Vol. 77 Thursday, No. 193 October 4, 2012

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and ; Proposed Endangered Species Status for the Bonneted ; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60750 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR We will post all comments on http:// (5) Additional information regarding www.regulations.gov. This generally the threats under the five listing factors: Fish and Wildlife Service means that we will post any personal (a) The present or threatened information you provide us (see the destruction, modification, or 50 CFR Part 17 Information Requested section below for curtailment of its habitat or range; [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2012–0078; more information). (b) Overutilization for commercial, 4500030113] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: recreational, scientific, or educational Larry Williams, Field Supervisor, U.S. purposes; RIN 1018–AY15 Fish and Wildlife Service, South Florida (c) Disease or predation; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Ecological Services Office, 1339 20th (d) The inadequacy of existing and Plants; Proposed Endangered Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960–3559, regulatory mechanisms; and Species Status for the Florida by telephone 772–562–3909, ext. 285, (e) Other natural or manmade factors Bonneted Bat by facsimile 772–562–4288. Persons affecting its continued existence. who use a telecommunications device We are particularly interested in AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal information regarding threats from Interior. Information Relay Service (FIRS) at disease; predation; climate change; ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 800–877–8339. impacts to prey base, including insect public comments. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This abundance and availability; impacts document consists of: (1) A proposed from wind energy and other land use SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and rule to list the as projects; inadvertent or purposeful Wildlife Service, propose to list the an endangered species; (2) a finding that removal or displacement of Florida Florida bonneted bat ( designation of critical habitat for the bonneted ; use of bat exclusion floridanus), as an endangered species species is prudent; and (3) a finding that devices at inappropriate times; and under the Endangered Species Act of critical habitat is not determinable at regulations or conservation measures 1973, as amended (Act). This proposed this time because the biological needs of that may be addressing these threats. rule, if made final, would extend the the species are not sufficiently well (6) What physical or biological Act’s protections to this species. We known to permit identification of areas features (e.g., space, food, water, cover have found that critical habitat is as critical habitat. or shelter, sites for breeding and rearing prudent but not determinable at this of offspring, protected habitats) are time due to lack of knowledge of which Information Requested essential to the conservation of the physical and biological features are We intend that any final action species. essential to the conservation of the resulting from this proposed rule will be (7) The reasons why we should or species. The Service seeks data and based on the best scientific and should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical comments from the public on this commercial data available and be as habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 proposed listing rule and on the accurate and as effective as possible. U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the biological needs of the species that will Therefore, we request comments or benefits of or possible risks of enable the Service to define critical information from the public, other designation, including any possible habitat for this species. concerned governmental agencies, adverse effects to Florida bonneted bats DATES: We will accept comments Native American tribes, the scientific or roosts once their locations are received or postmarked on or before community, industry, or any other published (e.g., targeted actions to December 3, 2012. Comments submitted interested parties concerning this discourage the use of roosts, intentional electronically using the Federal proposed rule. We particularly seek or excessive disturbance to roosts, eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES comments concerning: removal of individuals from roosts, use section, below) must be received by (1) Additional information concerning of exclusion devices at inappropriate 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing the historical and current status, range, times, other persecution directed at the date. We must receive requests for distribution, and population size of this species), and any other risks associated public hearings, in writing, at the species, including the locations of any with publication of maps designating address shown in FOR FURTHER additional populations or colonies of any area on which the species may be INFORMATION CONTACT by November 19, this species. located, now or in the future, as critical 2012. (2) Any information on the biological habitat. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments or ecological requirements of the (8) Specific information on: by one of the following methods: species, especially life history (a) The amount and distribution of (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal information and habitat needs (e.g., habitat for the Florida bonneted bat; eRulemaking Portal: http:// preferred roosting and foraging habitat, (b) What areas, which are occupied at www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, nightly and seasonal movements, the time of listing (or are currently enter FWS–R4–ES–2012–0078, which is dispersal capabilities, diet, and seasonal occupied) contain features essential to the docket number for this rulemaking. changes in diet), and ongoing the conservation of the species, should You may submit a comment by clicking conservation measures for the species be included in a designation and why; on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ and its habitat. (c) Special management (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail (3) Biological, commercial trade, or considerations or protection that may be or hand-delivery to: Public Comments other relevant data concerning any needed in critical habitat areas, Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2012– threats (or lack thereof) to this species including managing for the potential 0078; Division of Policy and Directives and regulations that may be addressing effects of climate change; and Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife those threats. (d) What areas not occupied at the Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS (4) Current or planned land use time of listing are essential for the 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. activities in the areas occupied by the conservation of the species and why. We request that you send comments species and possible impacts of these (9) Information on the projected and only by the methods described above. activities on this species. reasonably likely impacts of climate

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60751

change on the Florida bonneted bat and and faces numerous and immediate FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife its habitat. threats throughout its very restricted Conservation Commission Please note that submissions merely range and, therefore, qualifies for listing. IPCC = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate stating support for or opposition to the Change Protections under the Act can only be NPS = National Park Service action under consideration without accomplished through issuing proposed OC = Organochlorine providing supporting information, and final rules. This document proposes OP = Organophospate although noted, will not be considered the protection of the species and is PSSF = Picayune Strand State Forest in making a determination, as section based upon our careful review of the SFWMD = South Florida Water Management 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that status of the species and the threats it District determinations as to whether any faces, using the best available WMA = Wildlife Management Area species is a threatened or endangered information. Additionally, we seek data WNS = White-nose syndrome species must be made ‘‘solely on the and comments from peer reviewers, Previous Federal Actions basis of the best scientific and government agencies and Tribes, commercial data available.’’ The Florida bonneted bat (Eumops stakeholders, and the public on this floridanus) was previously known as the You may submit your comments and proposed listing rule and on possible materials concerning this proposed rule Florida mastiff bat (Eumops glaucinus critical habitat for the species. floridanus). by one of the methods listed in the The basis for our action. Under the ADDRESSES section. We request that you On September 18, 1985, we published Act, a species may be determined to be a Review of Vertebrate Wildlife for send comments only by the methods an endangered or threatened species described in the ADDRESSES section. Listing as Endangered or Threatened based on any of five factors: (A) The Species (50 FR 37958), which included If you submit information via http:// present or threatened destruction, www.regulations.gov, your entire the Florida mastiff bat as a category 2 modification, or curtailment of its candidate species for possible future submission—including any personal habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for identifying information—will be posted listing as an endangered or threatened commercial, recreational, scientific, or species. Category 2 candidates were on the Web site. If your submission is educational purposes; (C) Disease or made via a hardcopy that includes those taxa for which information predation; (D) The inadequacy of contained in our files indicated that personal identifying