Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64829-64843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22754]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0103; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AZ02

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Sonoyta Mud Turtle

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale), a
native subspecies from Arizona in the United States and Sonora in
Mexico, as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act
(Act). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's
protections to this subspecies. The effect of this regulation will be
to add this subspecies to the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
November 21, 2016. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by November 7, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R2-ES-2016-0103,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search
panel on the left

[[Page 64830]]

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 ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2016-0103; U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Public Comments below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office,
9828 North 31st Ave. #C3, Phoenix, AZ 85051-2517, by telephone 602-242-
0210 or by facsimile 602-242-2513. Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, if a species is
determined to be an endangered or threatened species throughout all or
a significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish
a proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our
proposal within one year. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the
maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to
be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Listing a species
as an endangered or threatened species and designations and revisions
of critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule. We will be
providing a proposal to designate critical habitat for the Sonoyta mud
turtle under the Act in the near future.
Our proposed determination. This document proposes the listing of
the Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale) as an
endangered species. The Sonoyta mud turtle is currently a candidate
species for which we have on file sufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threats to support preparation of a listing proposal,
but for which development of a listing regulation has been precluded by
other higher priority listing activities. This proposed rule reassesses
all available information regarding status of and threats to the
Sonoyta mud turtle.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we can determine that a
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five
factors after taking into account those efforts to protect such
species: (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. We have determined that Factors A (reduction or
loss of water availability; reduction or loss of riparian habitat
components; reduction or loss of invertebrate prey), C (nonnative
predators), and E (climate change) are and will continue to affect the
populations of Sonoyta mud turtle. The Act defines the term ``species''
to include any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants.
We will seek peer review. We will seek comments from independent
specialists to ensure that our designation is based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite these peer
reviewers to comment on our listing proposal. Because we will consider
all comments and information received during the comment period, our
final determinations may differ from this proposal.
To provide the necessary and most up-to-date information and
background on which to base our determination, we completed a Species
Status Assessment Report for the Sonoyta mud turtle (SSA Report;
Service 2016, entire), which is available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0103. The SSA Report
documents the results of the comprehensive biological status review for
the Sonoyta mud turtle and provides an account of the subspecies'
overall viability through the forecasting of the condition of surviving
populations into the future (Service 2016, entire). In the SSA Report,
we summarized the relevant biological data, described the past,
present, and likely future risk factors (causes and effects), and
conducted an analysis of the viability of the subspecies. The SSA
Report provides the scientific basis that informs our regulatory
decision regarding whether this subspecies should be listed under the
Act. This decision involves the application of standards within the
Act, its implementing regulations, and Service policies (see Finding).
The SSA Report contains the risk analysis on which this finding is
based, and the following discussion is a summary of the results and
conclusions from the SSA Report. Species experts and appropriate
agencies provided input into the development of the SSA Report.
Additionally, we will invite peer reviewers to provide a review of the
SSA Report.

Information Requested

Public Comments

We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry,
or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We
particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) The Sonoyta mud turtle's biology, range, and population trends,
including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including
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) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization,
disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
or other natural or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and existing regulations
that may be addressing those threats.
(4) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species,
including the locations of any additional populations of this species.
(5) Information related to climate change within the range the
Sonoyta mud turtle and how it may affect the species' habitat.
(6) The reasons why areas should or should not be designated as
critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
(7) The following specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of habitat for the Sonoyta mud
turtle.
(b) What areas, that are currently occupied and that contain the
physical

[[Page 64831]]

and biological features essential to the conservation of the Sonoyta
mud turtle, should be included in a critical habitat designation and
why.
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed for the essential features in potential critical habitat areas,
including managing for the potential effects of climate change.
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Also please note that 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, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described 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 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.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Public Hearing

Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public hearings on this
proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.

Peer Review

In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we have sought the
expert opinions of at least three appropriate and independent
specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is
to ensure that our listing determination is based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. The peer reviewers have
expertise in the Sonoyta mud turtle's biology, habitat, physical or
biological factors, or threats. We are inviting comment from the peer
reviewers during this public comment period.

Previous Federal Actions

We identified the Sonoyta mud turtle as a candidate species with a
listing priority number (LPN) of 3 in the annual Candidate Notice of
Review (CNOR) on September 19, 1997 (62 FR 49398). Candidates are those
fish, wildlife, and plants for which we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support
preparation of a listing proposal, but for which development of a
listing regulation is precluded by other higher priority listing
activities. We reaffirmed the Sonoyta mud turtle's candidate status in
subsequent annual CNORs (64 FR 57534, October 25, 1999; 66 FR 54808,
October 30, 2001; 67 FR 40657, June 13, 2002; 69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004;
70 FR 24870, May 11, 2005; 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR
69033, December 6, 2007; 73 FR 75175, December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804,
November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, November 10, 2010; and 76 FR 66370,
October 26, 2011; 77 FR 69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, November
22, 2013; 79 FR 72450, December 5, 2014; and 80 FR 80585, December 24,
2015). In 2012, based on a change in the timing of the threat from the
reduction of surface water to non-imminent, we changed the Sonoyta mud
turtle LPN from 3 to 6, which reflects a subspecies with threats that
are non-imminent and high in magnitude. We retained an LPN of 6 through
the latest CNOR.
On May 4, 2004, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity and others (petitioners) requesting the Service to
list 225 plants and animals as endangered under the Endangered Species
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the Sonoyta mud
turtle and to designate critical habitat. On September 9, 2011, the
Service entered into two settlement agreements regarding species on the
candidate list at that time (Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline
Litigation, No. 10-377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (D.D.C. May 10,
2011)). This proposed rule fulfills that requirement of those
settlement agreements for the Sonoyta mud turtle. We will also be
providing a proposal to designate critical habitat for the Sonoyta mud
turtle under the Act in the near future.

Background

The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the five
enumerated factors, and taking into account the effect of conservation
measures. The Act defines the term ``species'' to include any
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants. We completed a comprehensive
evaluation of the taxonomy, life history, ecology, and biological
status of the Sonoyta mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense
longifemorale), and we provide a thorough assessment of the species'
overall viability in the SSA Report (Service 2016, pp. 4-5; available
at http://www.regulations.gov and the Arizona Ecological Services
Office https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/).

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

The Sonoyta mud turtle is one of two recognized subspecies of
Sonora mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense) and has been differentiated
from the other subspecies based on morphometric (shape or form of
organism) analysis of shell measurements and mitochondrial DNA analysis
(Iverson 1981, p. 62; Rosen 2003, entire; Rosen et al. 2006, entire).
The other subspecies, K. s. sonoriense, is commonly referred to as
Sonora mud turtle. Figure 1 below depicts the location of each
subspecies. The Sonoyta mud turtle is a dark, medium-sized freshwater
turtle with a mottled pattern on the head, neck, and limbs. The Sonoyta
mud turtle is an isolated, native endemic (found in certain areas) of
southern Arizona and northern Sonora, Mexico. At Quitobaquito, annual
survivorship of adults (7-12 years old) and juveniles (<7 years old)
has been estimated by Rosen and Lowe (1996, p. 23) and Riedle et al.
(2012, p. 187) with similar results. Male survivorship ranged from
0.83-0.95, female survivorship ranged from 0.85-

[[Page 64832]]

0.95, and juvenile survivorship was lower than adult survivorship with
a gradual transition to higher survivorship as turtles moved towards
adulthood (Riedle et al. 2012, p. 187; Rosen and Lowe 1996, p. 23).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP21SE16.002

