Vol. 76 Wednesday, No. 154 August 10, 2011

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish & Wildlife Services 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Emergency Listing of the Miami Blue Butterfly as Endangered, and Emergency Listing of the Cassius Blue, Ceraunus Blue, and Nickerbean Blue Butterflies as Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance to the Miami Blue Butterfly; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49542 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR appointment, during normal business Emmel 1994, p. 647). The Miami blue hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife can be distinguished from the ceraunus Fish and Wildlife Service Service, South Florida Ecological blue and cassius blue by its very broad Services Office, 1339 20th Street, Vero white ventral submarginal band, the 50 CFR Part 17 Beach, Florida 32960–3559. dorsal turquoise color of both sexes, and [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2011–0043 MO FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the orange-capped marginal eyespot on 92210–0–0008 Paula Halupa, Fish and Wildlife the hind wings (Opler and Krizek 1984, Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife p. 112). The nickerbean blue is also RIN 1018–AX83 Service, South Florida Ecological similar to the Miami blue in general Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Services Office, 1339 20th Street, Vero appearance but is considerably smaller; and Plants; Emergency Listing of the Beach, Florida 32960–3559 by it has three black spots across the basal Miami Blue Butterfly as Endangered, telephone 772–562–3909, ext. 257 or by hindwing, while the Miami blue has and Emergency Listing of the Cassius electronic mail: [email protected]. four (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 15). The Blue, Ceraunus Blue, and Nickerbean SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: larvae and pupae of the nickerbean blue closely resemble the Miami blue Blue Butterflies as Threatened Due to Background Similarity of Appearance to the Miami (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 15). Blue Butterfly The Miami blue is a small, brightly In a comparison of Miami blue colored butterfly approximately 0.8 to butterfly specimens within the Florida AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 1.1 inches (1.9 to 2.9 centimeters [cm]) Museum of Natural History (FLMNH) Interior. in length (Pyle 1981, p. 488) with a collection, Saarinen (2009, pp. 42–43) ACTION: Emergency rule. forewing length of 0.3 to 0.5 inches (8.0 found a significant difference in wing to 12.5 millimeters) (Minno and Emmel SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife chord length between males and 1993, p. 134). Wings of males are blue females, with males having shorter wing Service (Service), exercise our authority above (dorsally), with a narrow black pursuant to section 4(b)(7) of the chords than females. However, no outer border and white fringes; females significant differences were found Endangered Species Act of 1973, as are bright blue dorsally, with black amended (Act), to emergency list the between wing chord length in borders and an orange/red and black comparing wet and dry seasons, decade Miami blue butterfly (Cyclargus thomasi eyespot near the anal angle of the bethunebakeri) as endangered. This of collection, seven different regions, or hindwing (Comstock and Huntington between eastern mainland and Keys subspecies is currently known to occur 1943, p. 98; Minno and Emmel 1993, p. at only a few small remote islands specimens (Saarinen 2009, pp. 42–43). 134). The underside is grayish with No seasonal size differences were found within the Florida Keys. Current darker markings outlined with white population numbers are not known, but between the mainland populations and and bands of white wedges near the those in the Keys (Saarinen 2009, p. 43). are estimated in the hundreds of outer margin. The ventral hindwing has butterflies. We are also emergency two pairs of eyespots, one of which is In a comparison of body size in a listing the cassius blue butterfly capped with red; basal and costal spots recent Miami blue population (BHSP (Leptotes cassius theonus), ceraunus on the hindwing are black and 2002–2006), females were significantly blue butterfly (Hemiargus ceraunus conspicuous (Minno and Emmel 1993, larger than males, and individuals antibubastus), and nickerbean blue p. 134). The winter (dry season) form is sampled in the wet season were also butterfly (Cyclargus ammon) as much lighter blue than the summer (wet significantly larger than in the dry threatened due to similarity of season) form and has narrow black season (Saarinen 2009, p. 43). In a appearance to the Miami blue, with a borders (Opler and Krizek 1984, p. 112). comparison of recent Bahia Honda State special rule pursuant to section 4(d) of Seasonal wing pattern variation may be Park (BHSP) individuals with the Act. caused by changes in humidity, specimens from historical collections Due to the subspecies’ severe temperature, or length of day (Pyle (FLMNH data), BHSP individuals were reduction in geographic range, small 1981, p. 489). Miami blue larvae are significantly larger than historical population sizes, and imminent threats, bright green with a black head capsule, specimens, females from BHSP were we need to make protective measures and pupae vary in color from black to also significantly larger than historical afforded by the Act available to the brown (Minno and Emmel 1993, pp. female specimens, and BHSP adults Miami blue immediately. This 134–135). measured in wet seasons were larger emergency rule provides Federal The Miami blue is similar in than those sampled in wet seasons in protection pursuant to the Act for a appearance to three other sympatric museum collections (Saarinen 2009, p. period of 240 days. A proposed rule to (occupying the same or overlapping 43). Saarinen (2009, p. 47) suggested list the Miami blue butterfly as geographic areas without interbreeding) that perhaps larger adults were selected endangered and to list the cassius blue butterflies that occur roughly in the for over time with larger adults being butterfly, ceraunus blue butterfly, and same habitats: cassius blue (Leptotes more capable of dispersing and finding nickerbean blue butterfly as threatened cassius theonus), ceraunus blue food and mates. Limited food resources due to similarity of appearance to the (Hemiargus ceraunus antibubastus), and during larval development or abrupt Miami blue is published concurrently nickerbean blue (Cyclargus ammon). termination of availability of food in the with this emergency rule, and it can be The Miami blue is slightly larger than last larval instar can lead to early found in this issue of the Federal the ceraunus blue (Minno and Emmel pupation and a smaller adult size (T.C. Register in the Proposed Rules section. 1993, p. 134), but the ceraunus blue has Emmel, pers. comm., as cited in DATES: This emergency rule becomes a different ventral pattern and flies close Saarinen 2009, p. 47). It is possible that effective on August 10, 2011, and to the ground in open areas (Minno and differences in host plant (e.g., nutrition) expires April 6, 2012. Emmel 1994, p. 647). The cassius blue and age of specimens (e.g., freshness) ADDRESSES: The supporting information often occurs with the Miami blue, but may also be factors when comparing used in this emergency rulemaking is has dark bars rather than spots on the body size between recent specimens and available for inspection, by undersides of the wings (Minno and those from historical collections.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49543

Taxonomy preliminary molecular evidence has blackbead leaves was not observed The Miami blue belongs to the family confirmed that they are the same taxon (Cannon et al. 2010, p. 851). Thus, Lycaenidae (Leach), subfamily (E.V. Saarinen, unpub. data, as cited in Cannon et al. (2010, p. 851) suggest that Polyommatinae (Swainson). The species Saarinen 2009, p. 18). abundance may be limited by the availability of young blackbead leaves Hemiargus thomasi was originally Life History described by Clench (1941, pp. 407– and buds for egg-laying, even if Like all butterflies, the Miami blue 408), and the subspecies Hemiargus abundant suitable nectar sources (see undergoes complete metamorphosis, thomasi bethunebakeri was first Habitat) are available year-round. with four life stages (egg, caterpillar or described by Comstock and Huntington On balloonvine, females lay single larva, pupa or chrysalis, and adult). The eggs near fruit (capsules) (Carroll and (1943, p. 97). Although some authors generation time is approximately 30–40 continue to use Hemiargus, Nabokov Loye 2006, p. 18). Newly hatched larvae days (Carroll and Loye 2006, p. 19; chew distinctive holes through the outer (1945, p. 14) instituted Cyclargus for Saarinen 2009, p. 22, 76). Although a walls of the capsules to access seeds some species, which has been supported single Miami blue female can lay 300 (Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 134). After by more recent research (Johnson and eggs, high mortality may occur in the consuming seeds within the natal Balint 1995, pp. 1–3, 8–11, 13; Calhoun immature larval stages prior to capsule, larvae must crawl to a sequence et al. 2002, p. 13; K. Johnson, Florida adulthood (T. Emmel, University of of two or three balloons before growing State Collection of Arthropods, in litt. Florida [UF], pers. comm. 2002). large enough to pupate. Attending ants 2002). There are differences in the Reported host plants are blackbead follow through the same holes (see internal genitalic structures of the (Pithecellobium spp.), nickerbean Interspecific relationships below). genera Hemiargus and Cyclargus (Caesalpinia spp.), balloonvine Miami blues were also observed to (Johnson and Balint 1995, pp. 2–3, 11; (Cardiospermum spp.), and presumably commonly pupate within mature K. Johnson, in litt. 2002). Kurt Johnson Acacia spp. (Kimball 1965, p. 49; capsules (sometimes with ants in (in litt. 2002), who has published most Lenczewski 1980, p. 47; Pyle 1981, p. attendance within the capsule) (Carroll of the existing literature since 1950 on 489; Opler and Krizek 1984, p. 113; and Loye 2006, p. 20). the blue butterflies of the tribe Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 134; The Miami blue has been described as Polyommatini, reaffirmed that thomasi Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18; Cannon et al. having multiple, overlapping broods belongs in the genus Cyclargus 2010, p. 851). In addition, Rutkowski year-round (Pyle 1981, p. 489). Adults (Nabokov 1945, p. 14), not Hemiargus. (1971, p. 137) observed a female laying can be found every month of the year Accordingly, Cyclargus thomasi one egg just above the lateral bud on (Opler and Krizek 1984, pp. 112–113; bethunebakeri (Pelham 2008, p. 256) snowberry (Chiococca alba). Eggs are Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 135; 1994, and its taxonomic standing is accepted laid singly near the base of young pods p. 647; Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 9; (Integrated Taxonomic Information or just above the lateral buds of Saarinen 2009, p. 22). Opler and Krizek System 2011, p. 1). balloonvine and the flowers of (1984, pp. 112–113) indicated one long In 2003, questions about the leguminous trees (Opler and Krizek winter generation from December to taxonomic identity of Miami blues from 1984, p. 113; Minno and Emmel 1993, April, during which time the adults are BHSP were raised by a few individuals. p. 134); flower buds and young tender probably in reproductive diapause (a To address these questions, the Service leaves of legumes are preferred (Minno period in which growth, development, sent two pairs (male and female) of and Minno 2009, p. 78; M. Minno, pers. and physiological activity is suspended adult specimens to three independent comm. 2010). or diminished); a succession of shorter taxonomists/reviewers (Dr. Jacqueline On nickerbean (Caesalpinia spp.), generations was thought to occur from Miller, Associate Curator, Allyn females lay eggs on developing shoots, May through November, the exact Museum of Entomology (AME), foliage, and flower buds (Saarinen 2009, number of which is unknown. Glassberg FLMNH; Dr. Paul Opler, Colorado State p. 22). Oviposition occurs throughout et al. (2000, p. 79) described the Miami University; and John Calhoun, Museum the day with females often seeking blue as having occurred all year, with of Entomology, Florida State Collection terminal growth close to the ground three or more broods. Researchers have of Arthropods) for verification. To avoid (< 3.3 feet [< 1 meter]) or in locations noted a marked decrease of adults from harm to the wild population, scientists sheltered from the wind (Emmel and December to early February at BHSP, examined moribund adults from a Daniels 2004, p. 13). Eggs are generally indicative of a short diapause (Emmel captive colony generated from laid singly, but may be clustered on and Daniels 2003, p. 3; 2004, p. 9). individuals taken from BHSP. Each developing leaves, shoot tips, and Saarinen also noted that the life cycle at reviewer independently confirmed flower buds (Saarinen 2009, p. 22). After BHSP slowed in winter months and through various means (e.g., comparison several days of development, larvae suspected a slight diapause (E.V. with confirmed specimens, dissection chew out of eggs and develop through Saarinen and J.C. Daniels, unpub. data, and examination of genitalia) that the four instar stages, with total larval as cited in Saarinen 2009, p. 22). identities of the adult specimens development time lasting 3 to 4 weeks, Conversely, Minno (pers. comm. 2010) examined were Cyclargus thomasi depending upon temperature and notes that there have been records of bethunebakeri (J. Miller, in litt. 2003; P. humidity (Saarinen 2009, p. 22). Fourth adults in December and January and Opler, in litt. 2003; J. Calhoun, in litt. instar larvae pupate in sheltered or suggests that this tropical butterfly may 2003a). We received an additional inconspicuous areas, often underneath not have a winter diapause, but rather, confirmation from Lee Miller, Curator leaf whorls or bracts (Saarinen 2009, p. emergence may be delayed by cold (AME, FLMNH) stating that the 22). Adult butterflies eclose (emerge) temperatures in some years. Salvato and identities of the adult specimens after 5 to 8 days, depending on Salvato (2007, p. 163) and Cannon et al. examined were Cyclargus thomasi temperature and humidity (Saarinen (2010, pp. 849–850) also reported bethunebakeri (L. Miller, in litt. 2003). 2009, p. 22). numerous adults at BHSP and KWNWR, Taxonomic verification by genitalic On blackbead plants, females lay eggs respectively, during winter months. dissection of the Miami blue at Key on flower buds and emerging leaves Information on adult lifespan is West National Wildlife Refuge (Cannon et al. 2010, p. 851). Oviposition limited. Adults may live a maximum of (KWNWR) has not occurred, but on, or larval consumption of, mature 9 days, but most adults live only a few

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49544 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

days (J. Daniels, UF, pers. comm. 2003a, derive honeydew from Miami blues they disturbances (e.g., coastal berm 2003b). In general, adult butterflies tended, but were not observed to hammocks, dunes, and scrub) (Opler survive less than a week in the wild; actively protect them from any predator and Krizek 1984, p. 112; Minno and there are approximately 8–10 (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, p. 71; Emmel 1994, p. 647; Emmel and Daniels generations per year (Saarinen et al. Saarinen 2009, p. 133). However, the 2004, p. 12). It also uses tropical 2009a, p. 31). Generations are not presence of ants in the vicinity of larvae pinelands (Minno and Emmel 1993, p. completely discrete due to the variance may potentially deter predators 134) and open sunny areas along trails in development time of all life stages (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, pp. 71, 73; (Pyle 1981, p. 489). In the Keys, it was (Saarinen et al. 2009a, p. 31). Saarinen 2009, p. 133, Trager and most abundant near disturbed Range size and dispersal—Adult Daniels 2009, p. 480). Two additional hammocks where weedy flowers Miami blues are nonmigratory and ants, Paratrechina longicornis and P. provided nectar (Minno and Emmel appear to be very sedentary (Emmel and bourbonica, have been identified as 1994, p. 647). It also occurred in pine Daniels 2004, p. 6). Based on mark- potential associates of the Miami blue rocklands (fire-dependent slash pine recapture work conducted in 2002– (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, pp. 70–71; community with palms and a grassy 2003, recaptured adults (N=39) moved Saarinen 2009, pp. 131, 138). P. understory) on Big Pine Key (Minno and an average of 6.53 +/¥ 11.68 feet (2.0 longicornis was found near Miami blue Emmel 1993, p. 134; Calhoun et al. +/¥ 3.6 meters), four individuals larvae and appeared to tend them 2002, p. 18) and elsewhere in Monroe moved between 25 and 50 feet (7.6 and during brief encounters; P. bourbonica and Miami-Dade Counties. In Miami- 15.2 meters), and only three individuals tended another lycaenid, martial scrub- Dade County, it occurred locally inland, moved more than 50 feet (15.2 meters) hairstreak (Strymon martialis) at BHSP sometimes in abundance (M. Minno, over a few days (Emmel and Daniels (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, p. 70). pers. comm. 2010). Within KWNWR, all 2004, pp. 6, 32–38). Few individuals Cannon et al. (2007, p. 16) also observed occupied areas had coastal strands and were found to move between the lower two ant species attending Miami blues dunes fronted by beaches (Cannon et al. and upper walkway locations of the on KWNWR. Based on photographs, the 2007, p. 13; Cannon et al. 2010, p. 851). south end colony sites at BHSP ants appeared to be C. inaequalis and P. Larval host plants include blackbead, (approximately 100 feet [30.5 meters]); longicornis. C. planatus was observed nickerbean, balloonvine, and no movement between any of the on blackbead. presumably Acacia spp. (Dyar 1900, pp. smaller individual, isolated colony sites In the 1980s, Miami blue larvae that 448–449, Kimball 1965, p. 49; was recorded (Emmel and Daniels 2004, fed on balloonvine in the upper Keys Lenczewski 1980, p. 47; Pyle 1981, p. p. 6). However, Saarinen (2009, pp. 73, were also tended by ants (C. floridanus 489; Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18). Gray 78–79) found that genetic exchange and C. planatus) (Carroll and Loye 2006, nickerbean (Caesalpinia bonduc) is between colonies occurred at BHSP and pp. 19–20). Carroll and Loye (2006, p. widespread and common in coastal noted that small habitat patches may be 20) found that Camponotus spp. raised south Florida. Following disturbances, crucial in providing links between with Miami blue larvae lived longer it can dominate large areas (K. Bradley, subpopulations in an area. than ants raised with larvae of other The Institute for Regional Conservation Interspecific relationships—As in lycaenid species or without any food [IRC], pers. comm. 2002). Gray many lycaenids worldwide (Pierce et al. source, demonstrating that larval nickerbean has been recorded as far 2002, p. 734), Miami blue larvae secretions benefit ants. north as Volusia County on the east associate with ants (Emmel 1991, p. 13; More recently, Trager and Daniels coast, matching the historical range of Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 135; Carroll (2009, p. 479) most commonly found C. the Miami blue, and Levy County on the and Loye 2006, pp. 19–20) in at least floridanus and C. planatus associated west coast (J. Calhoun, pers. comm. four genera of ants in three subfamilies with wild and recently released Miami 2003b). The Miami blue is also reported of Formicidae (Saarinen and Daniels blue larvae. In a comparison of Miami to use peacock flower (Caesalpinia 2006, p. 71; Saarinen 2009, p. 131, 133). blue larvae raised with and without pulcherrima) (Matteson 1930, pp. 13– Miami blues using nickerbean at BHSP ants, no effect of ant presence was found 14; Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18), a widely and Everglades National Park (ENP) on any measurements of larval cultivated exotic that occurs in (reintroduced individuals) were performance (e.g., age at pupation, disturbed uplands and gardens (Gann et variously tended by Camponotus pupal mass, length of pupation, total al. 2001–2010, p. 1). Rutkowski (1971, floridanus, C. planatus, Crematogaster time as an immature) (Trager and p. 137) and Opler and Krizek (1984, p. ashmeadi, Forelius pruinosus, and Daniels 2009, p. 480). Miami blue larval 113) reported the use of snowberry. Tapinoma melanocephalum (Saarinen development was found to be similar to Brewer (1982, p. 22) reported the use of and Daniels 2006, p. 71; Saarinen 2009, that of other conspecific lycaenid cat’s paw blackbead (Pithecellobium pp. 131, 138). C. floridanus was the species not tended by ants (Trager and unguis-cati) on Sanibel Island in Lee primary ant symbiont, commonly found Daniels 2009, p. 480). Although the County. tending larvae; other ant species were relationships are not completely Prior to the 1970s, documented host encountered less often (Saarinen and understood, it appears that Miami blue plants for the butterfly were nickerbean Daniels 2006, p. 70; Saarinen 2009, pp. larvae may receive some benefits from and blackbead (J. Calhoun, pers. comm. 131–132). Liquid (honeydew) exuded tending ants (e.g., potential defense 2003b). Balloonvine (Cardiospermum from the butterfly’s dorsal nectary organ from predators) without much, if any, spp.) was not reported as a host plant (honey gland) was actively imbibed by costs incurred. until the 1970s, when these plants all species of ants (Saarinen and Daniels seemed to have become common in 2006, p. 70; Saarinen 2009, p. 132). Habitat extreme southern Florida (J. Calhoun, Late Miami blue instars were always The Miami blue is a coastal butterfly pers. comm. 2003b). Subsequently, found in association with ants, but early reported to occur in openings and balloonvine (Cardiospermum instars, prepupae, and pupae were around the edges of hardwood halicacabum), an exotic species in frequently found without ants present hammocks (forest habitats characterized Florida, was the most frequently (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, p. 70). by broad-leaved evergreens), and in reported host plant for Miami blue (e.g., Forelius pruinosus and Tapinoma other communities adjacent to the coast Lenczewski 1980, p. 47; Opler and melanocephalum were observed to that are prone to frequent natural Krizek 1984, p. 113; Minno and Emmel

