[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 24 (Monday, February 6, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7658-7660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02467]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150; FF09E21000 FXES11130900000234]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings 
for Three Petitions To Delist the Grizzly Bear in the Lower-48 States

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notification of petition findings and initiation of status 
review.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 
three 90-day findings on petitions to delist the grizzly bear in the 
lower-48 States (Ursus arctos horribilis) under the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). One petition requests delisting the 
grizzly bear in the lower-48 States, and the other two petitions 
request delisting populations in two specific ecosystems, the Northern 
Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) and the Greater Yellowstone 
Ecosystem (GYE). Based on our review, we find that the petitions 
pertaining to the two ecosystems present substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be 
warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this document, we 
announce that we plan to initiate a status review to determine whether 
the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status review 
is comprehensive, we are requesting new scientific and commercial data 
and other information regarding the grizzly bear in the NCDE and GYE 
and factors that may affect its status in those ecosystems, including 
the adequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms to address threats now 
and in the foreseeable future. Based on the status review, we will 
issue a 12-month petition finding, which will address whether or not 
the petitioned actions are warranted, in accordance with the Act. If we 
ultimately do find that one or more of the petitioned actions is 
warranted and proceed to propose to delist one or more distinct 
population segments (DPSs), we will consider the effects of any 
proposed delisting on the ongoing recovery of the larger listed entity 
of grizzly bears. We also found that a petition to delist the grizzly 
bear in the lower-48 states on the basis of it not being a valid 
listable entity did not present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted; 
therefore, we will take no further action on that petition.

DATES: The findings announced in this document were made on February 6, 
2023.

ADDRESSES: 
    Supporting documents: A summary of the basis for the petition 
findings contained in this document is available on https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150. In addition, 
this supporting information is available by contacting the person 
specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Status reviews: If you have new scientific or commercial data or 
other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the grizzly 
bear in the NCDE and GYE or its habitats, particularly new information 
available since our March 30, 2021, 5-year status review, please 
provide those data or information by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150, 
which is the docket number for this action. Then, click on the 
``Search'' button. After finding the correct document, you may submit 
information by clicking on ``Comment.'' If your information will fit in 
the provided comment box, please use this feature of https://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our information 
review procedures. If you attach your information as a separate 
document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach 
multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a 
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments 
Processing, Attn: FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send information only by the methods described 
above. Any information we receive during the course of our status 
review will be considered, and we will post all information we receive 
on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post 
any personal information you provide us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hilary Cooley, Grizzly Bear Recovery 
Coordinator, Grizzly Bear Recovery Office, telephone: 406-243-4903, 
email: [email protected]. Individuals in the United States who are 
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay 
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay 
services offered within their country to make international calls to 
the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Information Submitted for a Status Review

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning the status 
of, or threats to, the grizzly bear in the NCDE and GYE or its 
habitats, by one of the methods listed above in ADDRESSES. We request 
that you send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES. 
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.
    If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy 
that includes personal identifying information, you

[[Page 7659]]

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 https://www.regulations.gov.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing these findings, will be available 
for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.