Sonoyta mud turtles occur in areas of an arid environment that
commonly experience drought and extreme heat (ambient temperatures can
exceed 45 degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (113 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)))
and in order to survive and complete life-history functions need both
perennial sources of water with aquatic vegetation and riparian areas
with moist soil. Sonoyta mud turtles spend most of their time in water
because water is essential to survival of individuals, as it provides
food and prevents desiccation. Water is also needed to provide moisture
for soil in riparian areas needed for nesting and estivation (spending
time in a prolonged state of torpor or dormancy) during drought.
Lastly, water with aquatic vegetation is needed to support invertebrate
prey and provide shelter from predators. Sonoyta mud turtles are
primarily opportunistic carnivores feeding on a variety of
invertebrates that are on the bottom of ponds and streams or attached
to submerged vegetation. In habitat with poor invertebrate fauna they
will also feed on small vertebrates, carrion, and plants (Hulse 1974,
pp. 197-198; Lovich et al. 2010, pp. 135-136; Rosen 1986, pp. 14 & 31;
Rosen and Lowe 1996a, pp. 32-35; Stanila et al. 2008, p. 345).
Sonoyta mud turtles are found in stream channels, and natural and
manmade ponds. Water in ponds is supplied by either springs or human
waste-water effluent. Aquatic habitat in ponds and stream channels is
usually shallow (to 2 meters (m) (7 feet (ft)), with a rocky or sandy
bottom and aquatic, emergent vegetation. Hatchlings, juveniles, and
subadults prefer shallow water with dense aquatic vegetation and
overhanging vegetation along the stream channel or pond margin that
provides foraging opportunities as well as protection from

[[Page 64833]]

predators. Adults prefer water with complex structure including
overhanging vegetation along the stream channel or pond margin but also
deeper sections of ponds where they forage for benthic invertebrates
along the bottom.
Terrestrial habitat of Sonoyta mud turtles is characterized by
riparian vegetation with moist soil that surrounds a pond or lines a
stream channel, and occurs along the banks of ponds and streams, as
well as in intermittently dry sections of the stream channel itself.
Sonoyta mud turtles in dry or low surface water reaches will either
travel along intermittent dry sections of a stream channel to find
water or they will estivate. Riparian vegetation provides some level of
protection from predators while turtles are out of the water, and it
also creates a microclimate that supports moist soil. Moist soil is
needed to prevent desiccation of adults and juveniles while traveling
between wetted sites or during estivation. Terrestrial estivation sites
consist of depressions under vegetation, soil, or organic matter; in
rock crevices; or in soil burrows under overhanging banks of streams or
ponds. Sonoyta mud turtles can endure lack of surface water for a short
time by estivating, but prolonged and recurrent estivation will reduce
fitness and increase mortality over the long term. Riparian vegetation
and corresponding moist soil are also needed for nest sites. In mid to
late July through September, females leave the water briefly to lay
eggs in terrestrial nests that maintain some level of moisture such as
vegetation litter, soil burrows, or possibly even in rock crevices. The
SSA Report has more detailed discussion of our evaluation of the
biological status of the Sonoyta mud turtle and the influences that may
affect its continued existence.
The Sonoyta mud turtle was historically found only in the Rio
Sonoyta basin in Arizona and Sonora, Mexico (Figure 3.1.1.a. in the SSA
Report). There were likely four populations of the Sonoyta mud turtle
distributed throughout the Rio Sonoyta basin in Arizona and Sonora (SSA
Report Figure 3.1.1.b.). One population was located at Quitobaquito in
southern Arizona in an area that is now within the Organ Pipe Cactus
National Monument. This population is north of the Rio Sonoyta, but
fossil spring deposits to the west of Quitobaquito Springs indicate
that, during floods or in times of greater natural flow, water filled
an adjacent wash and likely established a connection to the Rio Sonoyta
(Miller and Fuiman 1987, p. 603). The other three populations occurred
in distinct perennial reaches of the Rio Sonoyta in Sonora, Mexico,
just south of the U.S.-Mexico border. These included the Papalote
reach, Santo Domingo reach, and Sonoyta reach of Rio Sonoyta. The Rio
Sonoyta probably flowed continuously for short periods during the wet
season providing connectivity for mud turtles allowing for immigration
and emigration and then retracted during the dry season. This
assumption is based on our understanding of the historical literature
of hydrological conditions in the period 1854-1936 (Rosen et al. 2010,
p. 146). These three distinct perennial reaches of the Rio Sonoyta
(Papalote reach, Santo Domingo reach, and Sonoyta reach) together
likely provided 19-27 km (11.8-16.8 mi) of stream habitat for the
Sonoyta mud turtle (Table 1.). This amount is estimated from measuring
maps in the historical literature of hydrological conditions in the
period 1854-1936 (Rosen et al. 2010, p. 146). The best available
commercial and scientific data does not indicate any additional
populations.
Currently, there are five extant populations. The Quitobaquito
Springs population in Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, Arizona, is
extant (National Park Service (NPS) 2015, p. 1). Populations in the
Papalote reach and Sonoyta reach (now Xochimilco reach) of Rio Sonoyta
are extant, but perennial water flow in their reaches are reduced. The
historical population in the Santo Domingo reach of the Rio Sonoyta is
now likely extirpated due to loss of perennial surface water (P. Rosen,
pers. comm., 2016; Rosen 3004, pp. 4-5). The Sonoyta sewage lagoon and
Quitovac populations in Mexico were historically unknown and recently
found by Knowles et al. 2002 (p. 74) investigating potential new turtle
habitats in and around the Rio Sonoyta basin. Turtles were reported in
the Sonoyta sewage lagoon in October 2001 (Knowles et al. 2002, p. 4);
turtles either dispersed there from the upstream Xochimilco reach or
were released by humans soon after the sewage lagoon came into
operation in 1994. The Sonoyta sewage lagoon population is in the town
of Sonoyta adjacent to the Rio Sonoyta. The Sonoyta sewage lagoon is a
settling pond for raw wastewater from the town of Sonoyta. Sonoyta mud
turtles were also discovered in spring runs and ponds at Quitovac in
March 2002 (Knowles et al. 2002, p. 72). Quitovac is located about 40
km (25 mi) southwest of the town of Sonoyta and outside of the Rio
Sonoyta basin, in the Rio Guadalupe basin. It is unclear when this
population was established, and geography suggests that the turtle
population may have resulted from human introduction of turtles.
The perennial water supporting all five turtle populations has been
reduced, and all populations are small and isolated. Discharge from
Quitobaquito springs has diminished by 42 percent over the past 35
years with 5,500 cubic feet (cf)/day average discharge measured in the
period 1981-1992 down to 3,157 cf/day measured from 2005-present
(Carruth 1996, pp. 13, 21; Peter Holm, pers. comm., 2016). Thus far,
declining spring flow has been associated with < 30 centimeters (cm)
(12 inches (in)) of surface water level decline at the pond, the depth
of which ranges from 81 to 94 cm (32 to 37 inches). Today, the five
Sonoyta mud turtle populations are isolated from one another even more
than they used to be historically because the lengths of the distinct
perennial reaches in the Rio Sonoyta have contracted. The perennial
waters in these reaches have decreased by 80 to 92 percent from 19-27
km (11.8-16.8 mi) historically to approximately 1.5-5.5 km (0.9-3.4 mi)
currently (Table 1. Historical and Current Population Data below, and
Figure 3.1.1 of the SSA Report). Periodic movement between populations
in the Rio Sonoyta basin may occur during periods of high rainfall, but
the extent of immigration and emigration of turtles is unknown.
However, we assume that movement among populations is rare to limited
due to distances between populations coupled with limited hydrological
connection. The Quitovac population is outside of the Rio Sonoyta
watershed, in the Rio Guadalupe basin, and has no present-day
hydrological connection to the Rio Sonoyta.
Table 1 lists the status and condition of each population. We
believe that the historical locations of the Sonoyta mud turtle
occurred in the areas of the Rio Sonoyta basin that maintained
perennial surface water via springs fed by ground water and that these
locations may no longer have reliable water to support mud turtles
(Paredes-Aguilar and Rosen 2003, p. 2; Rosen et al. 2010, p. 155).