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49545

1993, p. 134; 1994, p. 647; Calhoun et Adult Miami blues have been thomasi bethunebakeri occurs in the al. 2002, p. 18). However, Carroll and reported to feed on a wide variety of Bahamas. Clench (1963, p. 250), who Loye (2006, pp. 13–15) corrected ‘‘the nectar sources including Spanish collected butterflies extensively in the common view that a principal host needles (Bidens alba), Leavenworth’s West Indies, indicated that the plant, balloonvine, is an exotic weed.’’ tickseed (Coreopsis leavenworthi), subspecies occurred only in Florida. They found that published reports of scorpionstail (Heliotropium Riley (1975, p. 110) and Calhoun et al. Miami blue larvae on balloonvine all angiospermum), turkey tangle fogfruit or (2002, p. 13) indicated that the Miami identified the host as C. halicacabum capeweed (Lippia nodiflora), buttonsage blue of Florida rarely occurs as a stray and stated that the butterfly was instead (Lantana involucrata), snow squarestem in the Bahamas. Minno and Emmel dependent upon a declining native C. (Melanthera nivea [M. aspera]), (1993, p. 134; 1994, p. 647) and Calhoun corindum (Carroll and Loye 2006, pp. blackbead, Brazilian pepper (Schinus (1997, p. 46) considered the Miami blue 14, 23). Bradley (pers. comm. 2002) also terebinthifolius), false buttonweed to occur only in Florida (endemic to confirmed that C. halicacabum does not (Spermacoce spp.), and seaside Florida, with other subspecies found in occur in the Keys, noting that the native heliotrope (Heliotropium curassavicum) the Bahamas and Greater Antilles). balloonvine (C. corindum) is relatively (Pyle 1981, p. 489; Opler and Krizek Smith et al. (1994, p. 129) indicated that common and widespread in the Keys 1984, p. 113; Minno and Emmel 1993, the Miami blue occurs in southern and has been commonly mistaken as C. p. 135; Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 12). Florida, but noted it has been recorded halicacabum in the Keys and other sites Emmel and Daniels (2004, p. 12) from the Bimini Islands in the Bahamas. in south Florida. reported that the Miami blue uses a However, in a recent comprehensive Calhoun (pers. comm. 2003b) variety of flowering plant species in the study of museum specimens, Saarinen suggested that the Miami blue may Boraginaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae, (2009, p. 28) found no specimens in simply utilize whatever acceptable hosts Polygonaceae, and Verbenaceae families current museum holdings to verify this. are available under suitable conditions. for nectar. Cannon et al. (2010, p. 851) Overall, the majority of historical According to Calhoun (pers. comm. found the butterfly uses nine plant records pertaining to this subspecies’ 2003b), a review of the historical range species as nectar sources within distribution are dominated by Florida of the butterfly and its host plants KWNWR, including: Blackbead, snow occurrences, with any peripheral suggests balloonvine was a more recent squarestem, coastal searocket (Cakile occurrences in the Bahamas possibly larval host plant and temporarily lanceolata), black torch (Erithalis being ephemeral in nature. surpassed nickerbean as the primary fruticosa), yellow joyweed Although information on distribution host plant. As native coastal habitats (Alternanthera flavescens), bay cedar is somewhat limited, it is clear that the were destroyed, balloonvine readily (Suriana maritime), sea lavender historical range of the Miami blue has invaded disturbed environments, and (Argusia gnaphalodes), seaside been significantly reduced. The type the Miami blue used what was most heliotrope, and sea purslane (Sesuvium series (i.e., the original set of specimens commonly available. Minno (pers. portulacastrum). on which the description of the species comm. 2010) suggested that the Miami Nectar sources must be near potential is based) contains specimens ranging blue used balloonvine on Key Largo and host plants since the butterflies are from Key West up the east coast to Plantation Key extensively in the 1970s sedentary and may not travel between Volusia County (Comstock and through the 1990s, noting that patches of host and nectar sources Huntington 1943, p. 98; J. Calhoun, nickerbean, blackbead, and perhaps (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 13). This pers. comm., 2003b). Opler and Krizek other hosts were also probably used, but may help explain the absence of the (1984, p. 112) showed its historical not documented. Miami blue from areas in which host range as being approximately from The Miami blue metapopulation plants are abundant and nectar sources Tampa Bay and Cape Canaveral (series of small populations that have are limited (J. Calhoun, pers. comm. southward along the coasts and through some level of interaction) at KWNWR 2003b). Emmel and Daniels (2004, p. 13) the Keys. It has also been collected in was found to rely upon Florida Keys argued that it is potentially critical that the Dry Tortugas (Forbes 1941, pp. 147– blackbead as the singular host plant sufficient available adult nectar sources 148; Kimball 1965, p. 49; Glassberg and (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 1; Cannon et al. be directly adjacent to host patches and Salvato 2000, p. 2). Lenczewski (1980, 2010, pp. 851–852). Blackbead was also also important that a range of potential p. 47) noted that it was reported as an important nectar plant when in nectar sources be available in the event extremely common in the Miami area in flower. High counts of Miami blues at one plant species goes out of flower or the 1930s and 1940s. Calhoun et al. KWNWR were generally associated with is adversely impacted by environmental (2002, p. 17) placed the historical limits the emergence of flowers and new factors. Cannon et al. (2010, p. 851) of the subspecies’ northern distribution leaves on blackbead (Cannon et al. 2007, suggested that the growth stage of at Hillsborough and Volusia Counties, pp. 14–15; Cannon et al. 2010, pp. 851– blackbead, coupled with abundant extending southward along the coasts to 852). All sites that supported Miami nectar from herbaceous plants, likely the Marquesas Keys (west of Key West). blues contained blackbead (Cannon et influenced Miami blue abundance; the The Miami blue was most common on al. 2007, p. 6; Cannon et al. 2010, p. highest counts occurred when the southern mainland and the Keys, 851). Limited abundance of blackbead blackbead was flowering profusely and especially Key Largo and Big Pine Key within select areas of KWNWR was producing new leaves. (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 17) and other thought to limit abundance of the Miami larger keys with hardwood hammock blue (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 10; Cannon Historical Distribution (Monroe County) (M. Minno, pers. et al. 2010, p. 850). At BHSP, the Miami The Miami blue butterfly (Cyclargus comm. 2010). The subspecies was blue was closely associated with gray thomasi bethunebakeri) is endemic to recorded on at least 10 islands of the nickerbean, but also uses blackbead (M. Florida with additional subspecies Keys (Adams Key, Big Pine Key, Elliott Minno, pers. comm. 2010). In KWNWR, occurring in the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, Key, Geiger Key, Key Largo, gray nickerbean was rare, with only a and Hispaniola (Smith et al. 1994, p. Lignumvitae Key, Old Rhodes Key, few small plants on Boca Grande Key 129; Hernandez 2004, p. 100; Saarinen Plantation Key, Stock Island, Sugarloaf and the Marquesas Keys (Cannon et al. 2009, pp. 18–19, 28). Field guides and Key) (Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 134). 2010, p. 851). other sources differ as to whether C. On the Gulf coast, it was reportedly

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49546 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

more localized and tended to occur on 2000, p. 79; Glassberg and Salvato 2000, west of BHSP). The Miami blue was not more southerly barrier islands (J. p. 1; Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 17). found on the mainland, including Calhoun, pers. comm. 2003b). Following Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Fakahatchee Strand, Charles Deering According to Calhoun et al. (2002, p. there were a few unsupported reports Estate, ENP, Marco Island, or 17), the Miami blue occupied areas on from Key Largo and Big Pine Key and Chokoloskee (Emmel and Daniels 2004, the barrier islands of Sanibel, Marco, the southeastern Florida mainland from pp. 5–6, 25). It was also absent from the and Chokoloskee, along the west coast approximately 1993 to 1998 (Glassberg following locations in the Keys: Elliott, into the 1980s (based upon Brewer and Salvato 2000, p. 3; Calhoun et al. Old Rhodes, Totten, and Adams Key in 1982, p. 22; Minno and Emmel 1994, 2002, p. 17). In 1996, four adult Miami Biscayne National Park (BNP) and Key pp. 647–648). Lenczewski (1980, p. 47) blues were observed in the area of Largo and Plantation Key in the Upper reported that the Miami blue Dagny Johnson Key Largo Hammock Keys; Lignumvitae, Lower Matecumbe, historically occurred at Chokoloskee, Botanical State Park (DJSP) by Linda Indian, and Long Keys in the Middle Royal Palm (Miami-Dade County), and and Byrum Cooper (L. Cooper, listowner Keys; and Little Duck, Missouri, Ohio, Flamingo (Monroe County) within ENP, of LEPSrUS Web site, pers. comm. 2002; No Name, Big Pine, Ramrod, Little but that the subspecies has not been Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 17). However, a Torch, Wahoo, Cudjoe, Sugarloaf, and observed in ENP since 1972. habitat restoration project apparently Stock Island in the Lower Keys (Emmel Based upon examination of specimens eradicated that population (L. Cooper, and Daniels 2004, pp. 3–5; 21–24). from museum collections (N=689), pers. comm. as cited in Calhoun et al. Based upon an additional Saarinen (2009, pp. 42, 55–57) found a 2002, p. 17). independent survey in 2002, the Miami large, primarily coastal, geographic The Miami blue was presumed to be blue was also not found at 18 historical distribution for the butterfly. Most extirpated until its rediscovery in 1999 locations where it had previously been specimens from an 11-county area from by Jane Ruffin, who observed observed or collected in Monroe, 1900 to 1990 were collected in Miami- approximately 50 individuals at a site in Broward, Miami-Dade, and Collier Dade and Monroe Counties (Saarinen the lower Keys (Bahia Honda) (Ruffin Counties into the 1980s (D. Fine, unpub. 2009, pp. 42, 58). Records from Miami- and Glassberg 2000, p. 3; Calhoun et al. data, pers. comm. 2002). These were: Dade County (N=212) were most 2002, p. 17). Additional individuals Cactus Hammock (Big Pine Key), numerous in the 1930s and 1940s; were located at a site within 0.5 mile County Road (Big Pine Key), Grassy records from Monroe County (N=387) (0.8 kilometers (km)) of where Ruffin Key, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State (including all of the Florida Keys) were had discovered the population Park, Windley Key, Crawl Key, Stock most numerous in the 1970s (Saarinen (Glassberg and Salvato 2000, p. 3). Island, Plantation Key, and Lower 2009, pp. 42, 58). Saarinen (2009, p. 47) Glassberg and Salvato (2000, p. 1) stated Matecumbe Key in Monroe County; was not able to quantify issues of that more than 15 highly competent Hugh Taylor Birch State Park and Coral collector bias and noted that collecting butterfly enthusiasts had failed to find Springs in Broward County; Redlands, restrictions, inaccessibility of certain any populations of the Miami blue from IFAS Station, Frog City, and Card Sound islands, and targeted interest in certain 1992 until 1999, despite more than Road in Miami-Dade County; Marco areas, may have been factors influencing 1,000 hours of search effort in all sites Island and Fakahatchee Strand State the relative abundance (and known to harbor former colonies and Preserve in Collier County. distribution) of specimens collected. For other potential sites throughout south In 2003, the Service contracted the example, it is unclear whether Key Florida and the Keys. In May 2001, North American Butterfly Association Largo represented a ‘‘central hotspot,’’ a there was an additional sighting by (NABA) to perform systematic surveys spot simply heavily visited by Richard Gillmore of a single Miami blue in south Florida and the Keys to identify lepidopterists, or both (Saarinen 2009, in the hammocks in North Key Largo all sites at which 21 targeted butterflies, p. 47). Still, it is clear that specimens (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 17; J. Calhoun, including the Miami blue, could be were common in museum collections pers. comm. 2003b). found. Despite considerable survey from the early 1900s to the 1980s, effort (i.e., 187 surveys performed), the Current Distribution suggesting that the butterfly was Miami blue was not located at any abundant, at least in local patches, Numerous searches for the Miami location except Bahia Honda (NABA during this time period (Saarinen 2009, blue have occurred in the past decade 2005, pp. 1–7). In addition, the Miami p. 46). This is consistent with the work by various parties. The Miami blue was blue was not present within the J.N. of Carroll and Loye (2006, pp. 15–18), not observed on 105 survey dates at 11 Ding Darling National Wildlife Refuge who, in a compilation of location data locations on the southern Florida or on Sanibel-Captiva Conservation for specimens (N=209), found that most mainland from 1990 to 2002 (Edwards Foundation properties (both on Sanibel collections were from the Upper Keys; and Glassberg 2002, p. 4). In the Keys, Island), during annual surveys those from peripheral sites were surveys during the same time period conducted from 1998 to 2009 (M. generally less recent and only single also produced no sightings of the Miami Salvato, pers. comm. 2011a). Monthly or specimens. Examination of museum blue at 29 locations for 224 survey dates quarterly surveys of Big Pine Key, records further verified the Miami blue’s (Edwards and Glassberg 2002, p. 4). In conducted from 1997 to 2010, failed to wide distribution in southern Florida 2002, the Service initiated a status locate Miami blues (M. Salvato, pers. through time (Carroll and Loye 2006, survey, contracting researchers at the comm. 2011b). Minno and Minno (2009, pp. 15–18; Saarinen 2009, p. 46). UF, to search areas within the pp. 77, 123–193) failed to locate the By the 1990s, very few Miami blue subspecies’ historical range, subspecies during butterfly surveys populations were known to persist, and concentrating on the extreme south throughout the Keys conducted from the butterfly had not been seen on the Florida mainland and throughout the August 2006 to July 2009. western Florida coast since 1990, where Keys. Despite surveys at 45 sites during Although two fifth-instar larvae were it was last recorded on Sanibel Island 2002–2003, adults or immature stages documented on West Summerland Key (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 17). One of the were found only at a single site near in November 2003, on unprotected land few verifiable reports (prior to BHSP on West Summerland Key approximately 2.2 miles (3.6 km) west rediscovery in 1999) was on Big Pine (Emmel and Daniels 2004, pp. 3–6; 21– of BHSP (Emmel and Daniels 2004, pp. Key in March 1992 (Glassberg et al. 25) (approximately 1.9 miles [3 km] 3, 24, 26), none have been seen there

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49547

since. According to Daniels (pers. of host plants, although the size was that the Miami blue was present on two comm. 2003c), an adult (or adults) was estimated to be 0.8 acres (0.32 ha) sites in the Marquesas, but not on Boca likely blown to this key from Bahia (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 12). The Grande (P. Cannon, pers. comm. 2010a). Honda by strong winds or was at least second largest colony occurred at the In 2010, similar surveys indicated that partially assisted by the wind. opposite (northeast) end of BHSP and the Miami blue was present on Boca In November 2006, Miami blues were was based solely on the presence of two Grande and one site in the Marquesas; discovered on islands within KWNWR to three small, isolated patches of it was still not located on Woman Key (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 2). This nickerbean directly adjacent to an (P. Cannon, pers. comm. 2010b; T. discovery was significant because it was existing nature trail and parking area Wilmers, pers. comm. 2010a). In March a new, geographically separate (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 6). The and April 2011, Miami blues were still population, and doubled the known remaining colonies were isolated, with present on five of seven sites where number of metapopulations remaining most occurring in close proximity to the previously found in KWNWR (T. (to 2). During the period from 1999 to main park road (Emmel and Daniels Wilmers pers. comm. 2011a; N. Haddad, 2009, the Miami blue was consistently 2004, pp. 13, 27). Isolated colonies used North Carolina State University [NCSU], found at BHSP (Ruffin and Glassberg very small patches of nickerbean (e.g., pers. comm. 2011). 2000, p. 29; Edwards and Glassberg one was estimated to be 10 by 10 feet 2002, p. 9; Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. [3 by 3 meters]) (Emmel and Daniels Reintroductions 4; Daniels 2009, p. 3). However, this 2003, p. 3), often adjacent to paved Although Miami blue butterflies were population may now be extirpated. This roads (Emmel and Daniels 2004, pp. 6, successfully reared in captivity, leaves the islands within KWNWR as 12, 27). reintroductions have been unsuccessful. the only known locations of the Key West National Wildlife Refuge Since 2004, approximately 7,140 subspecies. individuals have been released (J. Overall, the Miami blue has Efforts to define the limits of the Daniels pers. comm. as cited in FWC undergone a substantial reduction in its KWNWR metapopulation were 2010, p. 8). Between August 2007 and historical range, with an estimated > 99 conducted from November 2006 to July November 2008, reintroduction events percent decline in area occupied 2007 (Cannon et al. 2007, pp. 10–11; were carried out at BNP and DJSP 12 (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 2010, p. 849). Miami blues were found times resulting in the release of 3,553 Commission [FWC] 2010, p. 11). In in seven sites on five islands in the individuals (276 adults/3,277 larvae) 2009, metapopulations existed at two Marquesas Keys, approximately 12.2 (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). main locations: BHSP and KWNWR, miles (19.6 km) west of Key West, and Monitoring efforts have been limited; 19 roughly 50 miles (80 km) apart. The on Boca Grande Key, approximately days were spent monitoring metapopulation at BHSP is now 11.8 miles (19 km) west of Key West (6.3 reintroduction sites (Emmel and Daniels possibly extirpated with the last adult miles [10.1 km] east-southeast of the 2009, p. 4). To date, no evidence of documented in July 2010 (A. Edwards, Marquesas Keys) (Cannon et al. 2007, colony establishment has been found Florida Atlantic University, pers. comm. pp. 1–24; 2010, pp. 847–848). The eight (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). It is not 2011). It is feasible that additional sites occupied by Miami blues ranged clear why reintroductions were occurrences exist in the Keys, but these from approximately 0.25 to 37.10 acres unsuccessful. Numerous factors may may be ephemeral and low in (0.1–15.0 ha) (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 6; have been involved (e.g., predation, population number (Saarinen 2009, p. 2010, p. 848). The combined amount of parasitism, insufficient host plant or upland habitat of occupied sites (within 143). In 2010, the Service funded an larval sources). Due to limited resources KWNWR) was roughly 59 acres (23.8 ha) additional study with UF to search and other constraints, standard (Cannon et al. 2010, p. 848). Miami remote areas for possible presence; this protocols were not employed to help study is now underway. The subspecies blues were not found on Woman Key, identify factors that may have was not located in limited surveys approximately 10.1 miles (16.2 km) west influenced reintroduction success. conducted in the Cape Sable area of of Key West, or Man Key, approximately Research with surrogate species may be ENP in March 2011 (P. Halupa, pers. 6.8 miles (10.9 km) west of Key West; helpful to better establish protocols and obs. 2011; M. Minno, pers. comm. these sites had abundant nectar plants, refine techniques for the Miami blue 2011). but few host plants (Cannon et al. 2007, prior to future propagation and pp. 5, 12; 2010, pp. 848–850). In Bahia Honda State Park reintroduction efforts. addition, the Miami blue was not found Bahia Honda is a small island at the on six islands in the Great White Heron Population Estimates and Status east end of the lower Keys, National Wildlife Refuge (GWHNWR); approximately 7.0 miles (11.3 km) west Bahia Honda State Park these sites contained limited amounts metapopulation of Vaca Key (Marathon) and 2.0 miles of, or were lacking, either host plants or (3.2 km) east of Big Pine Key. The nectar plants (Cannon et al. 2007, pp. 5, Prior to its apparent extirpation, the amount of suitable habitat (habitat 12; 2010, pp. 847, 850–851). metapopulation at BHSP was monitored supporting larval host plants and In a separate study, Daniels also regularly from 2002 to 2009 (Emmel and adjacent adult nectar sources) within found four of the sites previously Daniels 2009, p. 4). Pollard transects at BHSP is approximately 1.5 acres (0.6 occupied within KWNWR to support the south-end colony site (largest) hectares [ha]). Of the suitable habitat the Miami blue variously from 2008 to yielded annual peak counts of available at BHSP, approximately 85 2010 (Emmel and Daniels 2008, pp. 7– approximately 175, 84, 112, and 132, percent (1.3 acres [0.5 ha]) was occupied 10; 2009, pp. 9–13; Daniels 2008, pp. 1– from 2002 to 2005 (prior to hurricanes), by the Miami blue (Emmel and Daniels 6; Daniels 2010, pp. 3–5; J. Daniels, and 82, 81, 120, and 38, from 2006 to 2004, p. 12). The metapopulation pers. comm. 2010a). Survey effort, 2009 (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). comprised 13 distinct colonies, with the however, was limited. Some previously From October 2002 to September 2003, core comprising 3 or 4 colonies, located occupied islands were not searched, and abundance estimates using mark- at the southwest end (Emmel and no new occupied areas were identified. release-recapture (Schnabel method) Daniels 2004, pp. 6, 27). This area Followup presence and absence ranged from a low of 19.7 in February contained the largest contiguous patch surveys by KWNWR in 2009 showed 2003 to a high of 114.5 in June 2003