Background

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533 et seq.) and its implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to, removing species 
from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) in 50 CFR part 17. Section 
4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on whether a 
petition to add a species to the Lists (i.e., ``list'' a species), 
remove a species from the Lists (i.e., ``delist'' a species), or change 
a listed species' status from endangered to threatened or from 
threatened to endangered (i.e., ``reclassify'' a species) presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, 
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the 
petition and publish the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
    Our regulations establish that substantial scientific or commercial 
information with regard to a 90-day petition finding refers to credible 
scientific or commercial information in support of the petition's 
claims such that a reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific 
review would conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be 
warranted (50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(i)).
    A species may be determined to be an endangered species or a 
threatened species because of one or more of the five factors described 
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). The five factors 
are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A);
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes (Factor B);
    (c) Disease or predation (Factor C);
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); 
and
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence (Factor E).
    These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused 
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued 
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for 
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as 
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative 
effects or may have positive effects.
    We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or 
conditions that are known to, or are reasonably likely to, affect 
individuals of a species negatively. The term ``threat'' includes 
actions or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct 
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration 
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat'' 
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action 
or condition, or the action or condition itself. However, the mere 
identification of any threat(s) may not be sufficient to compel a 
finding that the information in the petition is substantial information 
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The information 
presented in a petition to delist a species must include evidence 
sufficient to suggest that these threats may no longer be affecting the 
species to the point that the species may no longer meet the definition 
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act.
    If we find that a petition presents such information, our 
subsequent status review will evaluate all identified threats by 
considering the individual-, population-, and species--level effects 
and the expected response by the species. We will evaluate individual 
threats and their expected effects on the species, then analyze the 
cumulative effect of the threats on the species as a whole. We also 
consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions 
and conditions that are expected to have positive effects on the 
species--such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation 
efforts that may ameliorate threats. It is only after conducting this 
cumulative analysis of threats and the actions that may ameliorate 
them, and the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable 
future, that we can determine whether the species meets the definition 
of an endangered species or threatened species under the Act. If we 
find that a petition presents substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted, the 
Act requires that we promptly commence a review of the status of the 
species, and we will subsequently complete a status review.

History of the Petitions Received

    On December 17, 2021, we received a petition from the State of 
Montana to designate and delist a Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem 
distinct population segment (DPS) of the grizzly bear under the Act. 
The NCDE occurs only in Montana. On January 21, 2022, we received a 
petition from the State of Wyoming to designate and delist a Greater 
Yellowstone Ecosystem DPS of the grizzly bear under the Act. The GYE 
occurs in portions of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. On March 9, 2022, we 
received a petition from the State of Idaho to delist the grizzly bear 
in the lower-48 States. All three petitions clearly identified 
themselves as such and included the requisite identification 
information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(c). This 
finding addresses all three petitions.

Summary of Petition Findings

Evaluation of a Petition To Designate and Delist an NCDE DPS of Grizzly 
Bear

    The grizzly bear is currently listed in 50 CFR 17.11(h) as a 
threatened species in the lower-48 States (see 40 FR 31734; July 28, 
1975). The State of Montana's petition requests that we designate and 
delist an NCDE DPS of the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States. We find 
that the petition presents substantial information that the NCDE may 
qualify as a DPS. Additionally, we find that the petition presents 
substantial information that the population size and trends have 
improved and that threats have been reduced in the NCDE such that the 
population may no longer meet the definition of a threatened species 
under the Act. Therefore, we find that the petition presents 
substantial information that the petitioned action, designating and 
then delisting an NCDE DPS, may be warranted and we will commence a 
status review to determine if the action is warranted. During our 
status review, we will fully evaluate all relevant threats and 
conservation actions in detail based on the best scientific and 
commercial data available, including newly enacted State regulations in 
the State of Montana, such as MCA 87-6-106. We will determine whether 
these and other existing state regulatory mechanisms are adequate to 
address the threat of increased human-caused mortality such that an 
affected DPS is not in danger of extinction now or likely to become so 
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range.

[[Page 7660]]

Evaluation of a Petition To Designate and Delist a GYE DPS of Grizzly 
Bear

    The State of Wyoming's petition requests that we designate and 
delist a GYE DPS of the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States. We find 
that the petition presents substantial information that the GYE may 
qualify as a DPS. Additionally, we find that the petition presents 
substantial information that the population size and trends have 
improved and that threats have been reduced in the GYE such that the 
population may no longer meet the definition of a threatened species 
under the Act. Therefore, we find that the petition presents 
substantial information that the petitioned action, designating and 
then delisting a GYE DPS, may be warranted and we will commence a 
status review to determine if the action is warranted. Our status 
review will evaluate all relevant threats and conservation actions in 
detail based on the best scientific and commercial data available, 
including whether existing state regulatory mechanisms, such as 
controls on human-caused mortality or implementation of recalibration, 
are adequate to support a finding that a GYE DPS is not in danger of 
extinction now or likely to become so within the foreseeable future 
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

