevation species have limited suitable habitat for movement in 
response to these climate-caused shifts in habitat, and may simply run 
out of suitable habitat to occupy. The petition states that San 
Bernardino flying squirrels are more vulnerable to climate change 
because they are a high-elevation species at the southern limit of the 
species' range where climate change impacts are expected to be more 
pronounced.
Climate Change--Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and 
Available in Service Files
    After our evaluation of information provided in the petition, we 
find that the petition provides information to support the claim that 
the San Bernardino flying squirrel's habitat may be affected by impacts 
due to climate change. Consideration of ongoing and projected climate 
change is a component of our analyses under the Endangered Species Act. 
Described in general terms, ``climate change'' refers to a change in 
the state of the climate (whether due to natural variability, human 
activity, or both) that can be identified by changes in the mean or 
variability of its properties (e.g., temperature, precipitation) and 
that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer 
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Various 
types of changes in climate can have direct or indirect effects on 
species, and these may be positive or negative depending on the species 
and other relevant considerations, such as the effects of interactions 
with nonclimate conditions (e.g., habitat fragmentation). We use our 
expert judgment to weigh relevant information, including uncertainty, 
in our consideration of various aspects of climate change that are 
relevant to the San Bernardino flying squirrel. Climate is influenced 
primarily by long-term patterns in air temperature and precipitation. 
Changes in temperature and rainfall patterns are expected to shift the 
distribution of ecosystems northward (IPCC 2007, p. 33) and up mountain 
slopes (McDonald and Brown 1992, pp. 411-412; IPCC 2007, p. 33). These 
predicted climate shifts could lead to a loss in conifer/black oak 
forests, thus potentially eliminating suitable nesting sites, food, and 
other habitat requirements for San Bernardino flying squirrels. Flying 
squirrels occur more frequently near riparian ecosystems (USFS 2005a, 
p. 1129; Smith 2007, p. 866); therefore, changes in water regime or 
decreased flow could affect vegetation structure necessary for the 
species (Smith 2007, p. 864). In summary, we find the petition presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
San Bernardino flying squirrel may be threatened by the effects of 
climate

[[Page 4977]]