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49548 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

(Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 9). Counts Affecting the Species) (Emmel and and June revealed few Miami blues; ranged from 6 to 100 adults during Daniels 2009, p. 4; Daniels 2009, p. 5; little new leaf growth and no flowering surveys by the NABA conducted from E. Kiefer, BHSP, pers. comm. 2011a). of blackbead was observed at these February 2004 to January 2005 (NABA From 2006 through 2009, adult or locations after February 2007 (Cannon et 2005, unpub. data). Monthly (2003 to immature Miami blues were found at al. 2010, p. 850). Seasonality observed 2006) or bimonthly (2007) monitoring several colony sites; however, one on KWNWR was different than that by Salvato (pers. comm. 2011c) at the colony became relatively unproductive described for the BHSP metapopulation south-end colony produced annual in 2005 (pre-hurricane) (Emmel and (above). Hurricane Wilma (October average counts of 129, 58, 46, 6, and 8, Daniels 2009, p. 4). No Miami blues 2005) heavily damaged or killed respectively, from 2003 to 2007. Salvato have been found at any roadway blackbead stands at most sites, but it (pers. comm. 2011c) observed 21, 10, nickerbean patches within BHSP since also likely enhanced foraging habitat, if and 0 Miami blues from 2008 to 2010, 2005, prior to the advent of profound only temporarily, on select islands respectively, based on limited surveys. iguana herbivory and damages from within the KWNWR (Cannon et al. In general, early (dry) season numbers hurricanes (Emmel and Daniels 2009, 2007, p. 10; 2010, p. 851) (see Summary were low in most years and were p. 4). of Factors Affecting the Species). attributed to a persistent south Florida The metapopulation has diminished Periodic surveys at KWNWR in 2008 drought (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). in recent years likely due to the and 2009 suggested lower levels of Abundance trends indicated that there combined effects of small population abundance, based upon limited effort was a marked decrease in the number of size, drought, cold temperatures, and (Emmel and Daniels 2008, pp. 7–10; individuals during the winter months iguanas (see Summary of Factors 2009, pp. 9–13). In February 2008, (November to February) (Emmel and Affecting the Species). In 2010, few researchers recorded 3 adults on Boca Daniels 2004, p. 9; 2009, p. 4). Higher Miami blues were observed at BHSP. On Grande and a total of 32 adults at two abundances during the summer wet January 23, 2010, a photograph was islands within the Marquesas; lack of season may relate to production of a taken of a pair of Miami blues mating rainfall resulted in very limited adult large quantity of new terminal growth (Olle 2010, p. 5). On February 12, 2010, nectar sources and limited new growth on the larval host plants (nickerbean) a photograph was taken of a single adult of larval host (Emmel and Daniels 2008, and availability of nectar sources from (C. DeWitt, pers. comm. 2011). In March pp. 7–8). In April 2008, one adult was spring rainfall (Emmel and Daniels 2010, Daniels found one larva, but no recorded on Boca Grande; one adult was 2004, pp. 9–11). adults (D. Cook, FWC, pers. comm. also recorded at another island (Emmel Four hurricanes affected habitat at 2010a). In July 2010, a single adult was and Daniels 2008, p. 8). In June 2008, BHSP in 2005, resulting in reduced observed and photographed (A. no adults were located on Boca Grande, abundance of Miami blue following Edwards, pers. comm. 2011). No Miami and a total of 27 were recorded from two subsequent storms that continued blue adults have been located during other islands (Emmel and Daniels 2008, throughout 2006 (Salvato and Salvato quarterly surveys conducted in 2010 by p. 9). In August 2008, no adults were 2007, p. 160). Although no quantitative Salvato (pers. comm. 2010b, 2011c). No found at Boca Grande, and five adults measures were taken, a significant Miami blue butterflies of any life stage were recorded at another island (Emmel portion of the nickerbean in the survey were subsequently seen despite frequent and Daniels 2008, p. 10). In March 2009, area (> 35 percent of the area of searches (D. Cook, pers. comm. 2010a; no adults were recorded on Boca available habitat) was damaged by the P. Cannon, pers. comm. 2010c, 2010d, Grande; habitat conditions were deemed storms; roughly 60–80 percent of the 2010e, 2010f; M. Salvato, pers. comm. very poor, with limited new host growth vegetation on the southern side of the 2011c, 2011d; Jim Duquesnel, BHSP, and available nectar resources (Emmel island was visually estimated to have pers. comm. 2011a, 2011b). and Daniels 2009, p. 12). In April 2009, been heavily damaged, including large researchers found a total of 22 adults Key West National Wildlife Refuge stands of host and nectar plants (Salvato from two islands within the Marquesas Metapopulation(s) and Salvato 2007, p. 156). Despite a (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 13). decline in abundance after the The metapopulation at KWNWR Based upon limited data and hurricanes, the Miami blue had yielded counts of several hundred, at observations, the Miami blue persisted appeared to rebound toward pre-storm various times, in 2006–2007. Checklist on various islands within the KWNWR abundance by the summer months of counting was used during surveys in 2010. From April through July 2010, 2007 (Salvato and Salvato 2007, p. 160). conducted between November 2006 and the Miami blue was observed on 5 of 10 However, peaks remained below those July 2007 to document the distribution dates at one location within the found prior to the 2005 hurricane and abundance of Miami blues (Cannon Marquesas, although in limited numbers season (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). et al. 2007, p. 5; 2010, p. 848). Within during brief surveys (T. Wilmers, pers. Although it is unclear when iguanas the seven sites occupied in the comm. 2010b). On July 28, 2010, became established at BHSP, effects of Marquesas Keys, the highest counts researchers recorded 19 adults from herbivory on the host plant were ranged from 8 to 521 depending upon three islands within the Marquesas, in apparent by late 2008 or early 2009 site and sampling date (Cannon et al. limited surveys; another 25 adults were (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4; Daniels 2007, p. 7; 2010, p. 848). The highest recorded on Boca Grande in less than 1 2009, p. 5; P. Cannon, pers. comm. count on Boca Grande was 441 in hour of survey work (J. Daniels, pers. 2009; A. Edwards, pers. comm. 2009; P. February 2007 (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 7; comm. 2010a). On September 30, 2010, Hughes, pers. comm. 2009; M. Salvato, 2010, p. 848). Highest counts occurred dozens of Miami blues were observed pers. comm. 2010a). Defoliation was when blackbead flowered profusely and on Boca Grande; this may have mostly limited to the south-end colony produced new leaves (Cannon et al. represented an actual population size in site (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). 2010, p. 851). In March and April, the hundreds (N. Haddad, pers. comm. Cooperative eradication efforts to blackbead was observed to yield little 2010). On November 24, 2010, address this problem began in 2009 and new growth and no flowering, and researchers positively identified 48 continue today; however, iguanas oviposition by Miami blues was not Miami blue adults on Boca Grande in continue to impact terminal nickerbean observed (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 8). less than 3 hours of surveys, noting that growth (see Summary of Factors Partial searches on two islands in May assessment was difficult due to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49549

many hundreds or possibly thousands are separated by a distance of more than The metapopulation structure on of cassius blues, which were also 43 miles (70 km). Given the Miami KWNWR is more extensive than that present (P. Cannon, pers. comm. 2010b; blue’s poor dispersal capabilities (E.V. which occurred at BHSP (Saarinen T. Wilmers, pers. comm. 2010a). In Saarinen and J.C. Daniels, unpub. data 2009, p. 49). Due to small sample sizes March and April 2011, researchers as cited in Saarinen 2009, p. 22), it is from Boca Grande, only samples from observed Miami blue adults at five sites highly unlikely that they interacted. the Marquesas Keys were used for within KWNWR in numbers similar to Saarinen’s work showed no gene flow genetic analysis of KWNWR, and results those reported above (N. Haddad, pers. and a clear distinction between the were limited (Saarinen 2009, pp. 66, comm. 2011). In July 2011, fewer adults BHSP and KWNWR metapopulations 72). Overall, this metapopulation was were observed (P. Hughes, pers. comm. (Saarinen 2009, pp. 36, 74, 89) (see found to have higher genetic diversity 2011). Summary of Factors Affecting the (mean observed heterozygosity of 51 At this time, it is unclear what the Species). percent versus 39.5 percent) than the size of the metapopulation at KWNWR Studies addressing molecular BHSP population (Saarinen 2009, p. 49). is or its dynamics. However, available diversity at BHSP showed the effective Allelic richness (3.790 in February data (given above) suggest wide number of alleles remained relatively 2008) was also higher in KWNWR fluctuations of adults within and constant over time, at both a monthly (Saarinen 2009, pp. 71, 75). between years and sites. The frequency (generational) and annual scale Accordingly, KWNWR is a particularly of dispersal between islands is also not (Saarinen 2009, pp. 71, 84). Allelic important source of variation to be known (Cannon et al. 2010, p. 852). Due (gene) richness was also stable over time considered for future conservation to the distance between the Marquesas in BHSP, with values ranging from efforts for this taxon (Saarinen 2009, pp. and Boca Grande (i.e., about 7 miles [11 2.988 to 3.121 when averaged across the 71, 75), especially if this is the only km]) and the species’ limited dispersal 12 microsatellite loci from September extant metapopulation(s) remaining. capabilities, it is possible that two (or 2005 to October 2006. These values The KWNWR metapopulation showed more) distinct metapopulations exist were lower than those in KWNWR signs of a bottleneck and may support within KWNWR (J. Daniels, pers. comm. [3.790] (Saarinen 2009, p. 71). However, the hypothesis that it is a newly 2010b). In September 2010, the Service data showed that the BHSP founded population (Saarinen 2009, pp. initiated a new study with researchers metapopulation retained an adequate 76, 141). Further work is needed to from NCSU to conduct a comprehensive amount of genetic diversity to maintain better understand the metapopulation examination of potential habitat within the population in 2005 and 2006, dynamics and genetic implications in KWNWR and GWHNWR, quantify despite perceived changes in overall this population. current distribution and habitat use, and population size (Saarinen 2009, p. 77). develop a monitoring protocol to No significant evidence of a recent Previous Federal Action estimate detectability, abundance, and genetic bottleneck was found in the On May 22, 1984, we published a occupancy parameters. BHSP generations analyzed, however, Review of Invertebrate Wildlife for there may have been a previous Listing as Endangered or Threatened Gene Flow and Genetic Diversity Within bottleneck that was undetectable with Species (49 FR 21664), which included Contemporary Populations methods used (Saarinen 2009, pp. 72, the Miami blue butterfly (Hemiargus Saarinen (2009, pp. 15, 29–33, 40, 44) 85, 141). thomasi bethune-bakeri) as a category 2 and Saarinen et al. (2009b, pp. 242–244) To explore the level of gene flow and candidate species for possible future examined 12 polymorphic microsatellite connectivity between discrete habitat listing as threatened or endangered. loci (noncoding regions of patches at BHSP, Saarinen (2009, pp. Category 2 candidates were those taxa chromosomes) to assess molecular 64–65) conducted analyses at several for which information contained in our diversity and gene flow of wild and spatial scales, analyzing BHSP as a files indicated that listing may be captive-reared Miami blue butterflies; single population (with no subdivision), appropriate, but for which additional also, one microsatellite locus was as individual colonies occupying data were needed to support a listing successfully amplified from a subset of discrete habitat patches (as several proposal. In a January 6, 1989, Animal the museum specimens. Although groups acting in a metapopulation Notice of Review (54 FR 572), the Miami results from historical specimens should structure), and as a division of clumped blue butterfly continued as a category 2 be interpreted with caution (due both to colonies versus other, more spatially candidate, with a name change from small sample size and the single distant colonies. Analyses of bethune-bakeri to bethunebakeri. On microsatellite locus), Saarinen (2009, microsatellite frequencies were also November 21, 1991, the Miami blue was pp. 15, 50–51) reported some loss of used to assess gene flow between habitat downgraded from a category 2 to diversity in the contemporary patches (Saarinen 2009, p. 72). While category 3C species in an Animal populations, though less than had been some subpopulations were well linked, Candidate Review for Listing as expected. Even with small sample sizes, others showed more division (Saarinen Endangered or Threatened Species (56 historical populations were significantly 2009, p. 73). High levels of gene flow FR 58830), characterized as having an more diverse (with generally higher (and relatively little differentiation) unknown trend (meaning additional effective numbers of alleles and were apparent even between distant survey work was required to determine observed levels of heterozygosity) than habitat patches on BHSP, and the the current trend). Category 3C species BHSP; KWNWR population values were smaller patches, such as those along the were those taxa that had proved to be between historical values and BHSP Main Road, appeared to be important more abundant or widespread than values (Saarinen 2009, pp. 44–46). links in maintaining connectivity previously believed and/or those that Both historical and contemporary (Saarinen 2009, pp. 78, 141). Overall, were not subject to any identifiable populations showed evidence of a gene flow between habitat patches on threat. In 1996, Category 3 species were metapopulation structure with BHSP was considered crucial to removed from the candidate list (61 FR interacting subcolonies (E.V. Saarinen maintain genetic diversity and 7596). and J.C. Daniels, unpub. data as cited in imperative for the Miami blue’s long- On June 15, 2000, we received a Saarinen 2009, p. 49). However, the term persistence at this location petition from the NABA and Mark metapopulations at BHSP and KWNWR (Saarinen 2009, p. 141). Salvato to emergency list the Miami

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49550 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

blue butterfly (Hemiargus thomasi difficult to patrol. On January 11, 2011, Human Population Growth and bethunebakeri) as endangered with the Service received a separate petition Development critical habitat pursuant to the Act. The for emergency listing of the Miami blue The geographic range of this butterfly petition cited habitat loss and butterfly with critical habitat from the once extended from the Dry Tortugas fragmentation, influence of mosquito Center for Biological Diversity. north along the Florida coasts to about control chemicals, unethical butterfly The Miami blue butterfly is currently St. Petersburg and Daytona. It was most a Federal candidate (LPN of 3) and collection, and human-caused changes common on the southern mainland and State-threatened subspecies. to habitat occupied by the subspecies’ the Keys, and more localized on the The Service’s decision to emergency only known population. Gulf coast. Examination of museum On August 29, 2001, the Department list the Miami blue butterfly resulted collections indicated that specimens of the Interior reached an agreement from our careful review of the status of were common from the early 1900s to with several conservation organizations the subspecies and the threats it faces. the 1980s; the butterfly was widely regarding a number of listing actions We based this decision on information distributed, existing in a variety of that had been delayed by court-ordered in our files or otherwise available to us locations in southern Florida for critical habitat designations and listing (including the results of recent status decades (Saarinen 2009, p. 46). actions for other species. That surveys) as well as information agreement was subsequently approved contained in the original petition (2000), However, through time, much of this by the U.S. District Court for the District the renewed petition (2010), the new subspecies’ native habitat has been lost, of Columbia. Under the agreement, we petition (2011), and information degraded, or fragmented, especially on and the conservation organizations referenced in the petitions. the mainland, largely from development agreed to significantly extend the The proposed rule to list the Miami and urban growth (Lenczewski 1980, p. actions on the other species, thereby blue butterfly as endangered is 47; Minno and Emmel 1994, pp. 647– making funds available for a number of published concurrently with this 648; Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18; Carroll listing actions judged to be higher emergency rule and found in this issue and Loye 2006, p. 25). priority. Those higher priority listing of the Federal Register in Proposed On the east coast of Florida, the entire actions included the 90-day finding for Rules. coastline in Palm Beach, Broward, and the petition to list the Miami blue Miami-Dade Counties (as far south as Summary of Factors Affecting the Miami Beach) is densely urban, with butterfly. Species On January 3, 2002 (67 FR 280), we only small remnants of native coastal announced our 90-day finding for the Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), vegetation conserved in fragmented petition to list the Miami blue, initiated and its implementing regulations at 50 natural areas. Most of the Gulf Coast a status review, and sought data and CFR part 424, set forth the procedures barrier islands that previously information from the public. In this for adding species to the Federal Lists supported the Miami blue, including finding, we indicated the Miami blue of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Marco and Chokoloskee Islands, have may be in danger of extirpation. and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the experienced intense development However, we did not believe the threats Act, we may determine a species to be pressure and undergone subsequent to be so great that extirpation was endangered or threatened due to one or habitat loss (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18). imminent, requiring us to provide more of the following five factors: (A) In an independent survey of historical emergency protection to the butterfly The present or threatened destruction, sites where the Miami blue had through our emergency listing modification, or curtailment of its previously been observed or collected, provisions. We indicated that we could habitat or range; (B) overutilization for half were found to be developed or no issue an emergency rule when an commercial, recreational, scientific, or longer supporting host plants in 2002 immediate threat posed a significant educational purposes; (C) disease or (D. Fine, unpub. data, pers. comm. risk to the well-being of the subspecies. predation; (D) the inadequacy of 2002). On May 11, 2005, we recognized the existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Significant land use changes have Miami blue butterfly as a Federal other natural or manmade factors occurred through time in south Florida. candidate subspecies in our annual affecting its continued existence. Listing Considering political and economic Candidate Notice of Review (70 FR actions may be warranted based on any structure and changes, Solecki (2001, 24872). This action constituted a 12- of the above threat factors, singly or in pp. 339–356) divided Florida’s land-use month finding for the subspecies in combination. Each of these factors is history into three broad eras: Frontier which it was determined that the discussed below. era (1870–1930), development era subspecies was warranted but precluded (1931–1970), and globalization era for listing by other higher priority listing A. The Present or Threatened (1971–present). Within the development actions. On November 9, 2009, in our Destruction, Modification, or era, Solecki (2001, p. 350) noted that: annual Candidate Notice of Review (74 Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range ‘‘Tremendous change took place from FR 57809), we changed the Listing The Miami blue has experienced the early 1950s to the early and mid- Priority Number (LPN) for the Miami substantial destruction, modification, 1970s. Between 1953 and 1973, nearly blue from 6 to 3 due to increased and and curtailment of its habitat and range 5,800 km2 (28, 997 ha/year) of natural more immediate threats. (see Background, above), with an areas were lost to agricultural and urban On August 10, 2010, the Service estimated > 99 percent decline in area land uses (Solecki and Walker, 2001).’’ received a renewed petition from the occupied (FWC 2010, p. 11). Although During this time, ‘‘an almost continuous NABA for emergency listing of the many factors likely contributed to its strip of urban development became Miami blue butterfly as endangered. decline, some of which may have present along the Atlantic coast’’ and This petition stated that the entire operated synergistically, habitat loss, ‘‘urban land uses became well remaining population is in significant degradation, and fragmentation are established in the extreme southeastern and immediate danger because it exists undoubtedly major forces that part of the region particularly around in a single location and is subject to contribute to its imperilment (Calhoun the cities of Miami and Fort Lauderdale, hurricanes, iguanas, and human impacts et al. 2002, pp. 13–19; Saarinen 2009, p. and along the entire coastline heading given that the area is remote and 36). northward to West Palm Beach.’’