[[Page 64834]]

Table 1--Historical and Current Population Data of the Sonoyta Mud Turtle
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abundance Distribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical Current
Location Land ownership --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status
Historical Current Perennial stream km Perennial stream km
(mi) (mi) Area ha (ac)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quitobaquito.................... Organ Pipe Cactus Several hundred in 1950s 2015 = 141 25. (-0.15)................ (0.67).................
Avg = 110 \1\.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mexico
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rio Sonoyta:
Papalote Reach (or the Agua Mexican NPS, Rio unknown................. 2003 = >100, low 5-6.................... 1.5 to 3............... pool size 2-4.5 m\2\... Extant.
Dulce). Sonoyta, Pinacate density. (3.1-3.7).............. (0.9-1.9).............. (22-48 ft\2\)..........
Biosphere Reserve. Now = unknown.....
Santo Domingo............... Ejido Josefa Ortiz unknown................. 0................. 4-6.................... 0...................... ....................... Extirpated.
de Dominguez. (2.5-3.7)..............
Sonoyta Reach (reduced to Town of Sonoyta.... unknown................. 2002 = ~345....... 10-15.................. 0 to 2.5............... pool size 10-48 m\2\... Extant.
Xochimilco Reach). Now = unknown..... (6.2-9.3).............. (0-1.6)................ (107-516 ft\2\)........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rio Sonoyta Total....... ................... ........................ .................. 19-27
(11.8-16.8)............
Sonoyta Sewage Lagoon....... Town of Sonoyta.... N/A..................... N/A............... N/A.................... N/A.................... >5..................... Extant.
(>12.3)................
Quitovac.................... Quitovac y su anexo N/A..................... 2002 = ~200....... N/A.................... N/A.................... >1..................... Extant.
el Chujubabi. (>2.5).................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimates from Quitobaquito include adults only; no young-of-the-year are included. This average is from 2001 to 2015.

For the Sonoyta mud turtle to maintain viability, its populations,
or some portion of its populations, must be resilient enough to
withstand stochastic events such as fluctuations in water levels,
habitat modification, and introduction of nonnative predators. In a
highly resilient Sonoyta mud turtle population, turtles are able to
complete their life functions and breeding is successful enough to
maintain a population that is able to withstand stochastic events.
Influencing these population factors are elements of Sonoyta mud turtle
habitat (surface water availability, amount of riparian habitat and
benthic invertebrates, and lack of nonnative predators) that determine
whether survivorship among age classes is achieved in Sonoyta mud
turtle populations, thereby increasing the resiliency of populations.
Population resiliency categories for the Sonoyta mud turtle are
described in Table 3.3.1. of the SSA Report, and habitat factors used
to develop these resiliency levels are discussed below and outlined in
Table 3.4.2. of the SSA Report. As discussed below, water is the
primary limiting factor, and, therefore, water drives the condition of
each population.
Representation in the form of genetic or ecological diversity is
important to maintain the Sonoyta mud turtle's capacity to adapt to
future environmental changes. Genetic investigations (Rosen 2003, pp.
8-13; Rosen et al. 2006, p. 10) indicate the subspecies exhibits some
level of genetic diversity among populations at Quitobaquito, in the
Papalote reach and the Xochimilco reach of the Rio Sonoyta, and at
Quitovac. The population in the Sonoyta sewage lagoon was not sampled,
so we have no information on genetics of this population. Exchange of
genetic material between Quitobaquito and populations along the Rio
Sonoyta is unlikely due to lack of hydrological connection. Exchange of
genetic material among populations of the Rio Sonoyta is likely a rare
event limited to instances when a mud turtle may move during the wet
season if there are prolonged periods of precipitation that cause a
high flow event along the Rio Sonoyta or connects these populations by
providing stepping stones of wetted habitat through which mud turtles
could move or disperse.
The Sonoyta mud turtle historically occupied habitat in two
ecological settings including cienegas (a spring that is usually a wet,
marshy area at the foot of a mountain, in a canyon, or on the edge of a
grassland where ground water bubbles to the surface) and streams, both
supported by ground water via springs. Currently, there are still
populations within stream habitat but all the cienegas have either
dried completely or been modified from their natural state. There are
also two manmade impoundments that were created to capture spring flow
that now support Sonoyta mud turtles. Currently, the Sonoyta mud turtle
exhibits genetic and ecological diversity. Maintaining representation
in the form of genetic or ecological diversity is important to maintain
the Sonoyta mud turtle's capacity to adapt to future environmental
changes. The loss of Quitobaquito, Quitovac, and either Rio Sonoyta
Papalote or Rio Sonoyta Xochimilco populations would reduce the
representation for the species.
Redundancy describes the ability of a species to withstand
catastrophic events. Measured by the number of populations, their
resiliency, and their distribution (and connectivity), redundancy
gauges the probability that the species has a margin of safety to
withstand or can bounce back from catastrophic events (such as a rare
destructive natural event or episode involving one or more
populations). The Sonoyta mud turtle needs multiple resilient
populations spread over their range distributed in such a way that a
catastrophic event will not result in the loss of all populations.
Currently four of the populations are spread throughout a small area of
the Rio Sonoyta basin, and one population is in the northern part of
the Rio Guadalupe basin. It is possible that a catastrophic event such
as severe drought could impact three of

[[Page 64835]]