change based on the present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range.
Forest Fuel-Reduction Practices--Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition notes that San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat is 
lost not only due to climate change, but also due to fuel reduction 
projects in the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains. Salvage 
logging and construction or maintenance of fuel breaks and Wildland-
Urban Interface (WUI) Defense and Threat Zones are also cited by the 
petitioner as threats to the habitat of the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel. The petition claims that these fuel-reduction practices 
reduce suitable habitat and also remove or damage important habitat 
components including important food resources (USFS 2005b, pp. 25-27; 
CBD 2010, p. 46). The petitioner states that fuel-reduction projects 
degrade the habitat of the flying squirrel.
Forest Fuel-Reduction Practices--Evaluation of Information Provided in 
the Petition and Available in Service Files
    We evaluated the information in the petition and in our files and 
found that forest management practices in the urban-forest interface of 
communities in the San Bernardino Mountains, in combination with other 
habitat threats, may add to the degradation of habitat structure or 
loss of habitat needed by the San Bernardino flying squirrel. Fuel 
treatments used to reduce the intensity of fires and the amount of fuel 
in the forest include removing dead trees and thinning the forest (USFS 
2005b, p. 27). These practices may remove habitat for San Bernardino 
flying squirrel nests (such as snags and dead trees) and the canopy 
structure needed to maintain a moist sheltered habitat. Additionally, 
fuel breaks and WUI defense zones are constructed along roads, 
ridgelines, and buildings to prevent the spread of wildfire (USFS 
2005b, p. 27). All vegetation is regularly removed from these WUI 
areas. Where San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat occurs within fuel 
break areas, these practices remove some vegetation used by flying 
squirrels. Although these planned actions may affect San Bernardino 
flying squirrel habitat within the San Bernardino National Forest, the 
U.S. Forest Service has committed to strategically locating fuel 
treatments with respect to natural resources and sensitive habitat 
(USFS 2005b, p. 26). Therefore, the San Bernardino Land Management Plan 
diminishes the impacts to San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat by 
strategically placing fuel management areas.
    Although we currently do not have information to support the 
determination that these practices decrease the food supply of San 
Bernardino flying squirrels, fuel-reduction practices near urban 
communities in the San Bernardino Mountains, combined with habitat loss 
from other sources, could impact the amount and quality of San 
Bernardino flying squirrel habitat. In summary, we find that the 
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that the San Bernardino flying squirrel may be threatened by 
the effects of fuel-reduction practices in the San Bernardino 
Mountains.
Urban Air Pollution--Information Provided in the Petition
    Urban air pollution was cited in the petition as a threat to the 
San Bernardino flying squirrel due to its ability to potentially change 
the availability of resources for food, cover, and nesting. 
Specifically, the petition claims that increased nitrogen deposition 
and ozone enrichment alter the diversity and availability of epiphytic 
lichen (a symbiotic organism composed of fungus and algae that grow on 
plants for mechanical support) communities that the squirrels depend on 
for food (Fenn et al. 2008, pp. 505, 508; CBD 2010, p. 56). This 
increase in nitrogen deposition and ozone enrichment was also cited by 
the petitioner as causing a decrease in the understory plant community 
that may provide protection from predators of flying squirrels (CBD 
2010, p. 56). Additionally, air pollution was cited as being 
responsible for a decrease in the diversity of fungi and an increase in 
susceptibility of trees to drought (CBD 2010, p. 57).
Urban Air Pollution--Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition 
and Available in Service Files
    We evaluated the information in the petition and in our files and 
found no information that connects urban air pollution to the 
degradation or loss of San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat. The 
petition suggests that urban air pollution is a threat to the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel due to its ability to potentially change the 
availability of resources for food, cover, and nesting. We acknowledge 
that information in our files and in the petition indicates that urban 
air pollution affects the Los Angeles basin, including the San 
Bernardino Mountains (Fenn et al. 2003, p. 396; Fenn et al. 2008, p. 
502), with nitrogen deposition impacts including eutrophication in 
water bodies, community composition changes in vegetation, low 
visibility in the area, and increased ozone pollutants (Fenn et al. 
2003, pp. 391-392). However, nitrogen emissions within the southern 
California region decreased from 1975-2000 due to stricter regulations 
(Fenn et al. 2003, p. 401). Our evaluation of information in the 
petition and our files did not reveal a connection between urban air 
pollution and San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat.
    Although urban air pollution has been observed in the region, the 
effects of this pollution on the San Bernardino flying squirrel are 
unknown. Fenn et al. (2008, p. 505) reported that increased nitrogen 
deposition can affect the diversity of acidophytes (symbiotic organisms 
that occur on host tress with an acidic pH) in a lichen community. 
While nitrogen deposition rates in the Los Angeles basin are high 
compared to the rest of the country, we do not have information on the 
impacts of decreased lichen diversity or availability to San Bernardino 
flying squirrels. There was no information presented in the petition or 
found in our files on the effects of urban air pollution on the flying 
squirrel's main source of food (truffles).
    The petitioner also claims that nitrogen deposition and ozone 
enrichment cause declines in understory plant diversity and higher 
susceptibility to drought in plants. The petitioner did not support 
their claim or provide information that documents a connection between 
the loss of understory plant diversity and the main truffle food source 
of the squirrel. The loss of truffles is based on the assumption that 
the decreasing trend seen with lichens would be similar in truffles 
(CBD 2010, p. 57). Therefore, after our evaluation of the information, 
the petition does not present evidence on how urban air pollution might 
affect the San Bernardino flying squirrel's main food source. While 
research shows that urban air pollution could be affecting the San 
Bernardino Mountains, it is unclear how these changes in plant and 
lichen availability, diversity, and physiology will directly or 
indirectly affect San Bernardino flying squirrel.
    With regards to urban air pollution, the petitioner does not 
provide citations to support assertions concerning the present or 
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or 
range for the San Bernardino flying squirrel. Their arguments rely on 
the loss of diversity and availability of acidophyte lichens, declines 
in understory plant diversity, and a higher

[[Page 4978]]