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49551

Saarinen (2009, pp. 42, 46) examined coastal areas, continues and is expected 2002; J. Calhoun, pers. comm. 2003b; M. museum collections in the context of to increase. Salvato, pers. comm. 2003). In 2001, Solecki’s development eras and found Although extensive loss and following the return of balloonvine, a that Miami blue records for Miami-Dade fragmentation of habitat has occurred, single adult was observed (J. Calhoun, County were highest in the 1930s and significant areas of suitable larval host pers. comm. 2003b). Calhoun noted that 1940s, prior to massive land use plants still remain on private and public the silver-banded hairstreak changes and urbanization. Records from lands. Results from surveys (2002–2003) (Chlorostrymon simaethis), which also Monroe County (including the Keys) within south Florida and the Keys feeds on balloonvine, had also returned were most numerous in the 1970s showed that numerous areas still to the site. The silver-banded hairstreak (Saarinen 2009, p. 46). Calhoun (pers. contained host plants (Emmel and has rebounded substantially on northern comm. 2003b) suggested the butterfly Daniels 2004, pp. 3–6). Results from Key Largo within disturbed areas of reached peak abundance when similar surveys in 2007–2009 suggested DJSP; if any extant Miami blues remain balloonvine invaded clearings that 14 of 16 sites on the mainland and on the island, reestablishment in this associated with the construction boom 20 of 22 in the Keys contained suitable area is possible. of the 1970s and 1980s in the northern habitat (Emmel and Daniels 2009, pp. 6– Removal of nickerbean as part of trail Keys and southern mainland and 8). Other researchers noted that larval maintenance and impacts to a tree became available as a suitable host host plants are common in the Keys resulting from placement of a facility plant. If so, this may have represented (Carroll and Loye 2006, p. 24; Minno may have impacted the south colony at a change in primary host plant at a time and Minno 2009, p. 9). A search of The BHSP in 2002 (J. Daniels, pers. comm. when the subspecies was beginning to Institute for Regional Conservation’s 2002a; P. Halupa, pers. obs. 2002). The decline due to continued development (IRC) database suggests that 79 tree was an apparent assembly area for and destruction of coastal habitat. conservation areas in south Florida display by butterflies during courtship Saarinen (2009, p. 46) could not contain Caesalpinia spp., 39 areas (J. Daniels, pers. comm. 2002a). Damage correlate decreases in natural land areas contain Cardiospermum spp., and 77 to host plant and nectar sources from with changes in the numbers collected contain Pithecellobium spp. (http:// trimming and mowing during the dry (or abundance), due to several www.regionalconservation.org/ircs/ season and herbivory by iguanas (see confounding factors (e.g., increased database/search). With significant areas Factor E) impacted habitat conditions at pesticide use, exotic species). Calhoun of host plants still remaining in portions BHSP in 2010 (D. Olle, NABA, pers. et al. (2002, p. 13) also attributed the of the butterfly’s range, there is potential comm. 2010). More recently, the Florida butterfly’s decline to loss of habitat due for additional populations of the Miami Department of Environmental Protection to coastal development, but blue to exist. (FDEP) has worked to improve habitat Acute habitat fragmentation has acknowledged that other factors such as conditions at BHSP through plantings, apparently severely diminished the succession, tropical storms, and modification of its mowing practices, butterfly’s ability to repopulate formerly mosquito control also likely exacerbated removal of iguanas, protection of inhabited sites or to successfully locate the decline (see Factor E). sensitive areas, and other actions (R. host plants in new areas (Calhoun et al. Zambrano, FWC, pers. comm. 2010; D. Habitat loss and human population 2002, p. 18). Although larval host plants Cook, pers. comm. 2010a, 2010b; Janice growth in coastal areas on the mainland remain locally common, the Duquesnel, Florida Park Service [FPS], and the Keys is continuing. Human disappearance of core populations and pers. comm. 2010a, 2010b; Jim population in south Florida has extent of habitat fragmentation may now Duquesnel, pers. comm. 2010, 2011b; E. increased from less than 20,000 people prevent the subspecies from colonizing Kiefer, pers. comm. 2011a). in 1920 to more than 4.6 million by new areas (J. Calhoun, pers. comm. Maintenance, including pruning of 1990 (Solecki 2001, p. 345). Monroe 2003b). The Miami blue is sedentary host vegetation along trails and County and Miami-Dade County, two and not known to travel far from roadsides, use of herbicides, and areas where the butterfly was pockets of larval host plants and adult impacts from other projects could lead historically abundant, have increased nectar sources (J. Calhoun, pers. comm. to direct mortality in occupied habitats from less than 30,000 and 500,000 2003b; Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 6, (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 14). people in 1950, respectively, to more 13). The presence of adult nectar Habitat previously supporting immature than 73,000 and 2.5 million in 2009 sources proximal to larval host plants is stages of the butterfly on West (http://quickfacts.census.gov). All critical to the Miami blue and may help Summerland Key is subject to periodic available vacant land in the Keys is explain its absence from areas that mowing for road maintenance by projected to be consumed by human contain high larval host plant Florida Department of Transportation population increases (i.e., developed) by abundance but few nectar sources (J. (FDOT) (J. Daniels, pers. comm. 2003c); 2060, including lands not accessible by Calhoun, pers. comm. 2003b; Emmel the butterfly no longer occurs at this automobile (Zwick and Carr 2006, p. and Daniels 2004, p. 13). location (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 3; 14). Scenarios developed by 2009, p. 8). Since Miami blues are Massachusetts Institute of Technology Land Management Practices sedentary with limited dispersal (MIT) urban studies and planning Land management practices that capabilities, alteration of even small department staff (Flaxman and Vargas- remove larval host plants and nectar habitat patches may be deleterious. Moreno 2010, pp. 3–4) include both sources can be a threat to the Miami Removal of host plants from trend and doubling population blue. Some actions on public conservation lands does not appear to estimates combined with climate change conservation lands may have negatively be occurring on any large scales at this factors (see below) and show significant affected occupied habitat, but the extent time. IRC has conducted extensive plant impacts on remaining conservation of this impact is not known. For inventories on conservation lands lands, including the refuges, within the example, the Miami blue had been within south Florida and is not aware of Keys. While the rate of development in sighted in DJSP in 1996, but following any attempts to eradicate balloonvine portions of south Florida has slowed in removal of balloonvine as part of and notes that gray nickerbean has only recent years, habitat loss and routine land management, no adults rarely been controlled (i.e., purposefully degradation, especially in desirable were observed (L. Cooper, pers. comm. removed or pruned, followed with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49552 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

herbicide treatment) (K. Bradley, pers. and Atmospheric Administration diminish the likelihood of the comm. 2002). Nickerbean is reported to [NOAA] 2008, p. 1). This equates to subspecies’ survival and recovery. occur in all of the State parks in the approximately 8.76 inches (22.3 cm) in The Nature Conservancy (TNC) (2010, Keys. It is not removed, but where it is 100 years (NOAA 2008, p. 1). p. 1) used Light Detection and Ranging a safety hazard for visitors such as when In a technical paper following its 2007 (LIDAR) remote sensing technology to overgrowing into trails, it is trimmed report, the IPCC (2008, p. 28) derive digital elevation models and (Janice Duquesnel, pers. comm. 2003). emphasized it is very likely that the predict future shorelines and Removal of host plants in or near average rate of sea level rise during the distribution of habitat types for Big Pine occupied habitat remains a concern, 21st century will exceed that from 1961 Key based on sea level rise predictions given the subspecies’ small population to 2003, although it was projected to ranging from the best case to worst case size, isolated occurrences, and limited have substantial geographical scenarios described by current scientific dispersal capabilities (see Factor E). variability. Partial loss of the Greenland literature. In the Keys, models predicted Lack of prescribed fire on public and Antarctic ice sheets could result in that sea level rise will first result in the lands may have adversely affected the many feet (several meters) of sea level conversion of habitat and eventually the Miami blue through time, but impacts rise, major changes in coastlines, and complete inundation of habitat. In the are unclear. In addition to being found inundation of low-lying areas (IPCC best case scenario, a rise of 7 inches (18 within coastal areas and hardwood 2008, pp. 28–29). Low-lying islands and cm) would result in the inundation of hammocks, the Miami blue was also river deltas will incur the largest 1,840 acres (745 ha) (34 percent) of Big known to occur within tropical impacts (IPCC 2008, pp. 28–29). Pine Key and the loss of 11 percent of pinelands, a fire-dependent habitat According to CCSP (2008, p. 5–31), the island’s upland habitat (TNC 2010, (Minno and Emmel 1993, p. 134; much of low-lying, coastal south Florida p. 1). In the worst case scenario, a rise Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18). Calhoun et ‘‘will be underwater or inundated with of 4.6 feet (140 cm) would result in the al. (2002, p. 18) reported that, until the salt water in the coming century.’’ This inundation of about 5,950 acres (2,409 early 1990s, the Miami blue most means that most occupied, suitable, and ha) (96 percent) and the loss of all commonly occurred within pine potential habitat for Miami blue will upland habitat (TNC 2010, p. 1). rocklands on Big Pine Key. In the likely be either submerged or affected by Although the Miami blue no longer absence of fire, pine rockland often increased flooding. occurs on Big Pine Key, it was progresses to hardwood hammock. Lack historically found on this island. If The 2007 IPCC report found a 90 of fire may have resulted in habitat loss, modeling is accurate, under the worst percent probability of an additional 7 to however, the extent that this condition case scenario, even upland habitat on 23 inches and possibly as high as many occurred is unclear and difficult to Big Pine Key will become submerged, feet (several meters) of sea level rise by assess. Since the Miami blue is thereby making the butterfly’s potential 2100 in the Keys. This would cause sedentary, changes in vegetation due to recolonization or survival at this and major changes to coastlines and this and other land management other low-lying locations in the Keys inundation of low-lying areas like the practices may have exacerbated the very unlikely. effects of fragmentation. Keys (IPCC 2008, pp. 28–29). The IPCC Similarly, using a spatially explicit In summary, a variety of land (2008, pp. 3, 103) concluded that model for the Keys, Ross et al. (2009, p. management practices on public lands climate change is likely to increase the 473) found that mangrove habitats will (e.g., removal of host plants, mowing of occurrence of saltwater intrusion as sea expand steadily at the expense of nectar sources, and lack of prescribed level rises. Since the 1930s, increased upland and traditional habitats as sea fires) may have adversely affected the salinity of coastal waters contributed to level rises. Most of the upland and Miami blue and its habitat historically the decline of cabbage palm forests in transitional habitat in the central and continues to do so currently. southwest Florida (Williams et al. 1999, portion of Sugarloaf Key is projected to pp. 2056–2059), expansion of be lost with a 0.2-meter rise (0.7-foot Climate Change and Sea Level Rise mangroves into adjacent marshes in the rise) in sea level; a 0.5-meter rise (1.6- Climatic changes, including sea level Everglades (Ross et al. 2000, pp. 9, 12– foot rise) in sea level can result in a 95 rise, are major threats to south Florida, 13), and loss of pine rockland in the percent loss of upland habitat by 2100 including the Miami blue and its Keys (Ross et al. 1994, pp. 144, 151– (Ross et al. 2009, p. 473). Furthermore, habitat. Known occurrences and 155). Ross et al. (2009, pp. 471–478) suitable habitat are in low-lying areas Hydrology has a strong influence on suggested that interactions between sea and will be affected by rising sea level. plant distribution in these and other level rise and pulse disturbances (e.g., In general, the Intergovernmental Panel coastal areas (IPCC 2008, p. 57). Such storm surges or fire [see Factor E]) can on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that communities typically grade from salt to cause vegetation to change sooner than the warming of the world’s climate brackish to freshwater species. In the projected based on sea level alone. system is unequivocal based on Keys, elevation differences between Scientific evidence that has emerged documented increases in global average such communities are very slight (Ross since the publication of the IPCC Report air and ocean temperatures, et al. 1994, p. 146), and horizontal (2007) indicates an acceleration in unprecedented melting of snow and ice, distances are also small. Human global climate change. Important aspects and rising average sea level (IPCC 2007, developments will also likely be of climate change seem to have been p. 2; 2008, p. 15). Sea level rise is the significant factors influencing whether underestimated previously, and the largest climate-driven challenge to low- natural communities can move and resulting impacts are being felt sooner. lying coastal areas and refuges in the persist (IPCC 2008, p. 57; CCSP 2008, p. For example, early signs of change subtropical ecoregion of southern 7–6). For the Miami blue, this means suggest that the 1°C of global warming Florida (U.S. Climate Change Science that much of the butterfly’s habitat in the world has experienced to date may Program [CCSP] 2008, pp. 5–31, 5–32). the Keys, as well as habitat in other have already triggered the first tipping The long-term record at Key West shows parts of its historical range, will likely point of the Earth’s climate system—the that sea level rose on average 0.088 change as vegetation changes. Any disappearance of summer Arctic sea ice. inches (0.224 cm) annually between deleterious changes to important host This process could lead to rapid and 1913 and 2006 (National Oceanographic plants and nectar sources could further abrupt climate change, rather than the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49553

gradual changes that were forecasted. for exceedingly rare specimens. For small populations are vulnerable to Other processes to be affected by example, during a 4-year investigation, harm from collection (Gall 1984, p. 133). projected warming include special agents of the Service’s Office of A population may be reduced to below temperatures, rainfall (amount, seasonal Law Enforcement executed warrants sustainable numbers (Allee effect) by timing, and distribution), and storms and seized over 30,000 endangered and removal of females, reducing the (frequency and intensity) (see Factor E). protected butterflies and beetles, with a probability that new colonies will be The MIT scenarios combine various total wholesale commercial market founded. Collectors can pose threats to levels of sea level rise, temperature value of about $90,000 in the United butterflies because they may be unable change, and precipitation differences States (USDJ 1995, pp. 1–4). In another to recognize when they are depleting with population, policy assumptions, case, special agents found at least 13 colonies below the thresholds of and conservation funding changes. All species protected under the Act, and survival or recovery (Collins and Morris of the scenarios, from small climate another 130 species illegally taken from 1985, pp. 162–165). There is ample change shifts to major changes, will lands administered by the Department evidence of collectors impacting other have significant effects on the Keys. of the Interior and other State lands imperiled and endangered butterflies We have identified a number of (USDC 1993, pp. 1–86; Service 1995, pp. (Gochfeld and Burger 1997, pp. 208– threats to the habitat of the Miami blue 1–2). Law enforcement agents routinely 209), host plants (Cech and Tudor 2005, which have operated in the past, are see butterfly species protected under the p. 55), and even contributing to impacting the subspecies now, and will Convention on International Trade in extirpations (Duffey 1968, p. 94). For continue to impact the subspecies in the Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and example, the federally endangered foreseeable future. Based on our Flora (CITES) during port inspections in Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii analysis of the best available Florida, often without import mitchellii) is believed to have been information, we find that the present declarations or the required CITES extirpated from New Jersey due to and threatened destruction, permits (E. McKissick, Service Law overcollecting (57 FR 21567; Gochfeld modification, or curtailment of the Enforcement, pers. comm. 2011). and Burger 1997, p. 209). subspecies’ habitat is a threat to the Several listings of butterflies as Although we do not have evidence of subspecies throughout all of its range. endangered or threatened species under illegal collection of the Miami blue, we We have no reason to believe that this the Act have been based, at least do have evidence of illegal collection of threat will change in the foreseeable partially, on intense collection pressure. other butterflies from Federal lands in future. The decline of butterflies in Notably, the Saint Francis’ satyr south Florida, including the endangered south Florida is primarily the result of (Neonympha mitchellii francisci) was Schaus swallowtail. In a 1993 case, the long-lasting effects of habitat loss, emergency-listed as endangered on three defendants were indicted for degradation, and modification from April 15, 1994 (59 FR 18324). The Saint conspiracy to violate the wildlife laws human population growth and Francis’ satyr was demonstrated to have of the United States, including the associated development and agriculture. been significantly impacted by Endangered Species Act, the Lacey Act, Environmental effects resulting from collectors in just a 3-year period (59 FR and 18 U.S.C. 371 (USDC 1993, p. 1). climatic change, including sea level rise, 18324). The Callippe and Behren’s Violations involved numerous listed, are expected to become severe in the silverspot butterflies (Speyeria callippe imperiled, and common species from future and result in additional losses. callippe and Speyeria zerene behrensii) many locales; defendants later pled Although efforts have been made to were listed as endangered on December guilty to the felonies (Service 1995, p. restore habitat in some areas, the long- 5, 1997 (62 FR 64306), partially due to 1). As part of the evidence cited in the term effects of large-scale and wide- overcollection. The Blackburn’s sphinx case, defendants exchanged butterflies ranging habitat modification, moth (Manduca blackburni) was listed taken from County and Federal lands in destruction, and curtailment will last as endangered on February 1, 2000 (65 Florida and acknowledged that it was into the foreseeable future. FR 4770), partially due to overcollection best to trade ‘‘under the table’’ to avoid by private and commercial collectors. permits and ‘‘extra red tape’’ because B. Overutilization for Commercial, The Schaus swallowtail (Heraclides some were on the endangered species Recreational, Scientific, or Educational [Papilio] aristodemus ponceanus), the list (USDC 1993, p. 9). Acknowledging Purposes only federally listed butterfly in Florida, the difficulties in obtaining Schaus Collection was reclassified from threatened to swallowtail, defendants indicated that endangered in 1984 due to its continued they would traffic amongst each other to Rare butterflies and moths are highly decline (49 FR 3450). At the time of its exchange a Schaus for other extremely prized by collectors, and an original listing, some believed that rare butterflies (USDC 1993, p. 10). international trade exists in specimens collection represented a threat. As the These defendants engaged in interstate for both live and decorative markets, as Schaus decreased in distribution and commerce, exchanging a male Schaus in well as the specialist trade that supplies abundance, collection was believed to 1984 in the course of a commercial hobbyists, collectors, and researchers be a greater threat than at the time of activity (USDC 1993, p. 11). One (Collins and Morris 1985, pp. 155–179; listing (49 FR 3450). defendant also trafficked with a Morris et al. 1991, pp. 332–334; Collection was cited as a threat to the collector in Florida, dealing the Williams 1996, pp. 30–37). The Miami blue in both the original and federally listed San Bruno elfin butterfly specialist trade differs from both the live subsequent petitions for emergency (Callophrys mossii bayensis) (USDC and decorative market in that it listing. The State’s management plan for 1993, p. 67). concentrates on rare and threatened the Miami blue acknowledges that Illegal collection of butterflies on species (U.S. Department of Justice butterfly collecting may stress small, State, Federal, and other lands in [USDJ] 1993, pp. 1–3; United States v. localized populations and lead to the Florida appears ongoing, prevalent, and Skalski et al., Case No. CR9320137, U.S. loss of individuals and genetic damaging. As part of the District Court for the Northern District variability, but also indicates that there aforementioned case, one defendant, of California [USDC] 1993, pp. 1–86). In is no evidence or information on current who admitted getting caught collecting general, the rarer the species, the more or past collection pressure on the Miami within ENP and Loxahatchee National valuable it is; prices can exceed $25,000 blue (FWC 2010, p. 13). Butterflies in Wildlife Refuge, stated that he ‘‘got