information, you existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) may request at the top of your document listing may be appropriate, but for Other natural or manmade factors which additional data were needed to that we withhold this information from affecting its continued existence. Based public review. However, we cannot support a listing proposal. In a January on our analysis below, we have 6, 1989, Notice of Review (54 guarantee that we will be able to do so. determined that the Florida bonneted We will post all hardcopy submissions FR 554), the Florida mastiff bat bat qualifies for listing as an endangered continued as a category 2 candidate. On on http://www.regulations.gov. Please species due to three of these five factors include sufficient information with your November 21, 1991, the Florida mastiff (Factors A, D, and E). bat was upgraded from a category 2 to comments to allow us to verify any Peer review of our methods. We will a category 1 species in an Animal scientific or commercial information obtain review and opinions from Candidate Review for Listing as you include. knowledgeable individuals with Endangered or Threatened Species (56 Comments and materials we receive, scientific expertise on our technical FR 58804), characterized as having a as well as supporting documentation we assumptions, analysis, adherence to declining trend (indicating decreasing used in preparing this proposed rule, regulations, and whether or not we used numbers or increasing threats or both). will be available for public inspection the best available information in It remained a category 1 candidate on http://www.regulations.gov, or by developing this proposed rule. Their (declining trend) in the 1994 review (59 appointment, during normal business review will be requested during the FR 58982). In 1996, the Florida mastiff hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife public comment period. Service, South Florida Ecological bat was removed from the candidate list Services Office (see FOR FURTHER Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in (61 FR 7596) because the taxon was INFORMATION CONTACT). This Document deemed to be more abundant or widespread than previously believed or Executive Summary We use many acronyms and abbreviations throughout this proposed not subject to any identifiable threat. This document consists of: (1) A rule. To assist the reader, we provide a On November 9, 2009, we recognized proposed rule to list the Florida list of these here for easy reference: the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) as an floridanus) as a Federal candidate endangered species; (2) a finding that Babcock-Webb WMA = Fred C. Babcock/ species in our annual Candidate Notice designation of critical habitat for the Cecil M. Webb Wildlife Management Area of Review (74 FR 57804) with a Listing BCNP = Big Cypress National Preserve species is prudent; and (3) a finding that CCSP = U.S. Climate Change Science Priority Number of 2 (threats high in critical habitat is not determinable at Program magnitude and imminent). This action this time due to our current lack of ENP = Everglades National Park constituted a 12-month finding for the understanding of the physical and FBC = Florida Bat Conservancy species in which it was determined that biological habitat features essential to FBWG = Florida Bat Working Group listing the species was warranted but the conservation of the species. FDACS = Florida Department of Agriculture precluded by other higher priority Why we need to publish a rule. Under and Consumer Services listing actions. the Act, a species or subspecies may FDEP = Florida Department of Environmental On January 29, 2010, we received a warrant protection through listing if it is Protection petition from Wild South to list the an endangered or threatened species FFS = Florida Forest Service Florida bonneted bat as an endangered FNAI = Florida Natural Areas Inventory throughout all or a significant portion of FPL = Florida Power and Light species and to designate critical habitat its range. The Florida bonneted bat is FR = Federal Register pursuant to the Act (O’Malley 2010). currently a candidate species known to FSPSP = Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State The petition heavily relied upon the exist only in south Florida. The species Park Service’s 2009 species assessment, but has a small estimated population size FTBG = Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden did not provide any new substantial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60752 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