susceptibility to drought conditions in plants without drawing on 
evidence of how these changes are negatively affecting the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel. No information is provided to determine how 
these changes directly affect San Bernardino flying squirrels. 
Therefore, we find the petition, as well as other information in our 
files, does not present substantial scientific or commercial 
information to indicate that urban air pollution may present a threat 
to the San Bernardino flying squirrel such that the petitioned action 
may be warranted. We will, however, further investigate whether urban 
air pollution is a potential threat to the habitat of the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel in our 12-month status review.
Urban Development--Information Provided in the Petition
    Urban development in the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains 
was noted in the petition as a threat to San Bernardino flying squirrel 
habitat. The petition asserted that the expansion of existing 
communities and ski resorts, as well as new development, led to the 
loss and fragmentation of remaining habitat, accompanied by the need 
for further fuel reductions around these human structures (USFS 2005a, 
p. 1135; CBD 2010, pp. 57-59), and require expanded fuel management for 
WUI Defense Zones (CBD 2010, pp. 57-59). The petition states that the 
San Bernardino flying squirrel is threatened by loss and fragmentation 
of mature forest habitat in the San Bernardino Mountains area.
Urban Development--Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition 
and Available in Service Files
    Through the evaluation of the petition and information in our 
files, we found that several development projects are planned in areas 
that contain San Bernardino flying squirrels or within habitat 
considered suitable for the taxon (County of San Bernardino 2007, pp. 
15, 37; Michael Brandman Associates 2010, pp. 2-2, 2-3; PCR Services 
Corporation 2010, pp. 2-3, 3.C-26; Vista Community Planners 2010, p. 1-
3). The U.S. Forest Service states that urban development impacts the 
habitat of the San Bernardino flying squirrel (USFS 2005a, p. 1135). 
Urban development may affect San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat 
through direct loss of habitat, habitat fragmentation, and habitat 
modification through such activities as fuel treatment around 
structures (USFS 2005a, p. 1135). Habitat fragmentation may occur in 
some areas where openings created between trees are wider than 200 ft 
(61 m) and squirrels are unable to glide between trees (USFS 2005a, p. 
1135). One recent survey has a confirmed observation of San Bernardino 
flying squirrels within a development area (PCR Services Corporation 
2010, p. 3.C-26). Many urban development projects have incorporated 
best management practices during construction to benefit the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel (Michael Brandman Associates 2010, p. ES-26; 
PCR Services Corporation 2010, pp. ES-19, ES-20; Vista Community 
Planners 2010, p. 3-4).
    Although the Service has received notification letters and has 
commented on proposed projects (USFWS 2006, pp. 1-4), the Service does 
not have a regulatory role in the review of these proposed development 
projects because the San Bernardino flying squirrel is not a listed 
species under the Act. These proposed projects are expected to result 
in the direct loss of habitat, habitat fragmentation, or habitat 
modification. Therefore, we find the petition presents substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel may be threatened by urban development.
Summary of Factor A
    In summary, we find that the petition and other information in our 
files present substantial information indicating that environmental 
impacts resulting from climate change, forest fuel-reduction practices, 
and urban development may be threats to the habitat or range of the San 
Bernardino flying squirrel. Coupled with range reduction due to the 
likely extirpation of the squirrel in the San Jacinto Mountains, and 
low density of squirrels detected within the San Bernardino Mountains, 
these habitat impacts may affect the San Bernardino flying squirrel. 
The petition and other information in our files do not present 
substantial information indicating that urban air pollution may be a 
threat to the San Bernardino flying squirrel, although we will further 
investigate urban air pollution in our 12-month status review.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes

Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition asserts that San Bernardino flying squirrels are 
considered a ``nuisance species'' by nesting in attics, and that their 
removal may cause injury or death. Additionally, the petition notes the 
potential for San Bernardino flying squirrels to be captured as pets. 
The petition also includes the potential threat of house cat predation, 
which we discuss below under Factor C (Disease or Predation).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in 
Service Files
    We reviewed information in our files and the information provided 
by the petition, and did not find substantial information to indicate 
that San Bernardino flying squirrels are being injured or killed by 
people, nor was any reference information provided to support that they 
are collected as pets. There is some evidence that San Bernardino 
flying squirrels have been run over by vehicles in the San Bernardino 
National Forest (Chris Brown 2010, pers. comm.); however, there was no 
information presented in the petition or found in our files on the 
effects of such mortality on the San Bernardino flying squirrel. We 
find that the petition does not present substantial scientific or 
commercial information to indicate that overutilization for commercial, 
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes may present a threat 
to the San Bernardino flying squirrel such that the petitioned action 
may be warranted. However, we will further investigate whether injury 
or death caused by humans and collection as pets are potential threats 
to the San Bernardino flying squirrel in our 12-month status review.