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49554 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

away with it each time, simply claiming (M. Minno, pers. comm. 2009; C. species may inadvertently (or ignorance of the laws * * *.’’ (USDC Nagano, Service, pers. comm. 2011). At purposefully) collect the Miami blue 1993, p. 13). Another defendant detailed one Web site, male and female Florida butterfly thinking it was, or planning to his poaching in Florida and acquisition leafwing specimens can be purchased claim they thought it was, the cassius of federally endangered butterflies, for Ö110.00 and Ö60.00 (euros), blue, nickerbean blue, or ceraunus blue, acknowledging that he had ‘‘fared very respectively (approximately $153.18 which also occur in the same general well, going specifically after rare stuff’’ and $83.55). It is unclear from where the geographical area and habitat type. (USDC 1993, pp. 28–29). The same specimens originated or when these Federal listing of other similar defendant offered to traffic atala were collected, but this butterfly is now butterflies can partially reduce this hairstreaks (Eumaeus atala), noting that mainly restricted to ENP. The same Web threat (see Similarity of Appearance he did not do very well and had only site offers specimens of Bartram’s below) and provide added protective taken about 600 bugs in 9 days and that hairstreak for Ö10.00 ($13.93). Although measures for the Miami blue above this number seemed poor for Florida the specifics on its collection are not those afforded by the State. (USDC, p. 46). He further stated that clear, this butterfly now mainly occurs In summary, due to the few collecting had become difficult in on protected Federal, State, and County metapopulations, small population size, Florida due to restrictions and extreme lands. The same Web site offers restricted range, and remoteness of loss of habitat, admitting that he needed specimens of two other butterflies occupied habitat, we believe that to poach rare butterflies from protected similar in appearance to the Miami blue; collection is a significant threat to the parks (USDC 1993, p. 45). Methods to the ceraunus blue currently sells for subspecies and could potentially occur poach wildlife and means to evade Ö4.00 ($5.57), and the cassius blue is at any time. Even limited collection wildlife regulations, laws, and law available for Ö2.50–10.00 ($3.48-$13.93). from the small population in KWNWR enforcement were given (USDC 1993, p. Additionally, other subspecies of (or other populations, if discovered) 33). In a separate incident in 2008, an Cyclargus thomasi that occur in foreign could have deleterious effects on individual was observed attempting to countries are also for sale. It is clear that reproductive and genetic viability and take butterflies from Service lands in the a market currently exists for both thus could contribute to its extinction. Keys (D. Pharo, Service Law imperiled species and those similar in Scientific Research and Conservation Enforcement, pers. comm. 2008). When appearance to the Miami blue. Efforts confronted by a FWC officer, he lied The potential for unauthorized or about his activities; a live swallowtail illegal collection of the Miami blue Some techniques (e.g., capture, butterfly (unidentified) was found in an (eggs, larvae, pupae, or adults) exists, handling) used to understand or envelope on his person, a collapsible despite its State-threatened status and monitor the Miami blue have the butterfly net was found in a nearby area, the protections provided on Federal potential to cause harm to individuals and a cooler containing other live (and State) land. Illegal collection could or habitat. Visual surveys, transect butterfly species was in his car (D. occur without detection at remote counts, and netting for identification Pharo, pers. comm. 2008). islands of KWNWR since these areas are purposes have been performed during Additionally, we are aware of and difficult to patrol. The localized scientific research and conservation have documented evidence of interest in distribution and small population size efforts with the potential to disturb or the collection of other imperiled render this butterfly highly vulnerable injure individuals or damage habitat. butterflies in south Florida. In the to impacts from collection. At this time, Mark-recapture, a common method used aforementioned indictment, one removal of any individuals may have to determine population size, has been defendant noted that there was a ‘‘huge devastating consequences to the used by some researchers to monitor demand for Florida stuff,’’ that he knew survival of the subspecies. Although the Miami blue populations. This method ‘‘exactly where all the rare stuff is Miami blue is no longer believed to be has received some criticism. While found,’’ that he ‘‘can readily get present at BHSP, its return is possible. mark-recapture may be preferable to material,’’ and that in most cases he At BHSP, the butterfly, like other other sampling estimates (e.g., count- would ‘‘have to poach the material from wildlife and plant species within the based transects) in obtaining protected parks’’ (USDC 1993, p. 44). Florida park system, is protected from demographic data when used in a Salvato (pers. comm. 2011e) has also unauthorized collection (Chapter 62 D– proper design on appropriate species, been contacted by several individuals 2.013(5)) (see Factor D). However, such techniques may also result in requesting specimens of two Federal because BHSP is so heavily used, deleterious impacts to captured candidates, the Florida leafwing (Anaea continual monitoring for illegal butterflies (Mallet et al. 1987, pp. 377– troglodyta floridalis) and Bartram’s collections is a challenge. Daniels (pers. 386; Murphy 1988, pp. 236–239; hairstreak (Strymon acis bartrami), or comm. 2002a) believed that additional Haddad et al. 2008, pp. 929–940). seeking information regarding locations patrols would be helpful because Although effects may vary depending where they may be collected in the unauthorized collection of specimens is upon taxon, technique, or other factors, field. In addition, interest in the possible, even though collection is some studies suggest that marking may collection of the Florida leafwing was prohibited (J. Daniels, pers. comm. damage or kill butterflies or alter their posted by two parties on at least one 2002a). In addition, any colonies that behaviors (Mallet et al. 1987, pp. 377– Web site in 2010 along with advice on might be found or become established 386; Murphy 1988, pp. 236–239). where and how to bait trap, despite the outside of BHSP or other protected sites Murphy (1988, p. 236) and Mattoni et al. fact that this butterfly mainly occurs on would also not be patrolled and would (2001, p. 198) indicated that studies on Federal lands within ENP. Thus, there be at risk of collection. various lycaenids have demonstrated is established and ongoing collection Although the Miami blue’s status as a mortality and altered behavior as a pressure for rare butterflies, including State-threatened species provides some result of marking. Conversely, other two other highly imperiled candidate protection, this protection does not studies have found that marking did not species in south Florida. include provisions for other species of harm individual butterflies or We are also aware of multiple Web blues that are similar in appearance. populations (Gall 1984, pp. 139–154; sites that offer specimens of south Therefore, it is quite possible that Orive and Baughman 1989, p. 246; Florida’s candidate butterflies for sale collectors authorized to collect similar Haddad et al. 2008, p. 938). No studies

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49555

have been conducted to determine the criticized by some (FWC 2010, p. 10). Predation potential effects of marking on the All experiments were conducted with Predation of adults or immature stages Miami blue. Although data are lacking, captive-reared individuals; no wild was not observed during monitoring at researchers permitted to use such individuals were used. Individuals used BHSP, despite the presence of potential techniques have been confident in their in experiments were not intended for predators (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. abilities to employ the techniques safely release back into the wild or were reared 12; Trager 2009, p. 152). Several species with minimal effect on individuals specifically for this purpose. of social wasps, specifically paper handled. Researchers currently studying Researchers involved with the captive wasps (Polistes) and yellow jackets the population within KWNWR have colony and others conducting scientific (Vespula), are known to depredate opted to not use mark-release-recapture studies or other conservation efforts Lepidoptera on nickerbean and techniques due to the potential for were authorized by appropriate agencies surrounding vegetation at BHSP and damage to this small, fragile butterfly to conduct such work. other sites with suitable habitat, but (N. Haddad, pers. comm. 2011). In summary, we believe that captive predation on Miami blue larvae was not Captive propagation and propagation and reintroduction may be observed (Trager 2009, p. 152). Carroll reintroduction activities may present important components of the and Loye (2006, p. 18) encountered a risks if wild populations are impacted subspecies’ survival and recovery, but or if the species is introduced to new or parasitic wasp, Lisseurytomella flava, inappropriate areas outside of its such actions need to be carefully during their studies of the balloonvine historical range (65 FR 56916–56922). planned, implemented, and monitored. insects on northern Key Largo during Although butterflies were successfully Any future efforts should only be the late 1980s. No wasp parasitism reared in captivity at the UF with the initiated after it has been determined towards Miami blue larvae was noted support of State and Federal agencies, that: Such actions will not harm the (Carroll and Loye 2006, p. 24). However, efforts to reintroduce the Miami blue to wild population, rigorous standards are this wasp, along with the Miami blue, portions of its historical range did not met, and commitments are in place to was absent from continued balloonvine result in the establishment of any new increase the likelihood of success and sampling in 2003, suggesting the wasp populations (Emmel and Daniels 2009, maximize knowledge gained. may have used the butterfly as host. pp. 4–5; FWC 2010, p. 8). While some On the basis of this analysis, we find Cannon et al. (2007, p. 16) observed monitoring occurred following releases, that overutilization for commercial, wasps (unidentified) eating Miami blue it is not clear why captive-reared recreational, scientific, or educational larvae at KWNWR; wasps and individuals did not persist in the wild. purposes is a threat to the Miami blue. dragonflies were also observed to chase Perhaps experiments using surrogate Collection is a significant threat to the adults in flight. Adult Miami blues were species (e.g., other lycaenids) and more subspecies. Based on our analysis of the found entrapped in the webs of silver structured and intense monitoring best available information, we have no orb spiders (Argiope argentata) (Cannon following releases can help elucidate reason to believe that its vulnerability to et al. 2007, p. 16). Trager (2009, pp. 149, possible causes for failure and improve collection and risks associated with 153–154) indicated that the Miami blue chances for reestablishment in the scientific or conservation efforts will is likely depredated under natural future. change in the foreseeable future. conditions, but only predation by an Declines in the captive colony in 2005 adult brown anole lizard (Anolis sagrei) and 2006 were attributed to a C. Disease or predation was observed during field studies. Iguanas likely consume eggs and pupae baculovirus; consequently, this captive The effects of disease or predation are colony was terminated after 30 when opportunistically feeding (P. not well known. Because the Miami generations and another was started Hughes, pers. comm. 2009; Daniels blue is known from only a few locations with new stock from BHSP (Saarinen 2009, p. 5; FWC 2010, p. 13), especially and population size appears low, 2009, p. 92). Baculovirus infections are since the butterfly uses the same disease and predation could pose a capable of devastating both laboratory terminal growth of host plants (see threat to its survival. and wild butterfly populations Factor E). Predators and parasitoids (Saarinen 2009, pp. 99, 119). Irrevocable Disease have been suggested as potential consequences may occur if a pathogen contributors to the butterfly’s decline is transferred from laboratory-reared to A baculovirus was confirmed within (M. Minno, pers. comm. 2010), but this wild populations. Genetic diversity the captive colony, and infection caused has not been observed or confirmed in within the captive colony was lost over the death of Miami blue larvae in the field (Trager 2009, p. 149; Minno time (between generations) (Saarinen captivity (see Factor B above) (Saarinen and Minno 2009, p. 78; FWC 2010, pp. 2009, p. 100). At one point, the captive 2009, p. 120). Pathogens have affected 13, 24). colony was not infused with new other insect captive-breeding programs, Overall, the extent to which native or genetic material for approximately 1 however, this was the first time a exotic ants and other predators and year due to low numbers within the baculovirus was found to affect a parasitoids may pose a threat to the wild population; decreases in genetic captive colony of an endangered Miami blue is not clear, but deserves diversity, allelic richness, and number Lepidopteran (Saarinen 2009, p. 120). A further attention. For example, invasive of individuals produced occurred baculovirus or other disease or fire ants (Solenopsis invicta) were first during this time (Saarinen 2009, p. 100). pathogens have the potential to destroy confirmed in counties within the While captive propagation and wild populations (Saarinen 2009, p. 99). historical range of the Miami blue as reintroduction efforts offer enormous Plant pathogens could also negatively early as 1958 (Hillsborough); other conservation potential, there can be impact host plant survival, host growth, counties were confirmed in the late associated risks and ramifications to or the production of terminal host 1960s (Brevard and Volusia) and 1970s both wild and captive-reared growth available to developing larvae (Broward, Collier, Miami-Dade, Lee, individuals and populations. (Emmel and Daniels 2004, p. 14). At this Monroe) (Callcott and Collins 1996, p. The use of captive-reared Miami blues time, we are not aware of any disease or 249); infestation has since expanded. In in pesticide-use and life-history studies pathogens affecting Miami blue addition to the possible direct effects of can be questioned and has been butterflies or host plants in the wild. predation, fire ants can also disrupt

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49556 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

arthropod communities and displace against predators or other benefits further management plan goals and native ants. For example, in one study, (Saarinen and Daniels 2006, p. 73; objectives. Although these provisions Porter and Savignano (1990, pp. 2095– Saarinen 2009, pp. 134, 138). However, prohibit take of individuals, there is no 2106) found that S. invicta reduced Trager and Daniels (2009, pp. 478–481) substantive protection of Miami blue species richness by 70 percent and recorded a universal tending response habitat or protection of potentially abundance of native ants by 90 percent. among ants consistent with a suitable habitat. Therefore, while the Both the red imported fire ant and the mutualistic interaction through both Miami blue butterfly is afforded some little fire ant (Wasmannia field observations and laboratory trials. protection by its presence on Federal auropunctata), another invasive exotic They did not observe any depredation of (and State) lands, losses of suitable and ant, currently occur at BHSP (Saarinen larvae by ants in the field and, based potential habitat outside of these areas and Daniels 2006, p. 71). In one study upon observations, doubted that many are expected to continue (see Factor A). in Key Largo, fire ants were found ant species regularly depredate larvae The Miami blue’s presence on Federal within half of the study transects and in (Trager and Daniels 2009, pp. 479–481; (and State) lands offers some insulation close proximity to the edge of hardwood Trager 2009, p. 149). against collection, but protection is hammock habitat (Forys et al. 2001, p. Studies suggest that various stressors somewhat limited (see Factor B). In 257). Forys et al. (2001, p. 257) found (e.g., baculovirus, fire ants) have the addition, the State’s protection of the all immature swallowtail life stages to potential to negatively impact the Miami blue does not extend to be vulnerable to predation by imported Miami blue, but we do not have butterflies that are similar in appearance fire ants and recognized the potential evidence of their impacts to wild (see Similarity of Appearance below). impact of this predatory insect on the populations. The Miami blue may have Since there are only slight federally endangered Schaus some mechanisms to potentially deter morphological differences between the swallowtail and other butterflies in predators and parasitoids, but these are Miami blue and other butterfly species south Florida. Thus, immature life not well understood. Disease and in the same areas, the Miami blue stages of the Miami blue may be predation have the potential to impact remains at-risk to illegal collection, vulnerable to predation by fire ants the Miami blue’s continued survival, despite the regulatory mechanisms within its current locations or if the given its few remaining populations, already in place (see Factor B). butterfly still persists, elsewhere in its low abundance, and limited range. As part of its listing process, the FWC historical range. Based on our analysis of the best has completed a biological status review In a greenhouse situation, Trager available information, we do not believe and management plan for the subspecies (2009, p. 151) observed fire ants that disease or predation is a significant (FWC 2003, pp. 1–26). This removing Miami blue eggs in an indoor threat to its overall status at this time. management plan was recently revised flight cage, but noted that the ants did However, given its small population (FWC 2010, pp. ii–39). Although the not attack larvae on the same plant. In size, disease and predation have the management plan is a fundamental step his studies, a captive colony of fire ants potential to impact the subspecies now in outlining conservation needs, it may was found to consume captive-reared or in the foreseeable future. be insufficient for achieving Miami blue pupae in food trays; conservation goals and long-term however, the ants did not remove newly D. The Inadequacy of Existing persistence. Recommended laid eggs from the host plant and even Regulatory Mechanisms conservation strategies and actions exhibited weak tending behavior toward Despite the fact that they contain within the plan are voluntary and larvae (Trager 2009, pp. 151–152). At several protections for the Miami blue, dependent upon adequate funding, this time, it is unclear to what extent Federal, State, and local laws have not staffing, and the cooperation and native and exotic predatory insects may been sufficient to prevent past and participation of multiple agencies and be impacting wild Miami blue ongoing impacts to the Miami blue and private entities, which may or may not populations. its habitat within its current and be available or able to assist. Some ant species may also protect historical range. Conservation strategies include Miami blue larvae against parasitoids In response to a petition from the suggested actions to maintain, protect, and predators; however, this has not yet NABA in 2002, the FWC emergency- and monitor known metapopulations; been observed in the wild (Trager and listed the Miami blue butterfly in 2002, establish new metapopulations; and Daniels 2009, 479; Trager 2009, p. 101). temporarily protecting the butterfly. On conduct additional research to support In laboratory studies, Camponotus November 19, 2003, the FWC declared conservation (FWC 2010, pp. 17–26). floridanus ants have been shown to the Miami blue butterfly endangered As a Federal candidate subspecies, display strong defensive behaviors (e.g., (68A–27.003), making its protection the Miami blue is afforded some rapidly circling larvae, recruiting nearby permanent. On November 8, 2010, the protection through sections 7 and 10 of workers, and lunging at forceps) when FWC adopted a revised listing the Act and associated policies and disturbed (Trager and Daniels 2009, p. classification system, moving from a guidelines, but protection is limited. 480; Trager 2009, p. 102). The large size multi-tiered to single-category system. Federal action agencies are to consider of this ant species and nearly constant As a consequence of this change, the the potential effects to the butterfly and tending may serve as a visual deterrent Miami blue butterfly (along with other its habitat during the consultation to potential attackers; however, species) became a State-threatened process. Applicants and action agencies researchers acknowledged that they species; its original protective measures are encouraged to consider candidate have no definitive evidence that C. remained in place (68A–27.003, species when seeking incidental take for floridanus are more effective defenders amended). This designation prohibits other listed species and when of Miami blue larvae than small-bodied any person from taking, harming, developing habitat conservation plans. ant species (Trager and Daniels 2009, p. harassing, possessing, selling, or On Federal lands, such as KWNWR, 480; Trager 2009, p. 97). transporting any Miami blue or parts candidate species are treated as Researchers have suggested that some thereof or eggs, larvae or pupae, except ‘‘proposed threatened.’’ ant species may depredate Miami blue as authorized by permit from the Although the Miami blue occurs on larvae or may opportunistically tend executive director, with permits issued Federal (and possibly State) land that larvae without providing protection based upon whether issuance would offers protection, these areas are vast