information. On February 17, 2010, we oz) (Owre 1978, p. 43; Belwood 1981, p. be markedly larger than tropical responded to the petitioner, indicating 412; Belwood 1992, p. 216; Timm and American specimens of that species and that we had previously determined that Genoways 2004, p. 857). A pregnant regarded floridanus as a well-marked the listing of the species was warranted female with a single fetus weighed 55.4 subspecies of E. glaucinus. Until but precluded and that, through the g (2.0 oz) (Belwood 1981, p. 412). Males recently, two subspecies of E. glaucinus Candidate Notice of Review process, we and females are not significantly had been recognized: E. glaucinus annually determine whether listing different in size (Timm and Genoways floridanus, which occurs in Florida, and remains warranted but precluded. 2004, p. 857). Timm and Genoways E. glaucinus glaucinus, which occurs On May 10, 2011, the Service (2004, p. 857) found no pattern of size- from central to southeastern announced a work plan to restore related geographic variation in this and northwestern Argentina, and biological priorities and certainty to the species. and Jamaica in the Greater Antilles Service’s listing process. As part of an Members of the genus Eumops have (Eger 1977, pp. 39–43). agreement with one of the agency’s most large, rounded pinnae (ears), arising Timm and Genoways (2004, p. 852) frequent plaintiffs, the Service filed a from a single point or joined medially reviewed and reassessed the taxonomic work plan with the U.S. District Court on the forehead (Best et al. 1997, p. 1). status of bats of the genus Eumops. They for the District of Columbia. The work The common name of ‘‘bonneted bat’’ found considerable geographic variation plan will enable the agency to, over a originates from characteristic large among specimens of bonneted bats (then period of 6 years, systematically review broad ears, which project forward over named E. glaucinus) and determined and address the needs of more than 250 the eyes (FBC 2005, p. 1). Ears are that E. glaucinus is in fact a species- species listed within the 2010 Candidate joined at the midline of the head. This group consisting of more than one Notice of Review, including the Florida feature, along with its large size, species. Timm and Genoways (2004, pp. bonneted bat, to determine if this distinguish the Florida bonneted bat 852, 855, 859) determined that bonneted species should be added to the Federal from the smaller Brazilian (=Mexican) bats in Florida are significantly larger Lists of Endangered and Threatened free-tailed bat ( brasiliensis), than those in all other populations and Wildlife and Plants. This work plan will the only other molossid to occur in have other distinguishing skeletal enable the Service to again prioritize its Florida (Belwood 1992, p. 216). morphology, including the following: workload based on the needs of Wings of the members of the genus proportionally shorter and deeper candidate species, while also providing Eumops are among the narrowest of all basisphenoid pits (bony cavities inside State wildlife agencies, stakeholders, molossids (Freeman 1981, as cited in the nose), glenoid fossa (mandibular and other partners clarity and certainty Best et al. 1997, p. 3) and are well- fossa or depression in the skull) that are about when listing determinations will adapted for rapid, prolonged flight broadly triangular with rounded apices be made. On July 12, 2011, the Service (Vaughan 1959 as cited in Best et al. (tips), and differences in shape of the reached an agreement with a frequent 1997, p. 3). This wing structure is baculum (penis bone) and palate. Given plaintiff group and further strengthened conducive to high-speed flight in open these differences, Timm and Genoways the work plan, which will allow the areas (Findley et al. 1972 as cited in (2004, pp. 852, 856) indicated that the Best et al. 1997, p. 3). agency to focus its resources on the correct name for both Pleistocene and The Florida bonneted bat’s fur is short species most in need of protection Recent Florida bonneted bats is Eumops and glossy, with hairs sharply bicolored floridanus. Recent studies show that under the Act. These agreements were with a white base (Belwood 1992, p. approved on September 9, 2011. The morphologically, E. floridanus is 216; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 857). distinct from all other populations in timing of this proposed listing is, in Like other molossids, color is highly part, therefore, an outcome of the work the E. glaucinus complex (R. Timm, variable; color varies from black to University of Kansas, pers. comm. plan. brown to brownish-gray or cinnamon The Service’s decision to propose 2008a; McDonough et al. 2008, pp. brown with ventral pelage paler than listing of the Florida bonneted bat 1306, 1311). Based upon their most dorsal (Owre 1978, p. 43; Belwood 1992, resulted from our careful review of the recent work, McDonough et al. (2008, p. p. 216; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 1306) concluded that there are four status of the species and the threats it 857). The basisphenoid pits (paired species in the E. glaucinus complex—E. faces. depressions in the basisphenoid bone) glaucinus (in South America east of the Endangered Species Status for the of the skull are ovoid (egg-shaped) and Andes), E. ferox (in the , Florida Bonneted Bat moderately deep (Timm and Genoways Mexico, and ), an Background 2004, p. 857). The tail projects beyond unnamed taxon in western Ecuador the interfemoral membrane (skin that (subsequently described as E. wilsoni The Florida bonneted bat is a