Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

the Information Quality Act section 515
of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 Pub. L. 106554; H.R.
5658, and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available. They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat.
Prudency Determination Section 4a3 of the Act, as amended, and implementing regulations 50 CFR 424.12, require that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary shall designate critical habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species.
On August 27, 2019, the Service published a final rule 84 FR 45020
revising the regulations at 50 CFR part 424 for listing species and designating critical habitat. However, the revisions apply only to relevant rulemakings for which the proposed rule is published after September 26, 2019, the effective date of the final rule. Thus, the prior version of the regulations at 50 CFR part 424 continues to apply to any rulemakings for which a proposed rule was published before September 26, 2019, including this final rule for Franklins bumble bee.
The prior version of the regulations at 50 CFR part 424 50 CFR 424.12a1
state that the designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following situations exist:
1 The species is threatened by taking or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or 2 Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
In determining whether a designation would not be beneficial, the factors the Services may consider includes whether the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a species habitat or range is not a threat to the species.
As discussed above in the threats analysis, there is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to collection or vandalism identified under Factor B for this species, and identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to initiate any such threat. In the absence of finding that the designation of critical habitat would
VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:55 Aug 23, 2021

Jkt 253001

increase threats to a species, we next determine whether such designation of critical habitat would be beneficial to the Franklins bumble bee. For the reasons discussed below, we have determined that designating critical habitat would not be beneficial.
Designating Habitat Would Not Be Beneficial to the Species The Franklins bumble bee was widely distributed throughout its range and considered flexible with regard to habitat requirements. We know that the Franklins bumble bee needs 1 floral resources for nectaring throughout the colony cycle, and 2 relatively protected areas for breeding and shelter.
In addition, because the best available scientific information indicates that the Franklins bumble bee is a generalist forager, its habitat preferences and needs are relatively plentiful and widely distributed. While Bombus species in general might prefer protected meadows with an abundance of wildflowers, the Franklins bumble bee has been found in a wide array of habitat types, from foraging in montane meadows in a remote wilderness area of California to nesting in a residential garage in the city limits of Medford, Oregon. The species has a broad elevational range from 162
m 540 ft to 2,340 m 7,800 ft;
elevation does not appear to limit the species dispersal capabilities.
Some general habitat associations of Bombus are known; however, as one of the rarest Bombus species, the Franklins bumble bee is somewhat enigmatic and a specific habitat study for the Franklins bumble bee has not been completed. Such a study was initiated in 2006, when the Franklins bumble bee was last seen, but could not continue due to the subsequent absence of the species. Therefore, we cannot with specificity articulate the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the Franklins bumble bee, or determine whether or not any area would meet the definition of critical habitat for the Franklins bumble bee.
Since it was first identified in 1921, the Franklins bumble bee appears to have always been a rare species with a limited range. In fact, the species has perhaps the most limited range of any Bombus species in the world.
Nonetheless, Franklins bumble bee habitat is not known to be limiting, and habitat loss is not a threat to the species.
With the exception of the inundation of two sites with older historical occurrences of Franklins bumble bee through the construction of Applegate Dam, and a report of soil modification on a portion of the Gold Hill site 4 years
PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

47237

after the last occurrence of Franklins bumble bee in the area, no noticeable destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range can be identified in areas where the species had been previously located. No significant destruction or modification of Franklins bumble bee habitat can be attributed to natural fire, prescribed fire, agricultural intensification, urban development, livestock grazing, or the effects of climate change. Additionally, as discussed above, the Franklins bumble bee has been documented using a wide variety of habitats throughout its range. Because habitat for the Franklins bumble bee is not limiting, and because the bee is considered to be flexible with regards to its habitat, the availability of habitat does not limit the conservation of the Franklins bumble bee now, nor will it in the foreseeable future.
In the Service and National Marine Fisheries Services response to comments on the February 11, 2016, final rule 81 FR 7414 revising the critical habitat regulations the regulations in effect at the time the Franklins bumble bee was proposed for listing, the Services expressly contemplated a fact pattern where designating critical habitat may not be beneficial to the species: In some circumstances, a species may be listed because of factors other than threats to its habitat or range, such as disease, and the species may be a habitat generalist.
In such a case, on the basis of the existing and revised regulations, it is permissible to determine that critical habitat is not beneficial and, therefore, not prudent 81 FR 7425. This is the fact pattern we are presented with in the case of the Franklins bumble bee. In view of the foregoing, we conclude that present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat is not a threat to the Franklins bumble bee; rather, disease and other manmade factors are likely the primary threat to the species within its habitat. Therefore, in accordance with 50 CFR 424.12a1, we determine that critical habitat is not beneficial and, therefore, not prudent for the Franklins bumble bee.
Required Determinations 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
E:FRFM24AUR1.SGM

24AUR1