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49557

and often heavily used. Signage blue (75 FR 69258; Daniels 2009, p. 5; areas occupied (and recently occupied) prohibiting collection is sometimes FWC 2010, pp. 6, 13; Olle 2010, pp. 4, by the Miami blue. At BHSP, lacking; patrolling and monitoring of 14). Iguanas are prevalent within the cooperative efforts have resulted in the activities can be limited and dependent Keys, and sightings within occupied trapping and removal of 130 iguanas upon the availability of staffing and and potential habitat are common (P. between November 2009 and June 2011 resources. Within KWNWR, the Cannon, pers. comm. 2009, 2010d, (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4; FWC Marquesas Keys are open to the public; 2010e). Effects of herbivory to the host 2010, p. 17; E. Kiefer, pers. comm. portions of the beach on Boca Grande plant (nickerbean) at BHSP were evident 2011a, 2011b). While removal efforts are closed to the public (T. Wilmers, by late 2008 and early 2009 (Emmel and have significantly decreased the number pers. comm. 2011b). In general, Daniels 2009, p. 4; Daniels 2009, p. 5; of iguanas within BHSP, these occupied islands are remote and P. Hughes, pers. comm. 2009; P. management actions will need to be an difficult to patrol, and illegal use still Cannon, pers. comm. 2009; A. Edwards, ongoing effort due to the prevalence of occurs (see Factor E). Therefore, the pers. comm. 2009). In January 2009, iguanas in the surrounding areas (R. potential for illegal collection and Cannon (pers. comm. 2009) reported Zambrano, pers. comm. 2009). Efforts damage to sensitive habitats still exists that iguanas had stripped all new are also underway to address this threat (see Factors B and E). nickerbean growth, causing substantial at KWNWR (T. Wilmers, pers. comm. Prior to its apparent extirpation, the losses since November 2008. In April 2011a, 2011c, 2011d, 2011e). Despite metapopulation at BHSP was afforded 2009, nickerbean showed signs of cooperative efforts, the threat from some protection by its presence on State limited growth due to chronic herbivory iguanas is expected to continue due to lands. All property and resources (P. Hughes, pers. comm. 2009). their widespread distribution and the owned by FDEP are generally protected In addition to damage, iguanas likely difficulties in control. consume eggs and pupae when from harm in Chapter 62D–2.013(2) and Competition animals are specifically protected from opportunistically feeding (P. Hughes, unauthorized collection in Chapter pers. comm. 2009; Daniels 2009, p. 5; Host resource competition from other 62D–2.013(5) of the Florida Statutes. FWC 2010, p. 13), especially since the butterfly species could deleteriously Exceptions are made for collecting butterfly uses the same terminal growth impact metapopulation productivity of permits, which are issued, ‘‘for of host plants. For many years, host the Miami blue. The introduction of or scientific or educational purposes.’’ plant abundance within BHSP appeared future island colonization by potential Still, protection of resources at BHSP is capable of sustaining both iguanas and Lepidopteran competitors may impact a challenge due to the park’s popularity Miami blues. Depressed numbers of the Miami blue metapopulation. The and high use (See Factor E). However, Miami blues in 2008, however, were nickerbean blue, cassius blue, and in 2010, the FDEP hired a temporary, likely the result of both a severe drought Martial’s scrub hairstreak are known to full-time biologist to work on Miami and impacts to the nickerbean from use various species of nickerbean host plants throughout their range (Glassberg blue conservation issues at BHSP, iguanas feeding on the terminal et al. 2000, pp. 74–80; Calhoun et al. including patrol of sensitive habitats. nickerbean growth (FWC 2010, p. 6). Permits are required from the FWC for During the winter of 2010, prolonged 2002, p. 15). The nickerbean blue and scientific research on and collection of and unseasonably cold temperatures in Martial’s scrub hairstreak have been the Miami blue. For work on Federal the lower Keys resulted in a documented using gray nickerbean as a host plant at BHSP (Daniels et al. 2005, lands (i.e., KWNWR, ENP, and BNP), considerable decline in available p. 174; P. Cannon, pers. comm. 2010g). permits are required from the Service or nickerbean at BHSP (Olle 2010, p. 14). Such host use may represent direct the NPS. For work on State lands, The suppressed population of the competition for host resources (Emmel permits are required from FDEP. Permits Miami blue at this site during this time and Daniels 2004, p. 14). However, are also required for work on County- may not have been able to survive this Calhoun et al. (2002, p. 18) believed it owned lands. temporary, but severe, reduction in was unlikely that competition played a Despite these existing regulatory nickerbean, likely caused by the significant role in the decline of the mechanisms, the Miami blue continues combined influences of iguanas and Miami blue based on the abundance of to decline due to the effects of habitat environmental factors (e.g., drought and host plant sources available to lycaenids loss (see Factor A) and a wide array of cold). Iguana tracks were found on islands throughout the Lower Keys. We do not other factors (see Factors B and E). We occupied by the Miami blue in KWNWR have evidence to suggest that host find that regulatory measures have been (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 16; T. Wilmers, resource competition is a threat to the insufficient to significantly reduce or pers. comm. 2011c). Three large, gravid Miami blue at this time or is likely to remove the threats to the Miami blue female iguanas were trapped and become so in the future. and, therefore, that the inadequacy of removed from the Marquesas in existing regulatory mechanisms is a February 2011 (T. Wilmers, pers. comm. Inadvertent Impacts From Humans threat to the subspecies throughout all 2011d). To date, the presence of iguanas Inadvertent damage from humans can of its range. Based on our analysis of the has been documented on four islands affect the Miami blue and its habitat in best available information, we have no (two islands within the Marquesas, and its current and former range. For reason to believe that the Boca Grande and Woman Key) (T. example, the seed pods of balloonvine aforementioned regulations, which Wilmers, pers. comm. 2011a). Cannon et ‘‘pop’’ when squeezed and can be currently do not offer adequate al. (2007, p. 16) stated that the exotic targeted by humans. Damage to protection to the Miami blue, will be herbivore has the potential to impact balloonvine has been documented along improved in the foreseeable future. host and nectar plants. Iguanas have roads in the Keys (J. Loye, University of E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors also been observed on three islands in California-Davis, pers. comm. 2003a, Affecting its Continued Existence GWHNWR (Snipe Point, Sawyer Key, 2003b). During a study in the mid 1980s and Secret Key) since 2006 (T. Wilmers, examining balloonvine and its Impacts From Iguanas pers. comm. 2011b). associated insect community, Loye The exotic green iguana (Iguana Resource agencies are working to (pers. comm. 2003a) found a difference iguana) is a severe threat to the Miami combat the threat of green iguanas in in insect diversity between sites along

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49558 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

roads and those without road access. significant threat to the Miami blue Invasive and Exotic Vegetation Acknowledging other possible (Cannon et al. 2007, p. 13; 2010, p. 852). Displacement of native plants contributing factors (e.g., mosquito Immature stages (eggs, larvae), which including host plants by invasive exotic control, car emissions), Loye (pers. are sedentary, would be particularly species, a common problem throughout comm. 2003a) indicated that collectors vulnerable. Glassberg and Olle (2010, p. south Florida, also possibly contributed and maintenance crews damaged 1) asserted that ‘‘the proximity of the to habitat loss of the Miami blue. In balloons near roads, stating that islands within KWNWR, to both Key coastal areas where undeveloped land ‘‘humans damaged every balloon that West and the Dry Tortugas, invite remains, the Miami blue’s larval food could be easily found at our study sites’’ human mischief, and largely go plants are likely to be displaced by (J. Loye, pers. comm 2003b). It is not unpoliced.’’ These areas within invasive exotic plants, such as Brazilian clear what, if any, impact this had on KWNWR are remote and accessible pepper, Australian pine (Casuarina the butterfly at or since that time. mainly by boat, making them difficult to equesitifolia), Asian nakedwood However, damage to host plants (whole patrol and monitor. (Colubrina asiatica), cat-claw vine or parts) could contribute to mortality of In summary, inadvertent impacts from (Macfadyena ungius-cati), wedelia eggs or larvae. humans may have affected the Miami (Spahneticola trilobata), largeleaf BHSP is heavily used by the public blue and its habitat. Due to the location for recreational purposes, and although lantana (Lantana camara), Portia tree of occupied and suitable habitat, the (Thespesia populnea), wild indigo the butterfly has not been seen at this popularity of these areas with humans, location since early 2010, suitable (Indigofera spicata), beach naupaka and the projected human growth (Scaevola taccada), and several species habitat is located along trails and other especially in coastal areas, such impacts high-use areas (e.g., campgrounds). of invasive grasses. Although we do not from recreation and other uses are have direct evidence of exotic species Former colonies may have experienced expected to continue. disturbance from Park visitors. displacing host plants or nectar sources, Trampling of host plants and well-worn Other Natural and Unnatural Changes we recognize this as a potential threat, footpaths were evident, at least to Habitat due to the magnitude of this problem in periodically from 2002 to 2010, and south Florida. Natural changes to vegetation from during times when other stressors (e.g., environmental factors, succession, or Pesticides cold, drought, iguanas) occurred (P. other causes may now be a threat to the Halupa, pers. obs. 2002; D. Olle, pers. Efforts to control salt marsh comm. 2010; M. Salvato, pers. comm. Miami blue because of its severely mosquitoes, Aedes taeniorhynchus, 2010a; R. Zambrano, pers. comm. 2010). reduced range, few populations, and among others, have increased as human To protect larval host plants and adult limited dispersal capabilities. Suitable activity and population have increased nectar sources, the Florida Park Service and occupied habitat in KWNWR and in south Florida. To control mosquito (FPS) erected fencing and signage other coastal areas is dynamic and populations, second-generation around the majority of the south colony fluctuating, influenced by a variety of organophosphate (naled) and pyrethroid site at BHSP. Although this is expected environmental factors (e.g., storm surge, (permethrin) adulticides are applied by to minimize damage to the largest wind, precipitation). In 2010, mosquito control districts throughout habitat patch, other small habitat substantial changes in habitat south Florida. The use of pesticides patches (as small as 15.0 by 15.0 feet conditions on Boca Grande occurred (applied using both aerial and ground- [4.6 by 4.6 meters]) elsewhere on the with the proliferation of Galactia striata, based methods) to control mosquitoes island are still vulnerable to intentional a native climbing vine (T. Wilmers, presents a potential risk to nontarget or accidental damage. Fencing small pers. comm. 2010a; P. Cannon, pers. species, including the Miami blue colony sites or patches of available comm. 2010b, 2010h, 2010i, 2010j). The butterfly. habitat is impractical and would make vine has enveloped a substantial The potential for mosquito control exact locations of colonies more amount of blackbead, occurring on chemicals to drift into nontarget areas evident, possibly increasing the risk of about 40 percent of the blackbead and persist for varying periods of time illegal collection or harm should the growing on the seaward side at the dune has been well documented. Hennessey Miami blue return to the island. interface (T. Wilmers, pers. comm. and Habeck (1989, pp. 1–22; 1991, pp. KWNWR lacks human developments, 2010a). Wilmers (pers. comm. 2010a) 1–68) and Hennessey et al. (1992, pp. but local disturbances result from illicit believes that the extensive growth was 715–721) illustrated the presence of camping, fire pits, smugglers, vandals, likely fueled by the markedly higher mosquito spray residues long after and immigrant landings. These precipitation during September and application in habitat of the Schaus disturbances are generally infrequent for October 2010 (3.47 and 2.22 inches swallowtail and other imperiled species most islands within KWNWR with the [8.81 and 5.64 cm], respectively, above in both the upper (Crocodile Lake NWR, exception of Boca Grande, which normal in Key West). Under favorable North Key Largo) and lower Keys contains the largest amounts of beach. conditions, the vine first grows in the (National Key Deer Refuge [NKDR], Big Recreational visitation is high on Boca dune, then sprawls landward laterally, Pine Key). Residues of aerially applied Grande, particularly during weekends eventually ascending and blanketing naled were found 6 hours after (Cannon et al. 2010, p. 852). Trampling blackbead (T. Wilmers, pers. comm. application in a pineland area that was of dune vegetation has been a long-term 2010a). While climbing vines can 820 yards (750 meters) from the target problem on Boca Grande, and fire pits proliferate before eventually dying back, area; residues of fenthion (an adulticide have been found many times over the Wilmers (pers. comm. 2010a) states that no longer used in the Keys) applied via past two decades on both Boca Grande the intense proliferation in 2010 is truck were found up to 55 yards (50 and the Marquesas Keys (Cannon et al. unprecedented in his 25 years of work meters) downwind in a hammock area 2010, p. 852). In addition, the large in the area. It is unclear what steps are 15 minutes after application in adjacent amount of dead vegetation intermingled needed at this time. Left unchecked, this target areas (Hennessey et al. 1992, pp. with host plants on Boca Grande and proliferation has the potential to impact 715–721). the Marquesas Keys makes the threat of host plants and affect the butterfly’s More recently, Pierce (2009, pp. 1–17) fire (natural or human-induced), a ability to persist on some islands. monitored naled and permethrin

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49559

deposition following application in and (Agraulis vanillae) butterflies were naled on Miami blue larvae in the field. around NKDR from 2007 to 2009. placed in field enclosures at both target The study was conducted in North Key Permethrin, applied by truck, was found and nontarget areas during aerial naled Largo in cooperation with the Florida to drift considerable distances from application. The critical level of Keys Mosquito Control District target areas with residues that persisted cholinesterase inhibition (27 percent) (FKMCD) and used experimentally for weeks. Naled, applied by plane, was was exceeded in the majority of placed Miami blue larvae that were also found to drift into nontarget areas butterflies from the target areas, as well reared in captivity. The study involved but was much less persistent exhibiting as in a large proportion of butterflies 15 test stations: 9 stations in the target a half-life of approximately 6 hours. In from the nontarget areas (T. Bargar, pers. zone, 3 stations considered to be 2009, Tim Bargar (U.S. Geological comm. 2011). During the same field susceptible to drift (2 stations directly Survey, pers. comm. 2011) conducted experiment, great southern white and adjacent to the spray zone and 1 station two field trials on NKDR that detected Gulf fritillary larvae were also exposed 12 miles (19.3 km) southwest of the significant naled residues at locations in the field during aerial naled spray zone), and 3 field reference within nontarget areas on the refuge that application and exhibited mortality at stations (25 miles (40.2 km) southwest were up to 440 yards (402 m) from the both target and nontarget sites (T. of the spray zone). Survival of butterfly edge of zones targeted for aerial Bargar, pers. comm. 2011). larvae in the target zone was 73.9 applications. In a laboratory study, Rand and Hoang percent, which was significantly lower In addition to mosquito control (2010, pp. 1–33) and Hoang et al. (2011, than both the drift zone (90.6 percent) chemicals entering nontarget areas, the pp. 997–1005) examined the effects of and the reference zone (100 percent), toxic effects of mosquito control exposure to naled, permethrin, and indicating that direct exposure to naled chemicals to nontarget organisms have dichlorvos (a breakdown product of poses significant risk to Miami blue also been documented. Lethal effects on naled) on both adults and larvae of five larvae. In addition to observing elevated nontarget Lepidoptera have been Florida native butterfly species concentrations of naled at test stations attributed to fenthion and naled in both (common buckeye (Junonia coenia), in the target zone, 9 of 18 samples in the south Florida and the Keys (Emmel painted lady (Vanessa cardui), zebra drift zone also exhibited detectable 1991, pp. 12–13; Eliazar and Emmel longwing (Heliconius charitonius), atala concentrations, once again exhibiting 1991, pp. 18–19; Eliazar 1992, pp. 29– hairstreak (Eumaeus atala), and white the potential for mosquito control 30). In the lower Keys, Salvato (2001, peacock (Anartia jatrophae)). The chemicals to drift into nontarget areas. pp. 8–14) and Hennessey and Habeck results of this study indicated that, in Based on these studies, it can be (1991, p. 14) suggested that declines in general, larvae were slightly more concluded that mosquito control populations of the Florida leafwing sensitive to each chemical than adults, activities that involve the use of both (now a Federal candidate) were also but the differences were not significant. aerial and ground-based spraying partly attributable to mosquito control Permethrin was generally the most toxic methods have the potential to deliver chemical applications. Salvato (2001, p. chemical to both larvae and adults, pesticides in quantities sufficient to 14; 2002, pp. 56–57) found populations although the sensitivity between species cause adverse effects to nontarget of the Florida leafwing (on Big Pine Key varied. species in both target and nontarget within NKDR) to increase during drier The laboratory toxicity data generated areas. It should be noted that many of years when adulticide applications over by this study were used to calculate the studies referenced above dealt with the pinelands decreased, although hazard quotients (concentrations in the single application scenarios and Bartram’s hairstreak did not follow this environment/concentrations causing an examined effects on only one to two pattern. It is important to note that adverse effect) to assess the risk that butterfly life stages. Under a realistic vulnerability to chemical exposure may concentrations of naled and permethrin scenario, the potential exists for vary widely between species, and found in the field pose to butterflies. A exposure to all life stages to occur over current application regimes do not hazard quotient that exceeds one multiple applications in a season. In the appear to affect some species as strongly indicates that the environmental case of a persistent compound like as others (Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18; concentration is greater than the permethrin where residues remain on Breidenbaugh and De Szalay 2010, pp. concentration known to cause an vegetation for weeks, the potential exists 594–595; Rand and Hoang 2010, pp. 14– adverse effect (mortality in this case), for nontarget species to be exposed to 17, 20; Hoang et al. 2011, pp. 997– thus indicating significant risk to the multiple pesticides within a season 1005). organism. Environmental exposures for (e.g., permethrin on vegetation coupled Dose-dependent decreases in brain naled and permethrin were taken from with aerial exposure to naled). cholinesterase activity in great southern Zhong et al. (2010, pp. 1961–1972) and Aspects of the Miami blue’s natural white butterflies (Ascia monuste) Pierce (2009, pp. 1–17), respectively, history may increase its potential to be exposed to naled have been measured in and represent the highest concentrations exposed to and affected by mosquito the laboratory (T. Bargar, pers. comm. of each chemical that were quantified control pesticides and other chemicals. 2011). An inhibition of cholinesterase, during field studies in the Keys. When For example, host plants and nectar which is the primary mode of action of using the lowest median lethal sources are commonly found at naled, prevents an important concentrations from the laboratory disturbed sites and often occur along neurotransmitter, acetylcholine, from study, the hazard quotients for roads in developed areas, where being metabolized, causing uncontrolled permethrin were greater than one for chemicals are applied. Ants associated nerve impulses that may result in erratic each adult butterfly, indicating a with the Miami blue (see Interspecific behavior and, if severe enough, significant risk of toxicity to each relationships) may be affected in mortality. From these data, it was species. In the case of naled, significant unknown ways. Host plant and nectar determined that significant mortality risk to the zebra longwing was predicted source availability may also be was associated with cholinesterase based on its hazard quotient exceeding indirectly affected through impacts on activity depression of at least 27 percent one. pollinators. Carroll and Loye (2006, pp. (T. Bargar, pers. comm. 2011). In a From 2006 to 2008, Zhong et al. 19, 24) and others (Emmel 1991, p. 13; subsequent field study on NKDR, adult (2010, pp. 1961–1972) investigated the Glassberg and Salvato 2000, p. 7; great southern white and Gulf fritillary impact of single aerial applications of Calhoun et al. 2002, p. 18) suggested