the five populations--Papalote reach, Xochimilco reach, and
Quitobaquito. Conversely, catastrophic events such as disease would not
likely impact multiple populations since the hydrological connection
among populations is limited or nonexistent. While there could be rare
or limited movement of individuals between populations, all populations
are isolated in terms of one population being able to repopulate
another should one be lost due to a catastrophic event.
The Service evaluated the stressors affecting the conservation
status of the Sonoyta mud turtle, which include water loss, loss of
riparian habitat, amount of invertebrate prey, presence of nonnative
species, and land management activities incompatible with maintaining
needed habitat (such as dredging). Of these stressors, water loss
caused by drought and ground water pumping, both of which are
exacerbated by climate change, and changes to wastewater infrastructure
are the primary activities impacting the Sonoyta mud turtle. The other
stressors to the Sonoyta mud turtle include the loss of invertebrate
prey and presence of nonnative species. These stressors can be additive
in terms of effects to populations that are already stressed by water
loss. The following is a summary of these stressors affecting the
Sonoyta mud turtle. These stressors are described in detail in Appendix
A of the SSA Report.
Ground water pumping impacts the amount of surface water in
habitats used by Sonoyta mud turtles because the perennial sections of
the Rio Sonoyta as well as the pond at Quitobaquito and Quitovac are
supplied by ground water. As with all streams, the Rio Sonoyta exists
in an area where runoff has concentrated into a definable channel. In
most of the Rio Sonoyta, the channel cuts into dry soils, so that flow
is ephemeral and only in response to precipitation. In the Papalote and
Xochimilco reaches of the Rio Sonoyta where Sonoyta mud turtles live,
the defined channel intersects regional ground water held in storage,
the ground water saturates streamside channel bottom soils, and water
is discharged to the stream. In a hypothetical, unaffected system,
equilibrium exists so that recharge and discharge volumes of water are
equal. When pumping occurs in such a ground water system, it alters
this equilibrium so that less water is available for discharge to the
stream and springs and reduces the amount of surface water available to
the Sonoyta mud turtle.
Ground water can also reach the ground surface outside of a stream
channel via springs like those that supply water to habitats of the
Sonoyta mud turtle at Quitobaquito and Quitovac. Quitobaquito Springs
is likely supplied by ground water but is considered somewhat isolated
from the regional aquifer in the Sonoyta Valley (Carruth 1996, pp. 14,
18). It is possible that there is a connection between the two systems
so that Quitobaquito Springs could experience a delayed effect by an
increase in ground water drawdown occurring in Mexico (Carruth 1996, p.
21). Discharge from Quitobaquito Springs has diminished by 42 percent
over the past 35 years with 5,500 cf/day average discharge measured
from 1981-1992 down to 3,157 cf/day measured from 2005-present (Carruth
1996, pp. 13, 21; Peter Holm, pers. comm., 2016). Reasons for this
decrease are unknown.
Human demands on ground water in the Rio Sonoyta basin include
agriculture and municipal use to support a growing population, both of
which are almost wholly dependent on ground water. Irrigated
agriculture is widespread in the Rio Sonoyta Valley, and continued
development in the towns of Sonoyta and Lukeville is placing increased
demands on limited ground water availability. Potential ground water
use in the Rio Sonoyta watershed is greater than the estimated recharge
rate. Based on total number of wells installed along the Rio Sonoyta,
existing capacity for wells to withdraw water is six times the ground
water recharge (Pearson and Connor 2000, p. 388). Although we do not
have any recent observations of actual ground water use, we can assume
that ground water pumping currently exceeds recharge based on negative
trends of depth to ground water measured from 1992 to 2010 at Organ
Pipe Cactus National Monument in wells that are close to the
agricultural zone of Sonoyta, Sonora (OPCNM 2011, p. 8).
At Quitovac, there are five springs that provide water to the
impounded pond. The pond at Quitovac is used for watering small numbers
of livestock and irrigating fruit trees (Aguirre and Rosen 2003, p. 11;
USFWS files). One of the five springs at Quitovac was not flowing into
the pond during a visit to the site in 2015 (D. Duncan, pers. obs.,
2015). There has also been gold mining in the area surrounding
Quitovac, and mine exploration and development continue, all of which
require water. In addition, surface water diversion for agriculture has
occurred in the past and is likely to continue into the future. The
Quitovac population is in the Rio Guadalupe basin and, therefore, not
likely affected by ground water pumping in the Rio Sonoyta. While
ground water pumping could occur in this basin in the future, we
currently have no information indicating the likelihood. Land
management actions, such as dredging, also impact the Quitovac
population. Partial dredging of the pond has occurred at least twice
(Nabhan et al. 1982, p. 130; Nabhan 2008, p. 252; USFWS files). During
a visit to the site on June 3, 2015, after the pond and spring heads
had been completely excavated by dredging, only a single turtle with a
damaged shell was found at the spring head (D. Duncan, pers. obs.,
2015).
The surface water necessary for habitat of the subspecies generally
is fed by ground water recharge. This recharge comes from infiltration
of precipitation along mountain fronts and in ephemeral channels.
However, drought conditions that have persisted for the past 20 years
have likely contributed to decreased ground water recharge in the Rio
Sonoyta basin and Rio Guadalupe basin. Decreased precipitation and
increased evaporation related to increased duration of drought
conditions have contributed to reduced surface water available to
support the subspecies at all population sites. Climate model
projections predict a shift to increasing dryness in the Southwest as
early as 2021-2040 (Seager et al. 2007, p. 1181). Streamflow is
predicted to decrease in the Southwest even if precipitation were to
increase moderately (Nash and Gleick 1993, State of New Mexico 2005,
Hoerling and Eischeid 2007) because warmer surface air temperatures
lead to increased evaporation, increased evapotranspiration, and
decreased soil moisture. These three factors would lead to decreased
streamflow even if precipitation increased moderately (Garfin 2005,
Seager et al. 2007). The effect of decreased streamflow is that streams
become smaller, intermittent, or dry, and thereby reduce the amount of
habitat available for Sonoyta mud turtles. A smaller stream is affected
more by air temperature than a larger one, exacerbating the effects of
both warm and cold air temperatures (Smith and Lavis 1975). Although
Sonoyta mud turtles evolved in an extremely arid climate and have
survived drought in the past, it is anticipated that a prolonged,
intense drought would affect all populations, in particular those
occupying the Rio Sonoyta, which is likely to become entirely
ephemeral.
Habitat for the subspecies requires riparian vegetation, which is
also dependent on surface water and ground water recharge. When ground
water discharge is of sufficient volume to saturate streamside areas,
riparian

[[Page 64836]]

