Overview
Title
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Eight Species
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The people who take care of animals and plants are checking to see if some animals and plants need extra help or don't need help anymore to stay safe. They're asking everyone to share any clues they have to help decide what's best for these creatures.
Summary AI
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced 90-day findings on petitions to add several species to the endangered or threatened species list and to remove one species. They are starting detailed status reviews for the Amargosa toad, Carson Valley monkeyflower, large marble butterfly, Mohave ground squirrel, Morrison bumble bee, Oasis Valley speckled dace, Tennessee bottlebrush crayfish, and the golden-cheeked warbler to understand if these actions are necessary. The agency invites scientific and commercial data to ensure thorough status reviews and will publish further findings after these reviews. The reviews will consider factors such as habitat destruction, climate change, and other threats to the species.
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- day findings on seven petitions to add species to, and one petition to remove a species from, the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions to list the Amargosa toad (Anaxyrus nelsoni), Carson Valley monkeyflower (Erythranthe carsonensis), large marble butterfly (Euchloe ausonides) (including the large marble butterfly type subspecies (Euchloe ausonides ausonides)), Mohave ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus mohavensis), Morrison bumble bee (Bombus morrisoni), Oasis Valley population of Amargosa speckled dace (Rhinichthys nevadensis nevadensis; hereafter referred to as "Oasis Valley speckled dace"), Tennessee bottlebrush crayfish (Barbicambarus simmonsi), and one petition to delist the golden-cheeked warbler (Setophaga chrysoparia) 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 are initiating status reviews of these species to determine whether the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the species and factors that may affect their status. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are warranted, in accordance with the Act.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces key decisions about the status of several species under the Endangered Species Act. It reflects findings on petitions to either add or remove species from the list of endangered and threatened species. Based on an initial 90-day review, the agency will conduct thorough evaluations to determine if these preliminary findings should result in actual changes to the list.
General Summary
The document outlines the Fish and Wildlife Service's intent to initiate detailed status reviews for eight species, including the Amargosa toad and the golden-cheeked warbler. These reviews are based on petitions received from various organizations expressing concern about these species' status. The process aims to determine if the species should be listed as endangered or threatened, or if an existing species, such as the golden-cheeked warbler, should be removed from the list due to recovery.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One primary issue with the document is its use of dense legal language and specific regulatory references which might not be easily understood by the general public. While it provides essential information about regulatory procedures, without clear explanatory notes, readers may struggle to grasp the full scope of the content. The complex nature of the petition process is mentioned but not fully elucidated, leaving readers, who are unfamiliar with governmental procedures, potentially confused about how these findings came to be.
Moreover, the document does not discuss the financial implications of its findings. This omission could be significant as actions relating to the listing or delisting of species can have economic impacts both for the agency and other stakeholders involved.
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, this document highlights ongoing efforts to protect species and manage biodiversity, reflecting the government's responsibility toward environmental stewardship. It encourages public participation in the process by requesting submissions of scientific and commercial data, which can empower individuals and organizations to contribute actively to conservation efforts.
However, the anticipated actions might trigger discussions among stakeholders, emphasizing the need for an inclusive approach, ensuring all voices and concerns are considered in shaping decisions that affect public lands and resources.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Specific stakeholders such as environmental groups, local governments, and industries like agriculture and mining may see varying impacts. Environmental groups and conservationists might view the document as positive, implying potential protective actions for imperiled species and ecosystems. They might be encouraged by the willingness to re-evaluate the status of these species comprehensively.
Conversely, industries and local communities that depend on resources within these species' habitats might face constraints or changes in land use regulations. Such stakeholders might experience apprehension regarding new restrictions or economic impacts due to altered species conservation statuses.
In conclusion, while the initiative taken by the Fish and Wildlife Service represents a crucial aspect of environmental conservation, translating its technical language and potential implications into more accessible and understandable terms remains essential for broad public engagement and understanding. The outcomes of the announced status reviews will likely carry significant consequences for both ecological conservation and economic activities across the affected regions.
Issues
• The document uses complex legal and procedural language that might be difficult for a general audience to understand, such as citing specific sections of the Code of Federal Regulations and the Endangered Species Act without plain language summaries.
• The document refers to potential actions and processes (like emergency listing) that are not fully explained, which might confuse readers who are unfamiliar with such processes.
• The document outlines a complex petition process but might be unclear to those unfamiliar with government procedures, potentially necessitating additional guidance or clarification for general stakeholders.
• The use of extensive scientific and legal terminology without accompanying explanations may make it challenging for laypersons to grasp the full implications of the findings and potential actions.
• There is no discussion of cost implications or budgeting, which could be important for understanding any potential fiscal impact of listing or delisting species.
• The document refers to docket numbers for more detailed information without providing this information directly, requiring readers to seek additional documents to understand the full context.