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49560 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

that the Miami blue butterfly may be Imperiled Species Subcommittee, which plants) can contribute to and exacerbate more susceptible to pesticides than was initially formed to resolve the threats. perhaps other lycaenids (e.g., the silver- conflict between mosquito control Estimated abundance of the Miami banded hairstreak) because Miami blue spraying and the reintroduction of blue is not known, but may number in larvae leave entrance holes open in seed Miami blues to their historical range the hundreds, and at times, possibly pods to allow access for attending ants. (FWC 2010, p. 9). higher. Although highly dependent Ants and larvae of the Miami blue on The FWC’s management plan for the upon species, a population of 1,000 has balloonvine were found to die when Miami blue also recommends the use of been suggested as marginally viable for roadside spraying for mosquito control no-spray zones for all pesticides and use an insect (D. Schweitzer, The Nature began in late spring, but larvae of the of buffers at or around Miami blue Conservancy, pers. comm. 2003). silver-banded hairstreak (also on populations and other conservation Schweitzer (pers. comm. 2003) has also balloonvine) apparently survived measures (FWC 2010, pp. ii-41). suggested that butterfly populations of subsequent spraying (Emmel 1991, p. However, there are no specific binding less than 200 adults per generation 13). However, Minno (pers. comm. or mandatory restrictions to prohibit would have difficulty surviving over the 2010) argues that larvae using such practices or encourage other long term. In comparison, in a review of balloonvine pods would be protected beneficial measures. The FWC plan 27 recovery plans for listed insect from the effects of pesticides because suggests that an aerial no-spray buffer species, Schultz and Hammond (2003, the pods have internal partitions and zone of 820 yards (750 m) be established p. 1377) found that 25 plans broadly exposure would be limited due to the around Miami blue populations where specified metapopulation features in size of the entrance hole. possible and that buffer zones for truck- terms of requiring that recovery include No mosquito control pesticides are based applications of adulticides also be multiple population areas (the average used within KWNWR. At BHSP, the established (FWC 2010, p. 17). The number of sites required was 8.2). The only application of adulticides FCCMC also recommends that the three plans that quantified minimum (permethrin) is occasional truck-based appropriate width of buffer zones be population sizes as part of their spraying in the ranger residence areas determined by future research. The recovery criteria for butterflies ranged (E. Kiefer, pers. comm. 2011a). Mosquito Service is supporting research to from 200 adults per site (Oregon control practices currently pose no risk characterize drift from truck-based silverspot [Speyeria zerene hippolyta]) to the Miami blue within KWNWR or in spraying methods. The data from this to 100,000 adults (Bay checkerspot [Euphydryas editha bayensis]) (Schulz formerly occupied habitat at BHSP. study will aid in better determining However, mosquito control activities, and Hammond 2003, pp. 1374–1375). appropriate buffer distances around including the use of larvicides and Schultz and Hammond (2003, pp. sensitive areas. adulticides, are being implemented 1372–1385) used population viability within suitable and potential habitat for In summary, although substantial analyses to develop quantitative the Miami blue elsewhere in its range progress has been made in reducing recovery criteria for insects whose (Carroll and Loye 2006, pp. 14–15). The impacts, the potential effects of population sizes can be estimated and findings of Zhong et al. (2010, pp. 1961– mosquito control applications and drift applied this framework in the context of 1972) and Pierce (2009, pp. 1–17) along residues remain a threat to the Miami the Fender’s blue (Icaricia icarioides with other studies suggest that aerial or blue. We will continue to work with the fenderi), a butterfly listed as endangered truck-based applications of mosquito mosquito control districts and other in 2000 due to its small population size control chemicals may pose a threat to partners and stakeholders to reduce and limited remaining habitat. They the Miami blue, if the butterfly exists in threats wherever possible. found the Fender’s blue to be at high other, unknown locations. Additionally, Effects of Small Population Size and risk of extinction at most of its sites mosquito control practices potentially Isolation throughout its range despite that fact may limit expansion of undocumented that the average population at 12 sites populations or colonization of new The Miami blue is vulnerable to examined ranged from 5 to 738 (Schulz areas. If the Miami blue colonizes new extinction due to its severely reduced and Hammond 2003, pp. 1377, 1379). Of areas or if additional populations are range, small population size, the three sites with populations greater discovered or reintroduced, adjustments metapopulation structure, few than a few hundred butterflies, only one in mosquito control (and other) remaining populations, and relative of these had a reasonably high practices may be needed to help isolation. In general, isolation, whether probability of surviving the next 100 safeguard the subspecies. caused by geographic distance, years (Schulz and Hammond 2003, p. Efforts are already underway by ecological factors, or reproductive 1379). Although the conservation needs multiple agencies and partners to seek strategy, will likely prevent the influx of and biology of the Miami blue and ways to avoid and minimize impacts to new genetic material and can result in Fender’s blue are undoubtedly different, the Miami blue and other imperiled low diversity, which may impact the two lycaenids share characteristics: nontarget species. For example, in an viability and fecundity (Chesser 1983, both have limited dispersal, and most effort to reduce the need for aerial pp. 66–77). Extinction risk can increase remaining habitat patches are adulticide spraying, the FKMCD is significantly with decreasing completely isolated. increasing larviciding activities, which heterozygosity as was reported for the Losses in diversity within historical are believed to have less of an ecological Glanville fritillary (Saccheri et al. 1998, and current populations of the Miami impact on wilderness islands near pp. 491–494). Distance between blue butterfly have already occurred. NKDR and GWHNWR (FKMCD 2009, metapopulations and colonies within Historical populations were genetically pp. 3–4). This effort has led to a those metapopulations and the small more diverse than two contemporary reduction in area receiving adulticide size of highly sporadic populations can populations (BHSP and KWNWR) treatment on Big Pine Key, No Name make recolonization unlikely if (Saarinen 2009, p. 48). Yet together, Key, and Torch Key (FKMCD 2009, p. populations are extirpated. between the two contemporary 17). Another example is the Florida Fragmentation of habitat and aspects of populations, the Miami blue had Coordinating Council on Mosquito the butterfly’s natural history (e.g., retained a significant amount of genetic Control (FCCMC), including the limited dispersal, reliance on host diversity from its historical values

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49561

(Saarinen 2009, p. 51). Despite likely extinction. Cushman and Murphy (1993, Environmental factors have likely fluctuations in population size, the p. 40) argued that dispersal is essential impacted the Miami blue and its habitat BHSP population had retained an for the persistence of isolated within its historical range. A hard freeze adequate amount of genetic diversity to populations. Input of individuals from in the late 1980s likely contributed to maintain the population (Saarinen 2009, neighboring areas can bolster dwindling the Miami blue’s decline (L. Koehn, p. 77). Overall, patterns of genetic numbers and provide an influx of pers. comm. 2002) presumably due to diversity in the BHSP population (mean genetic diversity, increasing fitness and loss of larval host plants in south overall observed heterozygosity of 39.5 population viability. The tendency for Florida. Prolonged cold temperatures in percent) were similar to or slightly lycaenids to be comparatively sedentary January 2010 and December 2010 lower than other nonmigratory butterfly should result in less frequent through January 2011 may have also species’ studies utilizing microsatellite recolonization, less influx of impacted the remaining markers (Saarinen 2009, pp. 50, 74–75). individuals, and reduced gene flow metapopulations in the Keys. Unfortunately, the BHSP population between populations (Cushman and Unseasonably cold temperatures during may now be lost. The extant KWNWR Murphy 1993, p. 40). In short, taxa with winter 2010 (in combination with population is more genetically diverse limited dispersal abilities may be far impacts from iguanas) resulted in a (mean observed heterozygosity of 51 more susceptible to local extinction substantial loss of nickerbean and nectar percent vs. 39.5 percent for BHSP) events than taxa with well-developed sources at BHSP. This reduction, albeit (Saarinen 2009, p. 75). abilities (Cushman and Murphy 1993, p. temporary, may have severely impacted The Miami blue appears to have been 40). an already depressed Miami blue impacted by relative isolation. No gene Lycaenids with a strong dependence population on the island. Similarly, flow has occurred between on ants may be more sensitive to extended dry conditions and drought contemporary populations (Saarinen et environmental changes and thus more can affect the availability of host plants al. 2009a, p. 36). Saarinen (2009, p. 79) prone to endangerment and extinction and nectar sources and affect butterfly suggests that the separation was recent. than species not tended by ants (and populations (Emmel and Daniels 2004, While historical populations may have non-lycaenids in general) (Cushman and pp. 13–14, 17). Depressed numbers of once linked the two contemporary Murphy 1993, pp. 37, 41). Their the Miami blue at BHSP in 2008 were populations, the recent absence of hypothesis is based on the probability attributed to severe drought (Emmel and populations between KWNWR and that the combination of both the right Daniels 2009, p. 4). BHSP appears to have broken the gene food plant and the presence of a The Keys are regularly threatened by flow (Saarinen 2009, p. 79). Based upon particular ant species may occur tropical storms and hurricanes. No area modeling with a different butterfly relatively infrequently in the landscape. of the Keys is more than 20 feet (6.1 m) species, Fleishman et al. (2002, pp. 706– Selection may favor reduced dispersal above sea level (and many areas are only 716) argued that factors such as habitat by ant-associated lycaenids due to the a few feet (meters) in elevation). These quality may influence metapopulation difficulty associated with locating tropical systems have affected the dynamics, driving extinction and patches that contain the appropriate Miami blue and its habitat. Calhoun et colonization processes, especially in combination of food plants and ants al. (2002, p. 18) indicated that systems that experience substantial (Cushman and Murphy 1993, pp. 39– Hurricane Andrew in 1992 may have natural and anthropogenic 40). Although significant research on negatively impacted the majority of environmental variability (see the relationship between Miami blue Miami blue populations in southern Environmental stochasticity below). larvae and ants has been conducted, this Florida. In 2005, four hurricanes According to Saarinen et al. (2009a, p. association is still not completely (Katrina, Dennis, Rita, and Wilma) 36), the severely reduced size of the understood. Lycaenid traits (sedentary, affected habitat at BHSP, resulting in existing populations suggests that host-specific, symbiotic with ants) that reduced abundance of Miami blues genetic factors along with result in isolated populations of variable following the storms that continued environmental stochasticity may already sizes may serve to limit genetic throughout 2006 (Salvato and Salvato be affecting the persistence of the Miami exchange (Cushman and Murphy 1993, 2007, p. 160) and beyond (Emmel and blue. However, they also suggested that, pp. 37, 39–40). The Miami blue Daniels 2009, p. 4). A significant portion in terms of extinction risk, a greater possesses several of these traits, all of of the nickerbean and large stands of short-term problem for the two which may increase susceptibility and nectar plants at BHSP were temporarily contemporary natural populations contribute to imperilment. damaged by the storms, including (BHSP and KWNWR) may be the lack of roughly 50 percent of the vegetation on Environmental Stochasticity gene flow rather than the current the southern side of the island (Salvato effective population size (Saarinen et al. The climate of the Keys is driven by and Salvato 2007, p. 157). Although the 2009a, p. 36). If only one or two a combination of local, regional, and host plant quickly recovered following metapopulations remain, it is absolutely global events, regimes, and oscillations. the storms (Salvato and Salvato 2007, p. critical that remaining genetic diversity There are three main ‘‘seasons’’: (1) The 160), the Miami blue never fully and gene flow are retained. wet season, which is hot, rainy, and recolonized several parts of the island Conservation decisions to augment or humid from June through October, (2) (Emmel and Daniels 2009, p. 4). reintroduce populations should not be the official hurricane season that Similarly, Hurricane Wilma heavily made without careful consideration of extends one month beyond the wet damaged blackbead across many islands habitat availability, genetic adaptability, season (June 1 through November 30) within KWNWR (Cannon et al. 2010, p. the potential for the introduction of with peak season being August and 850). Although the hurricane severely maladapted genotypes, and other factors September, and (3) the dry season, damaged or killed much of the Miami (Frankham 2008, pp. 325–333; Saarinen which is drier and cooler from blue host plant on KWNWR, it is also et al. 2009a, p. 36). November through May. In the dry believed to have enhanced or created season, periodic surges of cool and dry many new habitats across the islands by Aspects of Its Natural History continental air masses influence the clearing older vegetation and opening Aspects of the Miami blue’s natural weather with short-duration rain events patches for growth of host plant and history may increase the likelihood of followed by long periods of dry weather. nectar sources (Cannon et al. 2010, p.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49562 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

852). Cannon et al. (2010, p. 852) (every 11 years), and the Atlantic Multi- information, we have determined that suggest that the proximity and circular decadal Oscillation. All of these cycles the Miami blue butterfly meets the arrangement of these islands may influence changes in Floridian weather. definition of an endangered species provide some safeguard during mild or The exact magnitude, direction, and under the Act. Consequently, we are moderate storms. Given enough distribution of all of these changes at the listing the Miami blue butterfly as an resiliency in extant populations, certain regional level are difficult to predict. endangered species throughout its entire storm regimes may benefit populations We have identified a wide array of range. over some timeframe if these events natural or manmade factors affecting the Reasons for Emergency Determination result in disturbances that favor host continued existence of the Miami blue plants and other habitat components. butterfly. These threats have operated in Under section 4(b)(7) of the Act and According to the Florida Climate the past, are impacting the subspecies regulations at 50 CFR 424.20, we may Center, Florida is by far the most now, and will continue to impact the emergency list a species if the threats to vulnerable State in the United States to species in the foreseeable future. Based the species constitute an emergency hurricanes and tropical storms (http:// on our analysis of the best available posing a significant risk to its well- coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/ information, we have no reason to being. Such an emergency listing tropicalweather.shtml). Based on data believe that natural or manmade factors expires 240 days following publication gathered 1856–2008, Klotzbach and will change in the foreseeable future. in the Federal Register unless, during Gray (2009, p. 28) calculated the this 240-day period, we list the species Determination of Status climatological and current-year following the normal listing procedures. probabilities for each State being We have carefully assessed the best Below, we discuss the reasons why impacted by a hurricane and major scientific and commercial information emergency listing the Miami blue hurricane. Of the coastal States available regarding the past, present, butterfly as endangered is warranted. In analyzed, Florida had the highest and future threats to the Miami blue accordance with the Act, if at any time climatological probabilities, with a 51 butterfly. The habitat and range of the after we publish this emergency rule, we percent probability of a hurricane and a subspecies are threatened with determine that substantial evidence 21 percent probability of a major destruction, modification, and does not exist to warrant such a rule, we hurricane over a 52-year time span. curtailment from human population will withdraw it. Florida had a 45 percent current-year growth, associated development and In making this determination, we probability of a hurricane and an 18 agriculture, and environmental effects have carefully assessed the best percent current-year probability of a resulting from climatic change. Due to scientific and commercial information major hurricane (Klotzbach and Gray the few metapopulations, small available regarding the past, present, 2009, p. 28). Given the Miami blue’s low population size, restricted range, and and future threats faced by the Miami population size and few isolated remoteness of occupied habitat, blue butterfly. The only confirmed occurrences, the subspecies is at collection is a significant threat to the metapopulation of Miami blue is substantial risk from hurricanes, storm subspecies and could potentially occur currently restricted to a few, small surges, or other extreme weather. at any time. Additionally, the insular areas in the extreme southern Depending on the location and intensity subspecies is currently threatened by a portion of its historical range. The range of a hurricane or other severe weather wide array of natural and manmade of this butterfly, which once extended event, it is possible that the Miami blue factors. Existing regulatory mechanisms from the Keys north along the Florida could be extirpated or could become do not provide adequate protection for coasts to about St. Petersburg and extinct. Because it has poor dispersal the subspecies. As a result, impacts Daytona, is now substantially reduced, capabilities, natural recolonization of from increasing threats, singly or in with an estimated > 99 percent decline potentially suitable sites is anticipated combination, are likely to result in the in area occupied. Population size is to be unlikely or exceedingly slow at extinction of the subspecies because the unknown, but estimated to be in the best. magnitude of threats is high. hundreds. Since only one or possibly Other processes to be affected by Section 3 of the Endangered Species two small metapopulations remain in climate change include temperatures, Act defines an endangered species as KWNWR, the Miami blue butterfly is rainfall (amount, seasonal timing, and ‘‘* * * any species which is in danger imminently threatened by its restricted distribution), and storms (frequency and of extinction throughout all or a range and the combined influences of intensity). Temperatures are predicted significant portion of its range’’ and a habitat destruction or modification, to rise from 2 °C to 5 °C for North threatened species as ‘‘* * * any impacts by iguanas, accidental harm America by the end of this century species which is likely to become an from humans, loss of genetic (IPCC 2007, pp. 7–9, 13). Based upon endangered species within the heterogeneity, and catastrophic modeling, Atlantic hurricane and foreseeable future throughout all or a environmental events. Illegal collection tropical storm frequencies are expected significant portion of its range.’’ Based could cause severe impacts, given the to decrease (Knutson et al. 2008, pp. 1– on the immediate and ongoing few populations and individuals 21). By 2100, there should be a 10–30 significant threats to the Miami blue remaining. Therefore, we find these percent decrease in hurricane frequency butterfly throughout its entire occupied threats constitute an immediate and with a 5–10 percent wind increase. This range and the fact that the subspecies is significant risk to the well-being of the is due to more hurricane energy restricted to only one or possibly two species and that extinction of the Miami available for intense hurricanes. populations, we have determined that blue butterfly may occur at any time. However, hurricane frequency is the subspecies is in danger of extinction We believe that the survival of the expected to drop due to more wind throughout all of its range. Since threats Miami blue now depends on protecting shear impeding initial hurricane extend throughout the entire range, it is the species’ occupied and suitable development. In addition to climate unnecessary to determine if the Miami habitat from further degradation and change, weather variables are extremely blue butterfly is in danger of extinction fragmentation; restoring potentially influenced by other natural cycles, such throughout a significant portion of its suitable habitat within its historical as El Nin˜ o Southern Oscillation with a range. Therefore, on the basis of the best range; removing and reducing threats frequency of every 4–7 years, solar cycle available scientific and commercial from iguanas, pesticides, and accidental