vegetation develops. This occurrence also extends to manmade ponds
created to capture ground water discharge. The extent and persistence
of this vegetation depends on the depth to ground water. In the case of
the perennial sections of the Rio Sonoyta as well as the ponds at
Quitobaquito and Quitovac, riparian vegetation has established where
its root systems can reach the alluvial ground water. The use of water
by the riparian vegetation (evapotranspiration) is itself a discharge
of ground water, and can even affect surface flow in the adjacent
stream or surface level in a pond. Because ground water extraction in
the Rio Sonoyta basin continues to reduce depth to ground water,
riparian vegetation has likely been reduced in the Rio Sonoyta, and
streamside areas are now occupied by drought-tolerant plants, which
generally lack the same ecological value of riparian vegetation.
Riparian vegetation is associated with increased ecological site
conditions; organic matter produced by plants is a major contributor to
soil development, structure, and moisture. The below-ground component
of riparian vegetation further enhances floodplain and bank water
storage because root growth, and subsequent root decay, creates
conditions that increase rates of infiltration of rainwater and
floodwater, thereby enhancing ground water recharge and base-flow
replenishment. Riparian vegetation, despite its own water use, also
moderates the direct evaporation of water from a stream or pond. Open
water in Sonoyta mud turtle habitats likely exhibits relatively high
evaporation compared to areas shaded by riparian overstory (Goodrich et
al. 2000, pp. 292-293). Riparian vegetation surrounding water features
provides essential habitat for all life stages of turtles. As riparian
vegetation dies due to declining ground water, the physical and
biological processes are reversed and a cascade of interconnected
impacts begins. Dead trees decompose and no longer stabilize floodplain
soils, which are then readily eroded away. The loss of floodplain soils
and their ability to store flood waters reduces the gradual release of
post-flood infiltrated water back to the stream, further reducing
surface flows. Reductions in riparian habitat will also decrease
subsurface moisture needed for nesting sites; drought refuge for
hatchlings, juvenile and adult turtles; and shelter from large flooding
events for juvenile and adult turtles. Decreased riparian vegetation
will lead to deterioration of the microclimate that provides soil
moisture to nest sites and burrows. (See Section 4.2 and Appendix A of
the SSA Report).
In addition to loss of habitat associated with ground water pumping
and drought in the Rio Sonoyta basin, changes to wastewater
infrastructure in the town of Sonoyta have reduced surface water
available in the Xochimilco reach of the Rio Sonoyta, but increased
habitat for the subspecies in the Sonoyta sewage lagoon. Most of the
wastewater that used to be discharged directly into the Xochimilco
reach and provided a constant source of surface water that maintained
perennial flow in this reach is now redirected to the Sonoyta sewage
lagoon. Wastewater runoff is now likely limited to individual
homesteads. Consequently, surface water available for Sonoyta mud
turtles is greatly reduced in the Xochimilco reach of the Rio Sonoyta.
It is likely that there is always a small pool of water in or near the
dam site at Xochimilco, either from springs or urban wastewater from
individual homesteads atop the arroyo wall. When wastewater that used
to contribute surface water to the Xochimilco reach was redirected to
the Sonoyta sewage lagoon, the amount of perennial water for Sonoyta
mud turtles increased at the lagoon.
Sonoyta mud turtles continue to persist at the Sonoyta sewage
lagoon, and this site is not subject to effects of ground water
withdrawal and drought due to a consistent inflow of wastewater. The
Sonoyta sewage lagoon is within the floodplain of the Rio Sonoyta, and
might contribute some level of recharge to the Rio Sonoyta basin
through seepage and outflow. There is a high likelihood that the sewage
lagoon in the town of Sonoyta will be replaced by a new wastewater
treatment plant about 2.4 km (1.5 mi) northwest of the existing sewage
lagoon in the next few years. Efforts will be made to translocate as
many Sonoyta mud turtles as possible to the new wastewater facility
from the sewage lagoon; however, it is unknown what amount this will
be. The new wastewater treatment plant will serve an additional 35
percent of the town of Sonoyta's residences and will, therefore, be
larger overall. However, the habitat available to Sonoyta mud turtles
will be reduced by more than 75 percent. There will be a greater number
of lagoons at the new wastewater treatment plant, but only one will be
unlined and provide habitat for the Sonoyta mud turtle. Lining
precludes the development of habitat for Sonoyta mud turtles including
aquatic and riparian vegetation (See Figure 3.2.1 of the SSA Report).
This unlined pond will provide less than 25 percent of the habitat that
is currently present at the Sonoyta sewage lagoon.
Effluent flowing through the new wastewater treatment facility will
be discharged into the Rio Sonoyta. This activity could improve
recharge of ground water and create perennial flow in the river
immediately downstream of the new wastewater treatment plant, which in
turn would provide additional habitat to the subspecies, although the
extent is unknown. Based on the persistence of turtles at the Sonoyta
sewage lagoon and increased wastewater volume to the new wastewater
treatment plant, we would expect that turtles at the new wastewater
treatment plant would also persist. Overall, wastewater from the town
of Sonoyta will continue to provide a perennial water source that
should continue to support one population of the Sonoyta mud turtle;
however, since the available habitat is reduced by more than 75
percent, the population size will likely be reduced.
Reduced surface water and associated decrease in riparian
vegetation, regardless of the cause, shrinks overall habitat amount and
quality causing crowding and increased competition for limited
resources (Stanila 2009 p. 45). Lack of surface water for a short time
outside the typical dry season may be endured by individual Sonoyta mud
turtles periodically, but multiple years without sufficient perennial
water will reduce fitness and increase mortality. Sonoyta mud turtles
in drying pond habitats or low surface water reaches will burrow in
banks to escape desiccation for a short period of time. After time,
burrows themselves may become too dry, turtles will lose fat reserves
due to lack of foraging opportunity, females may not have viable eggs
due to lack of nutrition and fat reserves, and eventually turtles will
die from either starvation or desiccation. Potential population level
impacts from reduced surface water and drought include lower
reproductive rates, reduced recruitment, reduced population growth
rate, or changes in distribution.
Decreasing availability of prey is another factor tied to surface
water availability and corresponding loss of habitat that may impact
the subspecies. We have very limited information on prey availability
for the known populations of mud turtles. However, a reduction in
surface water will impact the amount of aquatic invertebrate prey
available and result in increased competition for prey. Aquatic
invertebrates, the primary food source for Sonoyta mud turtles, need
surface water and emergent vegetation to

[[Page 64837]]

survive and complete their life-history functions. Water permanence
will affect the diversity of invertebrate prey available for mud
turtles, with ephemeral habitats having lower invertebrate diversity
than intermittent or perennial habitats (Stanila 2009, p. 38). A
reduction in water and emergent vegetation due to ground water pumping
will reduce the amount of aquatic invertebrate prey for Sonoyta mud
turtles. Adequate prey allows juvenile turtles to grow rapidly before
becoming adults and allows adults to have sufficient lipid content to
support reproduction. Poor body condition (i.e., low lipids) may be
associated with lower clutch size (total number of eggs produced) and,
therefore, lower population growth (Rosen and Lowe 1996, pp. 40-43).
There are also native fish at Quitobaquito that may compete with
turtles for invertebrate prey. Stomach analysis of turtles at
Quitobaquito revealed animals were primarily consuming young shoots of
bulrush even though benthic invertebrates were present in the aquatic
system. Rosen and Lowe (1996, pp. 32, 41) thought that turtles may not
be consuming invertebrates due to competition with native subspecies of
desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius eremus) found at Quitobaquito.
Desert pupfish are well known to feed on many of the same invertebrates
that Sonoran mud turtles consume (Rosen and Lowe 1996, p. 41). Pupfish
densities at Quitobaquito are similar or greater than the density used
in an experimental pond study that demonstrated strong effects of
desert pupfish on aquatic invertebrate abundance, so that competition
between Sonoyta mud turtles and desert pupfish is plausible (Rosen and
Lowe, p. 41).
Similarly, like competition with desert pupfish, the establishment
of nonnative aquatic vertebrate species may also affect future
persistence of the Sonoyta mud turtle. Currently two of the five
populations of Sonoyta mud turtles exist with some nonnative species
present. Black bullheads and western mosquitofish were introduced to
the Rio Sonoyta Papalote reach, and blue tilapia were introduced at
Quitovac. These species are now established at these two sites (Rosen
et al. 2010, pp. 153-154; Minkley et al. 2013, p. 289). All of these
fish species likely compete with Sonoyta mud turtles for benthic
invertebrates or alter the invertebrate community so that benthic
invertebrates are reduced. Other nonnative aquatic species including
American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), crayfish (Orconectes spp.
and Cherax spp.), large sunfish (centrarchids), and exotic turtles such
as red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans) are not currently
present in areas occupied by the Sonoyta mud turtle, but could be
released and become established, as they have been in many Sonoran mud
turtle populations in the United States (Fernandez and Rosen 1996, pp.
39-41; Hensley et al. 2010, pp. 175-176; Drost et al. 2011, p. 33).
Bullfrogs, crayfish, large sunfish and catfish (ictalurids) are
known to prey upon hatchling and juvenile Sonoran mud turtles.
Crayfish, in particular, could decimate a population if introduced
(Fernandez and Rosen 1996, pp. 41-43; Hensley et al. 2010, pp. 186-
187). In addition, crayfish, African cichlid fishes including tilapia,
western mosquitofish, and exotic turtles may also disrupt the food
chain, which could alter the invertebrate community (Taylor et al.
1984, pp. 330-331; Fernandez and Rosen 1996, pp. 39-40; Duncan 2013, p.
1). This, in turn, could decrease type and amount of benthic
invertebrate prey available to Sonoyta mud turtles (Fernandez and Rosen
1996, pp. 39-40) (See Section 4.4 and Appendix A of the SSA Report). In
addition, turtles isolated in pools as a result of decreased surface
water availability may be subject to increased predation from nonnative
aquatic predators. Although we cannot specifically quantify effects to
Sonoyta mud turtle populations now or in the immediate future we are
highly confident that nonnatives are impacting the Papalote and
Quitovac populations as described above. In addition, it is possible
that in the near future the remaining three populations could become
infested with the nonnative species listed above.
In summary, ground water withdrawal and changes to wastewater
infrastructure are highly likely to continue into the immediate future
and to negatively affect base flow that supports three populations of
the Sonoyta mud turtle basin. There is also the potential that Quitovac
may be impacted by ground water losses in the future, although we are
highly uncertain of this outcome. The sewage lagoon and new wastewater
treatment plant are not likely to be impacted by ground water pumping,
and may actually contribute to ground water recharge of the Rio
Sonoyta. Ongoing and future drought periods are likely to continue and
will affect the availability of water in both the United States and
Mexico (See Section 4.1 and Appendix A of the SSA Report). In addition,
drought is likely to be exacerbated by future climate change,
decreasing water availability and increasing evapotranspiration losses.
Effects from climate change are expected to impact all but one
population of Sonoyta mud turtles (the sewage lagoon). Although we
cannot specifically quantify effects to available surface water, we are
highly confident that there will be a reduction in surface water due to
ground water pumping and changes to wastewater infrastructure in
addition to impacts from climate change. This reduction in surface
water reduces or in some populations could eliminate habitat Sonoyta
mud turtles need to survive desiccation or complete life-history
functions as described above. Our assessment of water reduction in the
SSA Report indicates that water loss is an immediate and high-magnitude
threat to the species. Quitovac is likely to undergo partial dredging
again (and possibly complete dredging), and nonnatives are likely to be
introduced again. Nonnatives are still present in the Papalote reach,
and it is likely, based on the spread of nonnatives, that all sites
could receive nonnative species in the immediate future.
Management actions undertaken by the National Park Service and
Quitobaquito Rio Sonoyta Working Group have ameliorated many of the
risks to the single Sonoyta mud turtle population in the United States
at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, and, as explained below, these
actions are expected to continue. The Quitobaquito Rio Sonoyta Working
Group consists of biologists and managers from the National Park
Service (NPS), Arizona Game and Fish Department, FWS, University of
Arizona, Arizona Sonora Desert Museum, the National Commission of
Natural Protected Areas in Mexico, and private citizens interested in
conservation of aquatic native species in the Rio Sonoyta basin of
Arizona and Sonora. Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument has already
implemented numerous conservation measures recommended for the Sonoyta
mud turtle by the Quitobaquito Rio Sonoyta Working Group. Since the
1970's the NPS has implemented conservation measures including trucking
water, spring renovation, strengthening the dike that keeps water in
the pond, re-lining parts of the pond, and removing bulrush, that have
benefited the Quitobaquito population. Efforts by Organ Pipe Cactus
National Monument eventually resulted in water levels in the pond
stabilizing near historical norms.
One risk that cannot be addressed at Organ Pipe Cactus National
Monument is diminishing spring flow that supplies water to Quitobaquito
Pond, as the cause is still unknown. (See Section 4.5