C. Disease or Predation

Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition claims that, although San Bernardino flying squirrel 
diseases have not been well-studied, some evidence suggests that 
disease could pose a threat to the species. West Nile virus has been 
detected in grey squirrels (Sciurus griseus) in the San Bernardino 
Mountains. Additionally, the petition states that climate change may 
lead to increases in temperature and humidity, allowing new pathogens 
to expand northward and upslope, exposing the subspecies to new threats 
from disease. The petition also notes that San Bernardino flying 
squirrels face an increasing risk of predation from domestic house cats 
due to the expansion of communities and development in the San 
Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in 
Service Files
    We did not find substantial information to indicate that West Nile 
virus presents a threat to the San Bernardino flying squirrel. There 
was no information provided in the petition

[[Page 4979]]

(nor in our files) to support the petitioner's claim that West Nile 
virus is the direct cause of grey squirrel population declines, nor is 
there evidence that San Bernardino flying squirrels are being affected 
by the virus. While the petition provides some information to suggest 
that rising temperatures can expand the range and reproductive output 
of some pathogens, no information was provided to indicate that this is 
occurring within the range of the San Bernardino flying squirrel, nor 
does information in our files indicate that new pathogens threaten the 
subspecies now or in the future. However, we will further investigate 
whether West Nile virus is a potential threat to the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel in our 12-month status review.
    Information provided by the petitioner and readily available in our 
files indicates the San Bernardino flying squirrel may be threatened by 
predation from domestic and feral cats (Mitchell and Beck 1992, p. 200; 
USFS 2005a, pp. 1134, 1135), and this threat may be increasing due to 
increases in residential development within the range of this 
subspecies. Domestic cats can range and hunt across both urban and 
adjacent forested areas. Several residential development projects are 
planned in areas that contain San Bernardino flying squirrels or within 
suitable habitat for the species (County of San Bernardino 2007, pp. 
15, 37; Michael Brandman Associates 2010, pp. 2-2, 2-3; PCR Services 
Corporation 2010, pp. 2-3, 3.C-26; Vista Community Planners 2010, p. 1-
3). Domestic house cats are listed as a predator of northern flying 
squirrel species (Wells-Gosling and Heaney 1984, p. 4) and have been 
documented preying on the southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans; 
found through eastern North America south to Mexico and Honduras) 
(Mitchell and Beck 1992, p. 200). Additionally, Hall et al. (2000, p. 
23) found California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi) 
occasionally in the scat of feral cats. Research shows that feral cats 
show a preference for hunting native species in riparian habitats (Hall 
et al. 2000, p. 23), and it is reasonable to assume that feral and 
free-ranging cat abundance would increase as more residential 
development occurs (Jurek 1994, p. 1; Hall et al. 2000, p. 20).
    All species are subjected to some level of disease and predation 
under natural conditions, and the San Bernardino flying squirrel has 
many natural predators (see Background section). We do not have 
substantial information from the petition or in our files to suggest 
that this naturally occurring predation is outside the range of natural 
variation in the ecosystem. However, domestic and feral cats are an 
unnatural, nonnative, and possibly increasing predation threat to the 
San Bernardino flying squirrel (Mitchell and Beck 1992, p. 197).
    In summary, we find that the information provided in the petition, 
as well as other information in our files, presents substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned 
action may be warranted due to predation of the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel by domestic and feral cats. As stated above, we will also 
further investigate whether West Nile virus is a potential threat to 
the San Bernardino flying squirrel in our 12-month status review.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

