Quiero saber acerca de...

29442

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 103 / Tuesday, June 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3

Regulatory and Analytical Framework Regulatory Framework Section 4 of the Act 16 U.S.C. 1533
and its implementing regulations 50
CFR part 424 set forth the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened species. The Act defines an endangered species as a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a threatened species as a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the following 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; or E Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
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 negatively affect individuals of a species. 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 encompasseither together or separatelythe source of the action or condition or the action or condition itself.
However, the mere identification of any threats does not necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an endangered species or a threatened species. In determining whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all identified threats by considering the expected response by the species and the effects of the threatsin light of those actions and conditions that will ameliorate the threatson an
VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:04 May 28, 2021

Jkt 253001

individual, population, and species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all 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 will have positive effects on the species, such as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether the species meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species only after conducting this cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term foreseeable future, which appears in the statutory definition of threatened species. Our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11d set forth a framework for evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term foreseeable future extends only so far into the future as the Services can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the species responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable predictions. Reliable does not mean certain; it means sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define foreseeable future as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable future uses the best scientific and commercial data available and should consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and to the species likely responses to those threats in view of its life-history characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the species biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and other demographic factors.
Analytical Framework The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent a decision by the Service on whether the species should be proposed for listing as an endangered or threatened species under the Act. It does, however, provide the scientific basis that informs our regulatory decisions, which involve the further
PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

application of standards within the Act and its implementing regulations and policies. The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found on http www.regulations.gov at Docket FWSR2ES20210015.
To assess lesser prairie-chicken viability, we used the three conservation biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and representation Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306310. Briefly, resiliency supports the ability of the species to withstand environmental and demographic stochasticity for example, wet or dry, warm or cold years, redundancy supports the ability of the species to withstand catastrophic events for example, droughts, large pollution events, and representation supports the ability of the species to adapt over time to long-term changes in the environment for example, climate changes. In general, the more resilient and redundant a species is and the more representation it has, the more likely it is to sustain populations over time, even under changing environmental conditions. Using these principles, we identified the species ecological requirements for survival and reproduction at the individual, population, and species levels, and described the beneficial and risk factors influencing the species viability.
The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages. During the first stage, we evaluated the individual species life-history needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical and current condition of the species demographics and habitat characteristics, including an explanation of how the species arrived at its current condition. The final stage of the SSA involved making predictions about the species responses to positive and negative environmental and anthropogenic influences that are likely to occur in the future. Throughout all of these stages, we used the best available information to characterize viability as the ability of a species to sustain populations in the wild over time. We use this information to inform our regulatory decision.
The SSA report does not assess the distinct population segments proposed for the species because the SSA focuses on the biological factors, rather than those, such as DPS, that are created by the regulatory framework of the Act.
Both the geospatial and threats analysis in the SSA report are summarized by ecoregion. In this proposed rule, we present the analyses per ecoregion from the SSA report but also summarize per DPS as applicable.

E:FRFM01JNP3.SGM

01JNP3