[[Page 64838]]

of the SSA Report). Per the National Park Service Organic Act (16
U.S.C. 1-4), the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument will survey for,
protect, and strive to recover all species native to national park
system units. Based on their past conservation efforts at Quitobaquito,
the NPS will continue conservation efforts to maintain water at
Quitobaquito pond, to the extent within their power, as they have done
since the 1950s and protect the Sonoyta mud turtle as they have since
the late 1980s as this is a native species. Further, the endangered
desert pupfish and designated critical habitat co-occurs with the
Sonoyta mud turtle within the Quitobaquito pond. Some conservation
actions to protect the desert pupfish and critical habitat will also
protect the Sonoyta mud turtle and its aquatic habitat, as well as some
of the riparian habitat surrounding Quitobaquito Springs.
Quitobaquito Rio Sonoyta Working Group management actions in Mexico
have included defining the ecological status and distribution of the
Sonoyta mud turtle in Sonora, creating new habitat to replace lost
habitat, removing nonnative aquatic species, and outreach. Primary
actions included nonnative removal and fencing to prevent livestock.
However, the fencing has been removed and nonnatives have been
reintroduced by the locals. These management actions have not addressed
most of the risks to the four populations of the Sonoyta mud turtle in
Mexico (See Section 4.5, Management Actions, of the SSA Report). The
Quitobaquito and Rio Sonoyta Working Group has been developing a
conservation assessment and conservation agreement for five aquatic
species for a number of years. This agreement is meant to promote the
conservation of a number of species dependent on the aquatic and
riparian habitats of the Rio Sonoyta watershed. The agreement would
take the form of a Candidate Conservation Agreement. The Sonoyta mud
turtle is a species listed in the conservation agreement; it would
benefit from the conservation actions proposed. It is unclear when this
agreement will be finalized.
In the SSA, we described the viability of the species in a way that
characterizes the needs of the species in terms of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation. Resiliency is having sufficiently large
populations for the species to withstand stochastic events. Stochastic
events are those events arising from random factors such as
fluctuations in water levels, habitat modification, or introduction of
nonnative predators. Redundancy is having a sufficient number of
populations for the species to withstand catastrophic events. A
catastrophic event is a rare destructive event or episode involving one
or more populations and occurring suddenly. Representation is having
the breadth of genetic and ecological diversity for the species to
adapt to changing environmental conditions. In the SSA Report,
populations of the Sonoyta mud turtle having a low level of resiliency
are not considered to contribute to the redundancy and representation
of the subspecies due to low probability that the populations will
persist.
Currently, we consider the Quitobaquito and Sonoyta sewage lagoon
populations of the Sonoyta mud turtle to have high resiliency, the
Papalote reach population to have moderate resiliency, and the
Xochimilco reach and Quitovac populations to have low resiliency. The
Quitobaquito population occurs in an area of relatively good habitat
and exhibits high survivorship among all age classes with increasing
recruitment of juveniles. Resiliency of the four populations in Mexico
is less certain as habitat has been greatly reduced in the Papalote and
Xochimilco reaches, survivorship among age classes is unknown at the
Sonoyta sewage lagoon due to lack of any surveys, and survivorship
among age classes is unknown at Quitovac due to recent dredging of all
of the aquatic habitat available for mud turtles. Current abundance of
mud turtle populations in Mexico is unknown, and we have low confidence
that numbers have remained stable.
The viability of the Sonoyta mud turtle depends on maintaining
multiple resilient populations over time. The resiliency of Sonoyta mud
turtle populations depends on surface water availability, amount of
riparian habitat and benthic invertebrates, and absence of nonnative
competitors and predators. We expect the five extant Sonoyta mud turtle
populations to experience changes to all of these aspects of their
habitat, although it may be in different ways under the different
conditions. Given our uncertainty regarding when habitats of the
Sonoyta mud turtle will experience a reduction or elimination of
surface water and corresponding loss of riparian habitat in the future,
we forecasted future conditions of the Sonoyta mud turtle under three
future plausible scenarios over three time periods (Chapter 5 of the
SSA Report). These scenarios focus on surface water availability
because this is the driving factor for the other variables impacting
Sonoyta mud turtle populations--riparian habitat and prey. For example,
if there is a somewhat reduced amount of surface water there would be a
reduced amount or reduced quality of riparian area and prey. These
factors in turn impact reproduction and recruitment, which drive the
population growth. The three scenarios were:
(1) Best Case--All habitats occupied by Sonoyta mud turtle
experience no measurable drop in surface water and nonnatives are
absent.
(2) Moderate Case--Surface water in habitats occupied by Sonoyta
mud turtle is somewhat reduced but not eliminated, and nonnatives
remain at status quo.
(3) Worst Case--All surface water at sites occupied by Sonoyta mud
turtle is extremely reduced or eliminated, and nonnatives are present
in all populations.
We selected three useful timeframes for our forecasting: 7 years,
35 years, and 70 years. We chose 7 years based on the area's drought
cycle, 35 years because it incorporates both the maximum lifespan of
the species and the mid-century climate projections for the
southwestern United States, and 70 years because it is within the range
of the available drought and climate change model forecasts and is
about twice the maximum lifespan of the species (Lenart 2008, entire;
Stritthold et al. 2012, entire; Garfin et al. 2013, entire; P. Holms,
2016, pers. comm.). Within these timeframes, we considered the three
different scenarios that spanned a range of potential conditions that
we believe are important influences on the status of the species, and
our results describe this range of possible conditions in terms of our
projections of how many and where Sonoyta mud turtle populations will
persist into the near term.
We assessed the moderate-case scenario as the most likely to occur
because this scenario is based on the threats identified above
continuing at their current intensity and scale through the various
time steps. This scenario projected the current level of stressors
associated with the status quo conditions. The moderate-case scenario
was the most likely to occur, as explained in the SSA. While full
analyses of all scenarios are available in the SSA report, we are only
presenting the full results of the moderate-case scenario here because
it gives the most realistic projection of the future condition of the
subspecies. The worst-case scenario was not found to be very likely
because, as explained in the SSA, it is unlikely that all populations
will lose all or most of their surface water. Conversely, the best-case
scenario of improving conditions was found not to