International, Federal, and State Greenhouse Gas Regulatory 
Mechanisms--Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition states that current greenhouse gas regulatory 
mechanisms are inadequate to protect the San Bernardino flying squirrel 
and its habitat, particularly concerning impacts related to climate 
change. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and 
the Kyoto Protocol were noted as inadequate international regulatory 
mechanisms. The petitioners cite the Service's 2008 listing of the 
polar bear (Ursus maritimus), which concluded that there are no 
regulatory mechanisms that address the anthropogenic causes of climate 
change (such as greenhouse gas emissions) and the impact of warming 
temperatures and altered precipitation patterns on diminishing sea ice 
(73 FR 28288, May 15, 2008). California laws and initiatives (including 
the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and California Environmental 
Quality Act (CEQA)) and the Federal Clean Air Act, Energy Policy and 
Conservation Act, Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species Act were all 
also listed as inadequate greenhouse gas regulatory mechanisms.
International, Federal, and State Federal Greenhouse Gas Regulatory 
Mechanisms--Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and 
Available in Service Files
    For environmental impacts that may be due to climate change, as 
discussed above under Factor A, we will further explore any existing 
regulatory mechanisms that may ameliorate these effects in our 12-month 
status review.
San Bernardino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 
(LRMP)--Information Provided in the Petition
    The San Bernardino National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan (LRMP) is listed by the petitioner as inadequate to protect the 
San Bernardino flying squirrel or its habitat. The petitioner claims 
the Plan's fuel reduction program degrades the mixed-conifer forest 
habitat and does not adequately allow for monitoring and evaluation of 
impacts to the squirrel.
San Bernardino National Forest Land Management Plan (LRMP)--Evaluation 
of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in Service Files
    The San Bernardino National Forest LRMP was prepared in accordance 
with the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA), the regulatory 
mechanism directing the administration and management of national 
forests. The Plan's intent is to maintain forests in a sustainable 
manner to allow for social, economic, and ecological benefits to 
continue for future generations. The San Bernardino National Forest 
LRMP includes provisions specifically to reduce habitat loss and 
fragmentation and reduce conflicts with development (USFS 2005b, p. 
23). While we agree that creating fuel breaks may remove some 
components of San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat, we do not find 
substantial information that the NFMA, or the level of monitoring of 
impacts performed by the Forest Service, is inadequate in addressing 
the threat of habitat loss in the San Bernardino National Forest. After 
evaluation of the petition and information in our files, the petitioner 
does not provide adequate information to support the claim that San 
Bernardino National Forest LRMP is an inadequate existing regulatory 
mechanism for the San Bernardino flying squirrel.
State Regulatory Mechanisms--Information Provided in the Petition
    In addition to discussing State regulatory mechanisms related to 
greenhouse gas emissions, the petition claims local agencies are not 
adequately evaluating the individual and cumulative impacts of 
development projects on the San Bernardino flying squirrel despite its 
status as an ``Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species'' under CEQA 
(CBD 2010, p. 62).

[[Page 4980]]

State Regulatory Mechanisms--Evaluation of Information Provided in the 
Petition and Available in Service Files
    The petition provides no information to support the claim that 
local agencies are not adequately evaluating the individual and 
cumulative impacts of development projects on the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel under CEQA. CEQA does provide some protection for unlisted 
species through requiring public agencies to disclose environmental 
impacts of a project on native species and natural communities. CEQA 
also requires the identification and mitigation of project impacts, 
unless the agency makes a finding of overriding consideration. 
Therefore, CEQA does provide some protection for the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel and its habitat.
Summary of Factor D
    We find that the petition does not present substantial scientific 
or commercial information to indicate that the inadequacy of existing 
regulatory mechanisms may present a threat to the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel such that the petitioned action may be warranted. However, we 
will further investigate whether the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms is a potential threat to the San Bernardino flying squirrel 
in our 12-month status review.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence

Information Provided in the Petition
    The petition identified environmental impacts resulting from 
climate change as a factor impacting the San Bernardino flying 
squirrel. We know of no element of the San Bernardino flying squirrel's 
life history or physiology that would be directly affected by changes 
in climate. Predicted climate changes could impact forested 
environments upon which San Bernardino flying squirrels depend. 
Therefore, we addressed all climate change threats under Factor A 
above.
    The petition did not identify any other natural or manmade factors 
that could potentially impact the San Bernardino flying squirrel.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in 
Service Files
    The available information in our files does not indicate any threat 
to the San Bernardino flying squirrel from other natural or manmade 
factors affecting its continued existence. The limited range and low 
density of the subspecies suggest that San Bernardino flying squirrels 
may be more vulnerable to stochastic events such as large wildfires, as 
seen in other species with small populations and narrow ranges 
(Kohlmann et al. 2005, pp. 85, 86). However, we have no information at 
this time in regard to San Bernardino flying squirrels to support this 
theory, although we will further investigate whether this is a 
potential threat in our 12-month finding. Therefore, we find that the 
petition and information readily available in our files do not provide 
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that other 
natural or manmade factors may present a threat to the San Bernardino 
flying squirrel such that the petitioned action may be warranted.

Finding

    On the basis of our evaluation of the petition and other readily 
available data under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we determine that 
the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that listing the San Bernardino flying squirrel throughout 
its entire range may be warranted. This finding is based on information 
provided under Factors A and C. We determine that information provided 
under Factors B, D, and E does not present substantial information.
    Because we have found that the petition presents substantial 
information indicating that listing the San Bernardino flying squirrel 
may be warranted, we are initiating a status review to determine 
whether listing the San Bernardino flying squirrel under the Act is 
warranted.
    The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding 
differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard 
that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned 
action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status 
review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether 
a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough 
status review of the species, which is conducted following a 
substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and 
12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-
day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a 
warranted finding.

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at 
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Carlsbad Fish and 
Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Author

    The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the 
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.

    Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: January 19, 2012.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-2135 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P