Evaluation of a Petition To Delist the Grizzly Bear in the Lower-48 
States

    The State of Idaho's petition requests that we delist the grizzly 
bear in the lower-48 States. The petition asserts that the currently 
listed entity, the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States is not a valid 
DPS and, therefore, does not meet the Act's definition of a ``species'' 
and it should be delisted on that basis. The petitioner did not make 
any claims related to the biological status of or threats to the 
grizzly bear in the lower-48 States. Specifically, the petitioner 
claims that the listed entity: (1) does not identify a grizzly bear 
population; (2) does not identify a population that interbreeds when 
mature; and (3) is not discrete from grizzly bears in Canada. As 
summarized in our petition response form, the petitioner failed to 
present any credible scientific or commercial information with respect 
to certain claims; therefore, we do not consider the petition to 
present substantial information supporting those claims. With respect 
to the remaining claims, for the reasons discussed in our petition 
response form we conclude that the petitioner failed to present 
credible scientific or commercial information such that a reasonable 
person conducting an impartial scientific review would conclude that 
removing the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States from the List of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife may be warranted. Therefore, we find 
that the petition does not provide substantial information that the 
petitioned action may be warranted.

Evaluation of Information Summary and Finding

    We reviewed the petitions, sources cited in the petitions, and 
other readily available information. We considered the factors under 
section 4(a)(1) of the Act and assessed the effect that the threats 
identified within the factors may have on the grizzly bear in the 
lower-48 States now and in the foreseeable future. We also considered 
existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts that may 
ameliorate, reduce, or exacerbate the threats. Based on our review of 
the petitions and readily available information regarding the 
improvement in condition and reduction of threats in the NCDE and GYE, 
we find that the two petitions concerning the NCDE and GYE present 
credible and substantial information that the petitioned actions may be 
warranted.
    We appreciate the three States' historical commitment to recover 
grizzly bears, particularly conflict prevention efforts that have been 
effective in reducing human-caused mortality, and we hope that these 
efforts will continue and expand as needed to provide for effective 
management of these populations in the future. Although notable 
progress has been made to address deficiencies in future state 
management identified by the courts, the impact of recently enacted 
state statutes affecting these two grizzly bear populations is of 
concern and will require careful consideration. We will fully evaluate 
these and all other potential threats and associated state regulatory 
mechanisms, as well as the validity of each DPS, in detail based on the 
best scientific and commercial data available when we conduct the 
status assessment and make the 12-month finding.
    In accordance with the requirements of the statute, our 12-month 
findings on the two petitions to identify and delist DPSs (the NCDE and 
GYE) will be based upon the best scientific and commercial data 
available and will not be limited to the information presented in the 
petitions. Similarly, if we make one or more ``warranted'' 12-month 
findings, we will identify the DPS or DPSs in that finding on the basis 
of the best scientific and commercial data available; we will not be 
limited to the possible DPSs described in the petitions. If we 
ultimately do find that one or more of the petitioned actions is 
warranted and proceed to propose to delist one or more DPSs, we will 
consider the effects of any proposed delisting on the ongoing recovery 
of the larger listed entity of grizzly bears.
    Finally, we find that the petition from the State of Idaho does not 
present substantial information that the grizzly bear in the lower-48 
States is not a valid ``species'' as defined by the Act.
    The basis for our finding on these petitions, and other information 
regarding our review of the petitions, including the 2011 and 2021 5-
year status reviews, can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under 
Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150 under the Supporting Documents section.

Conclusion

    On the basis of our evaluation of the information presented in the 
petitions under sections 4(b)(3)(A) and 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the Act, we 
have determined that two of the three petitions summarized above for 
the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States present substantial scientific 
or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions for 
the GYE and the NCDE may be warranted. We are, therefore, initiating a 
status review of the grizzly bear in the GYE and NCDE to determine 
whether the actions are warranted under the Act. At the conclusion of 
the status review, we will issue a finding, in accordance with section 
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether the petitioned actions are not 
warranted, warranted, or warranted but precluded by pending proposals 
to determine whether other species are an endangered or threatened 
species.

Authors

    The primary authors of this document are staff members of the 
Grizzly Bear Recovery Office, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service.

Authority

    The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-02467 Filed 2-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P