[[Page 64839]]

be very likely to occur because this scenario projected no reduction in
surface water, which is an unlikely and unrealistic scenario given
current climate change projections. Please refer to the SSA report
(Service 2016, Chapter 5) for the full analysis of future scenarios.
Under the moderate-case scenario within the 7-year timeframe, we
expect the Sonoyta mud turtle's viability to be characterized by lower
levels of resiliency, representation, and redundancy than it has
currently, which is already reduced as described above. We expect
populations at Xochimilco reach and Quitovac to have low population
resiliency. In addition, we expect the Sonoyta sewage lagoon to have
low population resiliency and its possible extirpation within 7 years.
This possible outcome is dependent on exactly when the new wastewater
treatment plant begins operating, which will replace the Sonoyta sewage
lagoon. The new population at the new wastewater treatment plant will
be stocked with animals from the Sonoyta sewage lagoon population.
However, aquatic habitat at the new wastewater treatment plant is
smaller than the sewage lagoon, and riparian habitat will essentially
be nonexistent at first, so the population resiliency at the wastewater
treatment plant is expected to be only moderate at the 7-year time
step, whereas, the Sonoyta sewage lagoon currently has high population
resiliency.
We anticipate the population at Quitobaquito will be highly
resilient and the Papalote reach will be moderately resilient at this
time step. We expect the three populations with low resiliency, Sonoyta
sewage lagoon, Xochimilco reach, and Quitovac, will have only some or
few individuals that can complete life functions and breed
successfully, and the populations are decreasing and not able to
withstand stochastic events. Further, it is possible that one of the
low-resiliency populations, Sonoyta sewage lagoon, will be extirpated
by this time. Two of the three remaining populations are projected to
be moderately resilient and will occur in highly managed habitats--the
Quitobaquito population with a spring-fed pond and the wastewater
treatment plant that is maintained by wastewater effluent. The Santo
Domingo population is considered extirpated. We expect representation
and redundancy will also be substantially reduced due to the three
populations of low resiliency being functionally extirpated. This
leaves three populations with only one being highly resilient and two
being moderately resilient, including the wastewater treatment plant,
which will be reduced in size from the sewage lagoon it is replacing.

Table 2--Rio Sonoyta Mud Turtle Current and Near-Future Population Condition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderate-case scenario
Country Population name Current condition --------------------------
7-year time step
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States..................... Quitobaquito......... High...................... High.
Mexico............................ Papalote Reach (Agua Moderate.................. Moderate.
Dulce).
Sonoyta Sewage Lagoon High...................... Low.
New Sonoyta 0......................... Moderate.
wastewater treatment
plant.
Xochimilco Reach Low....................... Low.
(Sonoyta Reach).
Quitovac............. Low....................... Low.
Santo Domingo........ 0......................... 0.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination

Section 4 of the Act, and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section
4(b)(1)(a), the Secretary is to make endangered or threatened
determinations required by section 4(a)(1) solely on the basis of the
best scientific and commercial data available to her after conducting a
review of the status of the species and after taking into account
conservation efforts by States or foreign nations. The standards for
determining whether a species is endangered or threatened are provided
in section 3 of the Act. An endangered species is any species that is
``in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range.'' A threatened species is any species that is ``likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.'' Per section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, in reviewing the status of the species to determine if it meets
the definition of endangered or of threatened, we determine whether any
species is an endangered species or a threatened species because of any
of the following five factors: (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; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be
warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination.
The fundamental question before the Service is whether the
subspecies warrants protection as an endangered or threatened species
under the Act. To make this determination, we evaluated extinction
risk, described in terms of the current condition of populations and
their distribution (taking into account the risk factors (i.e.,
threats, stressors) and their effects on those populations). For any
species, as population conditions decline and distribution shrinks, the
species' overall viability declines and extinction risk increases.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Sonoyta mud turtle. Currently, there are five extant
populations, and all are significantly isolated from one another such
that recolonization of areas previously extirpated or areas that may be
extirpated is extremely unlikely. Expert input provided during the
development of the SSA Report indicated that, under the current
situation for the five currently occupied sites, connectivity or
movement among the populations is a rare occurrence. The species' range
has been reduced by 80 to 92 percent in the Rio Sonoyta (Factor A) in
Mexico, and current distribution is limited to five populations in
three ponds totaling <7 ha (<15.5 ac) and two perennial sections of the
Rio Sonoyta totaling 1.5 to 5.5 km (0.9 to 3.4 mi). Two historical
populations are extirpated due to loss of perennial water. There are
two newly discovered extant populations in addition to the three
historical

[[Page 64840]]