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49563

harm from humans; increasing the that now pose a significant risk to the final recovery plan will be available on current population in size; reducing the survival of the subspecies. our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ threats of illegal collection; retaining the endangered), or from our South Florida Available Conservation Measures remaining genetic diversity; and, Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR establishing populations at additional Conservation measures provided to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). locations. The survey and monitoring species listed as endangered or Implementation of recovery actions efforts and scientific studies conducted threatened under the Act include generally requires the participation of a to date, when combined with other recognition, recovery actions, broad range of partners, including other available historical information, make it requirements for Federal protection, and Federal agencies, States, Tribes, clear that the Miami blue butterfly is on prohibitions against certain practices. nongovernmental organizations, the brink of extinction. Recognition through listing results in businesses, and private landowners. By emergency listing the Miami blue public awareness and conservation by Examples of recovery actions include butterfly as an endangered subspecies, Federal, State, Tribal, and local habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of we believe the protections (through agencies, private organizations, and native vegetation), research, captive sections 7, 9, and 10 of the Act) and individuals. The Act encourages propagation and reintroduction, and recognition that immediately become cooperation with the States and requires outreach and education. The recovery of available to the subspecies will increase that recovery actions be carried out for many listed species cannot be the likelihood that it can be saved from all listed species. The protection accomplished solely on Federal lands extinction and ultimately be recovered. required by Federal agencies and the because their range may occur primarily In addition, if protections remain in prohibitions against certain activities or solely on non-Federal lands. To place after the 240-day period, recovery are discussed, in part, below. achieve recovery of these species funds may become available, which The primary purpose of the Act is the requires cooperative conservation efforts could facilitate recovery actions (e.g., conservation of endangered and on private, State, and Tribal lands. funding for additional surveys, threatened species and the ecosystems Through this listing, funding for management needs, research, captive upon which they depend. The ultimate recovery actions will be available from propagation and reintroduction, goal of such conservation efforts is the a variety of sources, including Federal monitoring) (see Available Conservation recovery of these listed species, so that budgets, State programs, and cost share Measures). they no longer need the protective grants for non-Federal landowners, the The Service acknowledges that it measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of academic community, and cannot fully address some of the natural the Act requires the Service to develop nongovernmental organizations. threats facing the subspecies (e.g., and implement recovery plans for the Additionally, under section 6 of the Act, hurricanes, tropical storms) or even conservation of endangered and we would be able to grant funds to the some of the other significant, long-term threatened species. The recovery State of Florida for management actions threats (e.g., climatic changes, sea-level planning process involves the promoting the conservation of the rise). However, through emergency identification of actions that are Miami blue. Information on our grant listing, we provide immediate necessary to halt or reverse the species’ programs that are available to aid protection to the known population(s) decline by addressing the threats to its species recovery can be found at: http:// and any new population of the survival and recovery. The goal of this www.fws.gov/grants. subspecies that may be discovered (see process is to restore listed species to a Please let us know if you are section 9 of Available Conservation point where they are secure, self- interested in participating in recovery Measures below). With emergency sustaining, and functioning components efforts for the Miami blue. Additionally, listing, we can also influence Federal of their ecosystems. we invite you to submit any new actions that may potentially impact the Recovery planning includes the information on the subspecies, its subspecies (see section 7 below); this is development of a recovery outline habitat, or threats whenever it becomes especially valuable if it is found at shortly after a species is listed, available and any information you may additional locations. With emergency preparation of a draft and final recovery have for recovery planning purposes; if listing, we are also better able to deter plan, and revisions to the plan as you submit information after the date illicit collection and trade. significant new information becomes listed in the DATES section above, you Through this action, the Miami blue available. The recovery outline guides will need to send it to the street address and the three butterflies that are similar the immediate implementation of urgent provided in the FOR FURTHER in appearance will receive immediate recovery actions and describes the INFORMATION CONTACT section. protection from collection, possession, process to be used to develop a recovery Section 7(a) of the Act requires and trade (through sections 9 and 10 of plan. The recovery plan identifies site- Federal agencies to evaluate their the Act). At present, the three similar specific management actions that will actions with respect to any species that butterflies are not protected by the State. achieve recovery of the species, is proposed or listed as endangered or Extending the prohibitions of collection, measurable criteria that determine when threatened and with respect to its possession, and trade to the three a species may be downlisted or delisted, critical habitat, if any is being similar butterflies provides greater and methods for monitoring recovery designated. Regulations implementing protection to the Miami blue. This progress. Recovery plans also establish this interagency cooperation provision immediate protection will help to deter a framework for agencies to coordinate of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part those who might otherwise seek to their recovery efforts and provide 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal collect the Miami blue before a estimates of the cost of implementing agencies to confer informally with us on proposed rule could be finalized (i.e., recovery tasks. Recovery teams any action that is likely to jeopardize through the normal listing process). At (composed of species experts, Federal the continued existence of a species this time, the normal listing timeframe and State agencies, nongovernment proposed for listing or result in and process is insufficient to prevent organizations, and stakeholders) are destruction or adverse modification of losses that may result in extinction. We often established to develop recovery proposed critical habitat. If a species is believe emergency listing will partially plans. When completed, the recovery listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of alleviate some of the imminent threats outline, draft recovery plan, and the the Act requires Federal agencies to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49564 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

ensure that activities they authorize, import or export, deliver, receive, carry, minimize and mitigate impacts to the fund, or carry out are not likely to transport, or ship in interstate or foreign species to the greatest extent jeopardize the continued existence of commerce in the course of commercial practicable. such a species or to destroy or adversely activity, or sell or offer for sale in (4) Actions that may affect the Miami modify its critical habitat. If a Federal interstate or foreign commerce any blue that are conducted in accordance action may affect a listed species or its listed species. It also is illegal to with the conditions of a section critical habitat, the responsible Federal possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or 10(a)(1)(A) permit for scientific research agency must enter into formal ship any such wildlife that has been or to enhance the propagation or consultation with us. taken illegally. Further, it is illegal for survival of the subspecies. Federal agency actions that may any person to attempt to commit, to (5) Captive propagation activities require conference or consultation as solicit another person to commit, or to involving the Miami blue that are described in the preceding paragraph cause to be committed, any of these acts. conducted in accordance with the include the issuance of Federal funding, Certain exceptions apply to our agents conditions of a section 10(a)(1)(A) permits, or authorizations for and State conservation agencies. permit, our ‘‘Policy Regarding construction, clearing, development, We may issue permits to carry out Controlled Propagation of Species road maintenance, pesticide otherwise prohibited activities Listed Under the Endangered Species registration, pesticide use (on Federal involving endangered wildlife under Act,’’ and in cooperation with the State land or with Federal funding), certain circumstances. We codified the of Florida. agricultural assistance programs, regulations governing permits for (6) Low-impact, infrequent, dispersed Federal loan and insurance programs, endangered species at 50 CFR 17.22. human activities on foot (e.g., bird Federal habitat restoration programs, Such permits are available for scientific watching, butterfly watching, and scientific and special uses. purposes, to enhance the propagation or sightseeing, backpacking, photography, Activities will trigger consultation survival of the species, or for incidental camping, hiking) in areas occupied by under section 7 of the Act if they may take in the course of otherwise lawful the Miami blue or where its host and affect the Miami blue butterfly, as activities. nectar plants are present. addressed in this emergency rule. It is our policy, published in the (7) Activities on private lands that do Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR not result in take of the Miami blue Jeopardy Standard 34272), to identify, to the maximum butterfly, such as normal landscape Prior to and following listing, the extent practicable at the time a species activities around a personal residence, Service applies an analytical framework is listed, those activities that would or construction that avoids butterfly for jeopardy analyses that relies heavily would not constitute a violation of habitat, and pesticide/herbicide on the importance of core area section 9 of the Act and associated application consistent with label populations to the survival and recovery regulations at 50 CFR 17.21. The intent restrictions, if applied in areas where of the species. The section 7(a)(2) of this policy is to increase public the subspecies is absent. analysis is focused not only on these awareness of the effect of this We believe the following activities populations but also on the habitat emergency listing on proposed and would be likely to result in a violation conditions necessary to support them. ongoing activities within a species’ of section 9 of the Act; however, The jeopardy analysis usually range. We believe, based on the best possible violations are not limited to expresses the survival and recovery available information, that the following these actions alone: needs of the species in a qualitative actions will not result in a violation of (1) Unauthorized possession, fashion without making distinctions the provisions of section 9 of the Act, collecting, trapping, capturing, killing, between what is necessary for survival provided these actions are carried out in harassing, sale, delivery, or movement, and what is necessary for recovery. accordance with existing regulations including interstate and foreign Generally, if a proposed Federal action and permit requirements, if applicable: commerce, or harming or attempting is incompatible with the viability of the (1) Possession, delivery, or movement, any of these actions, of Miami blue affected core area population(s), including interstate transport and butterflies at any life stage without a inclusive of associated habitat import into or export from the United permit (research activities where Miami conditions, a jeopardy finding is States, involving no commercial blue butterflies are surveyed, captured considered to be warranted, because of activity, of dead specimens of this taxon (netted), or collected will require a the relationship of each core area that were collected or legally acquired permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the population to the survival and recovery prior to the effective date of this rule. Act). of the species as a whole. (2) Actions that may affect the Miami (2) Incidental take of Miami blue blue that are authorized, funded, or butterfly without a permit pursuant to Section 9 Take carried out by Federal agencies when section 10 (a)(1)(B) of the Act. The Act and implementing such activities are conducted in (3) Sale or purchase of specimens of regulations set forth a series of general accordance with an incidental take this taxon, except for properly prohibitions and exceptions that apply statement issued by us under section 7 documented antique specimens of this to all endangered and threatened of the Act. taxon at least 100 years old, as defined wildlife. These prohibitions are (3) Actions that may affect the Miami by section 10(h)(1) of the Act. applicable to the Miami blue butterfly blue that are not authorized, funded, or (4) Unauthorized destruction or immediately through emergency listing. carried out by a Federal agency, when alteration of Miami blue butterfly The prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the the action is conducted in accordance habitat (including unauthorized grading, Act, codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for with an incidental take permit issued by leveling, plowing, mowing, burning, endangered wildlife, in part, make it us under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. trampling, herbicide spraying, or other illegal for any person subject to the Applicants design a Habitat destruction or modification of occupied jurisdiction of the United States to take Conservation Plan (HCP) and apply for or potentially occupied habitat or (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, an incidental take permit. These HCPs pesticide application in known shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or are developed for species listed under occupied habitat) in ways that kills or collect, or to attempt any of these), section 4 of the Act and are designed to injures eggs, larvae, or adult Miami blue

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49565

butterflies by significantly impairing the Similarity of Appearance three similar butterflies are not subspecies’ essential breeding, foraging, Section 4(e) of the Act authorizes the protected by the State. Extending the sheltering, or other essential life treatment of a species, subspecies, or prohibitions of collection, possession, functions. population segment as endangered or and trade to the three similar butterflies (5) Use of pesticides/herbicides that threatened if: ‘‘(a) Such species so through this listing of these species due are in violation of label restrictions closely resembles in appearance, at the to similarity of appearance under resulting in take of Miami blue butterfly point in question, a species which has section 4(e) of the Act and providing or ants associated with the subspecies in been listed pursuant to such section that applicable prohibitions and exceptions areas occupied by the butterfly. enforcement personnel would have under section 4(d) of the Act will (6) Unauthorized release of biological substantial difficulty in attempting to provide greater protection to the Miami control agents that attack any life stage differentiate between the listed and blue. For these reasons, we are listing of this taxon or ants associated with the unlisted species; (b) the effect of this the cassius blue butterfly (Leptotes Miami blue. substantial difficulty is an additional cassius theonus), ceraunus blue (7) Removal or destruction of native butterfly (Hemiargus ceraunus food plants being utilized by Miami threat to an endangered or threatened species; and (c) such treatment of an antibubastus), and nickerbean blue blue butterfly, including Caesalpinia butterfly (Cyclargus ammon) as spp., Cardiospermum spp., and unlisted species will substantially facilitate the enforcement and further threatened due to similarity of Pithecellobium spp., within areas used appearance to the Miami blue, pursuant the policy of this Act.’’ Listing a species by this taxon that results in harm to this to section 4(e) of the Act. butterfly. as endangered or threatened under the (8) Release of exotic species into similarity of appearance provisions of Special Rule Under Section 4(d) of the occupied Miami blue butterfly habitat the Act extends the take prohibitions of Act that may displace the Miami blue or its section 9 of the Act to cover the species. Whenever a species is listed as a native host plants. A designation of endangered or threatened species under the Act, the We will review other activities not threatened due to similarity of Secretary may specify regulations that identified above on a case-by-case basis appearance under section 4(e) of the he deems necessary and advisable to to determine whether they may be likely Act, however, does not extend other provide for the conservation of that to result in a violation of section 9 of the protections of the Act, such as species under the authorization of Act. We do not consider these lists to be consultation requirements for Federal section 4(d) of the Act. These rules, exhaustive, and provide them as agencies under section 7 and the commonly referred to as ‘‘special rules,’’ information to the public. recovery planning provisions under are found in part 17 of title 50 of the You should direct questions regarding section 4(f), that apply to species that Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in whether specific activities may are listed as endangered or threatened sections 17.40–17.48. This special rule constitute a future violation of section 9 under section 4(a). All applicable for 17.47, which is reserved, prohibits of the Act to the Field Supervisor of the prohibitions and exceptions for species take of any cassius blue butterfly Service’s South Florida Ecological listed under section 4(e) of the Act due (Leptotes cassius theonus), ceraunus Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER to similarity of appearance to a blue butterfly (Hemiargus ceraunus INFORMATION CONTACT). Requests for threatened or endangered species will antibubastus), or nickerbean blue copies of regulations regarding listed be set forth in a special rule under butterfly (Cyclargus ammon) or their species and inquiries about prohibitions section 4(d) of the Act. immature stages throughout their ranges and permits should be addressed to the There are only slight morphological in order to protect the Miami blue U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, differences between the Miami blue and butterfly from collection, possession, Ecological Services Division, the cassius blue, ceraunus blue, and and trade. In this context, collection and Endangered Species Permits, 1875 nickerbean blue, making it difficult to trade are defined as any activity where Century Boulevard, Atlanta, GA 30345 differentiate between the species, cassius blue, ceraunus blue, or (Phone 404–679–7313; Fax 404–679– especially due to their small size. This nickerbean blue butterflies or their 7081). poses a problem for Federal and State immature stages are attempted to be, or law enforcement agents trying to stem are intended to be, kept, traded, sold, or Critical Habitat and Prudency illegal collection and trade in the Miami exchanged for goods or services. Determination blue. It is quite possible that collectors Capture of cassius blue, ceraunus blue, Critical habitat and prudency is authorized to collect similar species or nickerbean blue butterflies, or their addressed in the proposed listing rule, may inadvertently (or purposefully) immature stages, is not prohibited if it which is published concurrently with collect the Miami blue butterfly is accidental or incidental to otherwise this emergency rule. In that rule, we thinking it was the cassius blue, legal collection activities, such as determine that designation of critical ceraunus blue, or nickerbean blue, research, provided the animal is habitat for the Miami blue butterfly is which also occur in the same released immediately upon discovery at not prudent due to the increased geographical area and habitat type. The the point of capture. Scientific activities likelihood and severity of threats to the listing of these similar blue butterflies as involving collection or propagation of subspecies from collection and threatened due to similarity of these similarity of appearance destruction of sensitive habitat. appearance eliminates the ability of butterflies are not prohibited provided Spatially depicting exactly where the amateur butterfly enthusiasts and there is prior written authorization from subspecies may or could be found and private and commercial collectors to the Service. All otherwise legal more widely publicizing maps of purposefully or accidentally activities involving cassius blue, specific areas containing essential misrepresent the Miami blue as one of ceraunus blue, or nickerbean blue features or essential areas is expected to these other species. The listing will also butterflies that are conducted in expose the fragile population and its facilitate Federal and State law accordance with applicable State, habitat to greater risks. In addition, enforcement agents’ efforts to curtail Federal, Tribal, and local laws and designation of critical habitat will likely illegal possession, collection, and trade regulations are not considered to be take exacerbate enforcement problems. in the Miami blue. At this time, the under this regulation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 49566 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Effects of These Rules undertaken actions that result in the governments, individuals, businesses, or Listing the cassius blue, ceraunus accidental take of cassius blue, ceraunus organizations. We may not conduct or blue, and nickerbean blue butterflies as blue, or nickerbean blue butterflies. sponsor, and you are not required to threatened under the ‘‘similarity of These actions will not be considered as respond to, a collection of information appearance’’ provisions of the Act, and violations of section 9 of the Act. We unless it displays a currently valid OMB the promulgation of a special rule under believe that listing the cassius blue, control number. ceraunus blue, and nickerbean blue section 4(d) of the Act, extend take National Environmental Policy Act (42 prohibitions to these species and their butterflies under the similarity of appearance provision of the Act, U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) immature stages. Capture of these coupled with this special 4(d) rule, will species, including their immature We have determined that we do not help minimize enforcement problems stages, is not prohibited if it is need to prepare an environmental and enhance conservation of the Miami accidental or incidental to otherwise assessment, as defined under the blue. authority of the National Environmental legal collection activities, such as We believe that this provision to research, provided the animal is Policy Act of 1969, in connection with allow incidental take of these three regulations adopted under section 4(a) released immediately upon discovery, at similar butterflies will not pose a threat the point of capture. However, this of the Act. We published a notice to the Miami blue because: (1) Activities outlining our reasons for this emergency rule establishes immediate such as yard care and vegetation control prohibitions on the possession, determination in the Federal Register in developed or commercial areas that on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). collection, and trade of these species are likely to result in take of the cassius throughout their ranges in the United blue, ceraunus blue, and nickerbean References Cited States. Likewise, this emergency rule blue are not likely to affect the Miami A complete list of all references cited immediately prohibits the import and blue, and (2) the primary threat that export of these subspecies, and therefore in this rule is available on the Internet activities concerning the cassius blue, at http://www.regulations.gov or upon may have an effect on commercial and ceraunus blue, and nickerbean blue non-commercial trade within the United request from the Field Supervisor, butterflies pose to the Miami blue comes South Florida Ecological Services Office States. from collection and commercial trade. There are over 60 species and (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). subspecies of butterflies within the Required Determinations Author Cyclargus, Leptotes, Hemiargus and Clarity of Rule Pseudochrysops genera, occurring The primary author of this emergency We are required by Executive Orders domestically and internationally, that rule is the staff of the South Florida 12866 and 12988 and by the could be confused with the Miami blue Ecological Services Office (see FOR Presidential Memorandum of June 1, butterfly, or the three similarity of FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 1998, to write all rules in plain appearance butterflies. We are aware language. This means that each rule we List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 that legal trade in some of these other publish must: (a) Be logically organized; blue butterflies exists. To avoid Endangered and threatened species, (b) Use the active voice to address Exports, Imports, Reporting and confusion and delays in legal trade, we readers directly; (c) Use clear language strongly recommend maintaining the recordkeeping requirements, rather than jargon; (d) Be divided into Transportation. appropriate documentation and short sections and sentences; and (e) declarations with legal specimens at all Use lists and tables wherever possible. Regulation Promulgation times, especially when importing them If you feel that we have not met these into the United States. Legal trade of Accordingly, we amend part 17, requirements, send us comments by one subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the other species that may be confused with of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: the Miami blue butterfly or the three section. To better help us revise the similarity of appearance butterflies rule, your comments should be as PART 17—[AMENDED] should also comply with the import/ specific as possible. For example, you export transfer regulations under 50 should tell us page numbers and the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 CFR 14, where applicable. names of the sections or paragraphs that continues to read as follows: All otherwise legal activities that may are unclearly written, which sections or involve incidental take (take that results sentences are too long, the sections Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Public Law from, but is not the purpose of, carrying where you feel lists or tables would be out an otherwise lawful activity) of 99–625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise useful, etc. noted. these similar butterflies, and which are Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. conducted in accordance with ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding new 3501, et seq.) applicable State, Federal, Tribal, and entries for the following, in alphabetical local laws and regulations, will not be This rule does not contain any new order under Insects, to the List of considered take under this regulation. collections of information that require Endangered and Threatened Wildlife: For example, this special 4(d) rule approval by the Office of Management exempts legal application of pesticides, and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork § 17.11 Endangered and threatened yard care, vehicle use, vegetation Reduction Act. This rule will not wildlife. management, exotic plant removal, impose new recordkeeping or reporting * * * * * burning, and any other legally requirements on State or local (h) * * *

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49567

Species Vertebrate population Historic where en- Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name range dangered or habitat rules threatened

******* INSECTS

******* Butterfly, cassius blue .. Leptotes cassius U.S.A. (FL), Bahamas, NA T(S/A) NA 17.47(a) theonus. Greater Antilles, Cayman Islands. Butterfly, ceraunus blue Hemiargus ceraunus U.S.A. (FL), Bahamas NA T(S/A) NA 17.47(a) antibubastus.

******* Butterfly, Miami blue .... Cyclargus thomasi U.S.A. (FL), Bahamas NA E NA NA bethunebakeri.

******* Butterfly, nickerbean Cyclargus ammon ...... U.S.A. (FL), Bahamas, NA T(S/A) NA 17.47(a) blue. Cuba.

*******

■ 3. In subpart D, add § 17.47 to read as ceraunus blue butterfly, nickerbean blue blue butterfly, ceraunus blue butterfly, follows: butterfly), regardless of whether in the and nickerbean blue butterfly. wild or in captivity, and also apply to (b) [Reserved] § 17.47 Special rules—insects. the progeny of any such butterfly. (a) Cassius blue butterfly (Leptotes Dated: July 27, 2011. cassius theonus), Ceraunus blue (2) Any violation of State law will also be a violation of the Act. Gregory E. Siekaniec, butterfly (Hemiargus ceraunus Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife (3) Incidental take, that is, take that antibubastus), and Nickerbean blue Service. butterfly (Cyclargus ammon). results from, but is not the purpose of, (1) All provisions of § 17.31 apply to carrying out an otherwise lawful [FR Doc. 2011–19812 Filed 8–9–11; 8:45 am] these species (cassius blue butterfly, activity, will not apply to the cassius BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:53 Aug 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\10AUR2.SGM 10AUR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2