populations that remain. Only three of these populations are of
sufficient resiliency to withstand stochastic events.
Habitat loss from anthropogenic ground water withdrawals and long-
term drought is occurring rangewide and is likely to continue and
increase in the near term (Factor A; Factor E). This reduction in water
restricts the limited available habitat and decreases the resiliency of
the Sonoyta mud turtle within those habitats. We find that ongoing
drought is likely to continue and be exacerbated by climate change,
decreasing water availability and increasing evapotranspiration losses
(Factor A). This threat is ongoing, rangewide, and expected to increase
in the future. Predation by nonnative aquatic species has occurred at
two sites in Mexico, although there is uncertainty with regard to the
population effects (Factor C). Predation by nonnative aquatic species
has been shown to reduce recruitment and population size of other
populations of Sonora mud turtle and it is likely to occur in Sonoyta
mud turtle populations in the future. The Quitovac population's current
habitat was just recently completely dredged, and the status of Sonoyta
mud turtles is unknown. Partial dredging in the near term is likely
based on past dredging activity. It is reasonably likely that a
catastrophic event could occur anytime within the initial 7-year time
step analyzed in the SSA Report and that current population resiliency
and redundancy are inadequate to maintain population viability.
The implementation of the conservation measures by the National
Park Service and the Quitobaquito Rio Sonoyta Working Group has
resulted in maintaining the only Sonoyta mud turtle population in the
United States and reduces the risk of loss of at least one population
in Mexico. However, the conservation measures do not alleviate the
threats that are influencing the resiliency, redundancy, and
representation of the Sonoyta mud turtle across its range (as described
above).
The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``that is likely to
become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range
within the foreseeable future.'' Based on the information presented in
the SSA Report for the Sonoyta mud turtle, and the discussion above, we
find that the best available scientific and commercial information
indicates that the Sonoyta mud turtle is presently in danger of
extinction throughout its entire range based on the severity and
immediacy of threats currently impacting the species. The overall range
has been significantly reduced; the limited remaining habitat and
populations are currently threatened by an increase in ground water
pumping, which results in reduced spring flows and, therefore, reduced
surface water. Reduced surface water results in reduced aquatic habitat
for the subspecies where they spend the majority of their time and is
needed to avoid desiccation. Further, the reduction in surface water
impacts aquatic vegetation used by the Sonoyta mud turtle for cover and
by their prey species. Lastly, the reduction in ground water reduces
the soil moisture of the riparian area resulting in habitat that is too
dry for Sonoyta mud turtles to use for estivation and nesting.
These factors acting in combination reduce the overall viability of
the species. The risk of extinction is high because the five remaining
populations are small, isolated, and have limited, if any, potential
for recolonization. The estimated current and near-term future
conditions of the known Sonoyta mud turtle populations as described in
the SSA Report lead us to find that the condition and distribution of
populations do not provide sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and
representation for this subspecies; therefore, we find that the
subspecies meets the definition of an endangered species under the Act.
Accordingly, on the basis of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we propose listing the Sonoyta mud turtle as
endangered in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act.
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the
Sonoyta mud turtle is endangered throughout all of its range, no
portion of its range can be ``significant'' for purposes of the
definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.'' See
the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion
of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of
``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 37577, July 1,
2014).
We find that a threatened species status is not appropriate for the
Sonoyta mud turtle because of the existing contracted range (loss of
80-92 percent of its historic range in Mexico) compared to the
historical range, the primary threats are occurring rangewide and are
not localized, and the threats are impacting the species now and are
ongoing. We find the Sonoyta mud turtle to be in danger of extinction
now.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, private
organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the
States and other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried
out for listed species. The protection required by Federal agencies and
the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part,
below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning
components of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed and preparation of a draft and final
recovery plan. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation
of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to be used to
develop a recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address
continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive
information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for
downlisting or delisting, and methods for monitoring recovery progress.
Recovery plans also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate
their recovery efforts and provide estimates of the cost of
implementing recovery tasks. Recovery teams (composed of species
experts, Federal and State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and
stakeholders) are often established to develop recovery plans. When
completed, the recovery outline, draft

[[Page 64841]]

recovery plan, and the final recovery plan will be available on our Web
site (http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our Arizona Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses,
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat
restoration (e.g., restoration of water availability and associated
native vegetation), research, captive propagation and reintroduction,
and outreach and education. The recovery of many listed species cannot
be accomplished solely on Federal lands because their range may occur
primarily or solely on non-Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these
species requires cooperative conservation efforts on private, State,
and Tribal lands, and, in the case of the Sonoyta mud turtle,
cooperation with our counterparts in Mexico. If this species is listed,
funding for recovery actions will be available from a variety of
sources, including Federal budgets, State programs, and cost-share
grants for non-Federal landowners, the academic community, and
nongovernmental organizations. In addition, pursuant to section 6 of
the Act, the State of Arizona would be eligible for Federal funds to
implement management actions that promote the protection or recovery of
the Sonoyta mud turtle. Information on our grant programs that are
available to aid species recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the Sonoyta mud turtle is only proposed for listing under
the Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in
participating in recovery efforts for this species. Additionally, we
invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as an
endangered or threatened species and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of a species proposed for listing or result in
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a
species is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or
carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a
Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the
Service.
Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require
conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding
paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering
activities on Federal lands administered by the National Park Service
(Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument); issuance of section 404 Clean
Water Act permits by the Army Corps of Engineers; and construction and
maintenance of roads or highways by the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection of the Department of Homeland Security.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife.
The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at 50 CFR
17.21, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of
these) endangered wildlife within the United States or on the high
seas. In addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive,
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the
course of commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate
or foreign commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess,
sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has
been taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the
Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land
management agencies, and State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to
endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes:
For scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the
species, and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful
activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the
species proposed for listing. At this time, we are unable to identify
specific activities that would not be considered to result in a
violation of section 9 of the Act because the Sonoyta mud turtle sites
where the species currently occurs are subject to a variety of
potential activities, and it is likely that site-specific conservation
measures may be needed for activities that may directly or indirectly
affect the species. Additionally, most activities subject to
consultation include direct effects to the species and/or the aquatic
and riparian habitats to which it is inextricably tied. It is difficult
to predict an activity already subject to consultation that would not
result in anticipated take of individual Sonoyta mud turtles.
Based on the best available information, the following activities
may potentially result in a violation of section 9 of the Act; this
list is not comprehensive:
(1) Unauthorized handling or collecting of the species.
(2) Destruction/alteration of the species' habitat by discharge of
fill material, draining, ditching, tiling, pond construction, stream
channelization or diversion, removal or destruction of emergent aquatic
vegetation; or diversion or alteration of surface or ground water flow
into or out of the wetland (i.e., due to roads, impoundments, discharge
pipes, stormwater detention basins, etc.) or in any body of water in
which the Sonoyta mud turtle is known to occur.
(3) Direct or indirect destruction of riparian habitat.
(4) Introduction of nonnative species that compete with or prey
upon the Sonoyta mud turtle, such as the introduction of nonnative fish
and crayfish species.
(5) Release of biological control agents that attack any life stage
of this species.
(6) Discharge of chemicals or fill material into any waters in
which the Sonoyta mud turtle is known to occur.
Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Arizona
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

[[Page 64842]]

Required Determinations

Clarity of the Rule

We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to tribes.
Based on cultural claims maps and reservation boundaries we have on
file, the distribution of the Sonoyta mud turtle overlaps areas that
may be of interest to the following tribes: Tohono O'odham Nation,
Quechan Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Colorado River Indian Tribes, and Cocopah
Indian Tribe. On November 20, 2015, we notified these tribes via letter
of our intent to conduct a status assessment for the purpose of
determining whether the subspecies warrants protection under the Act.
In our letter we offered to meet with the tribe to discuss the process,
potential impacts to the tribes, and how tribal information may be used
in our assessment. In addition, we requested any information they have
regarding the subspecies. To date we have not received a response from
these any of these tribes. Upon publication of this proposed rule we
will send notification letters to these tribes and again extend an
invitation to meet and discuss.

References Cited

A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
in the SSA Report (U.S. Fish and Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016.
Species status assessment report for the Sonoyta mud turtle
(Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale), Version 1.0. Albuquerque, NM)
that is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket Number FWS-R2-ES-2016-0103, at https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/, and upon request from the Arizona Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Arizona Ecological Services Field Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless
otherwise noted.

0
2. In Sec. 17.11(h), add an entry for ``Turtle, Sonoyta mud'' to the
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order under
REPTILES to read as set forth below:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
(h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status citations and
applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
Reptiles

* * * * * * *
Turtle, Sonoyta mud........... Kinosternon sonoriense Wherever found.. E [Federal
longifemorale. Register
citation when
published as a
final rule.]

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64843]]

Dated: September 7, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22754 Filed 9-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P