member stretches between the legs) (Owre 1978, (Baker et al. 2009, pp. 1–13)), and E. of the Molossidae (free-tailed bats) p. 43; Belwood 1992, p. 216). floridanus in south Florida. within the order Chiroptera. The E. floridanus is extremely similar in species is approximately 130 to 165 both the mitochondrial and nuclear millimeters (mm) (5.1 to 6.5 inches [in]) Allen (1932, pp. 256–259) first genes to the populations on Cuba and in length (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. described a new genus and species of Jamaica and is clearly derived from 857) and the largest bat in Florida (Owre Pleistocene free-tailed bat, Molossides those populations (R. Timm, pers. 1978, p. 43; Belwood 1992, p. 216; floridanus, from a jaw of a single comm. 2008a; McDonough et al. 2008, Florida Bat Conservancy [FBC] 2005, p. specimen. Ray et al. (1963, pp. 373, pp. 1309–1313). Specimens of E. 1). The length of the tail ranges from 46 377–381) transferred Molossides floridanus are morphologically distinct to 57 mm (1.8 to 2.2 in), hind foot 11 floridanus to the genus Eumops. The from E. glaucinus, but cannot be to 15 mm (0.4 to 0.6 in), ear 20 to 30 genus Eumops was later revised distinguished by cytochrome-b or mm (0.8 to 1.2 in), and forearm 60.8 to (Koopman 1971, pp. 1–6; Eger 1977, pp. amplified fragment length 66.0 mm (2.39 to 2.60 in) (Timm and 1–69; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. polymorphism (AFLP) DNA data Genoways 2004, p. 857). Masses average 859). Koopman (1971, pp. 1–6) found (McDonough et al. 2008, pp. 1312– 39.7 grams (g) (1.4 ounces [oz]) and specimens of Eumops from Florida that 1313). McDonough et al. (2008, p. 1313) range from 30.2 to 46.6 grams (1.1 to 1.6 have been identified as E. glaucinus to suggested that morphological

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60753

distinction in E. floridanus has 2004, p. 859). The maternity season for and had a left forearm length of 64.5 preceded establishment of either most bat species in Florida occurs from mm (2.5 in) (Smith 2010, p. 1). mitochondrial or nuclear distinction mid-April through mid-August (Marks Based upon limited information, the through their examination of mtDNA and Marks 2008a, p. 8). During the early species roosts singly or in colonies (mitochondrial DNA), nuclear AFLP, portion of this period, females give birth consisting of a male and several females karyotypic, and morphological data and leave young in the roost while they (Belwood 1992, p. 221). G.T. Hubbell within the E. glaucinus complex. make multiple foraging excursions to believed that individuals in Miami According to McDonough (2008, p. support lactation (Marks and Marks roosted singly (Belwood 1992, p. 221). 1313), the floridanus-glaucinus complex 2008a, pp. 8–9). During the latter However, Belwood (1981, p. 412) presented a unique opportunity to study portion of the season, young and suggested that a colony, consisting of the process of speciation using new females forage together until the young seven females and one male using a techniques from the emerging field of become sufficiently skilled to forage and cavity as a roost site in genomics, and the use of multiple survive on their own (Marks and Marks Punta Gorda, was a group, based on its sex ratio. Belwood (1981, p. 412; character sets (mtDNA, nuclear, and 2008a, p. 9). The Florida bonneted bat 1992, p. 221) suggested that this morphological) will become more is a subtropical species, and pregnant behavior has been recorded in a few bat prevalent in the future. McDonough et females have been found in June al. (2008, p. 1313) stated that while species and such social groupings may through September (FBC 2005, p. 1; adherence to the genetic species concept be facilitated by roosting in tree cavities, Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 9). would relegate E. floridanus to which can be defended from other Examination of limited data suggests conspecific status (of or belonging to the males (Morrison 1979, pp. 11–15). same species) with E. glaucinus, that this species may be polyestrous Information on roosting habits from morphological and ecological concepts (having more than one period of estrous artificial structures is also limited. The clearly call for the recognition of E. in a year), with a second birthing season Florida bonneted bat colony using bat floridanus as a distinct species. possibly in January–February (Timm houses on private property in Lee The Florida bonneted bat (E. and Genoways 2004, p. 859; FBC 2005, County consisted of 8 to 25 individuals, floridanus) was previously known as p. 1). including one albino (S. Trokey, pers. Florida mastiff bat, Wagner’s mastiff bat, Information on reproduction and comm. 2006a, 2006b; 2008a, 2008b, and mastiff bat (E. glaucinus floridanus) demography is sparse. The Florida 2012). After the prolonged cold (Owre 1978, p. 43; Belwood 1992, p. bonneted bat has low fecundity; litter temperatures killed and displaced 216; Best et al. 1997, p. 1). While earlier size is one (FBC 2005, p. 1; Timm and several bats in early 2010, a total of 10 literature found the Florida bonneted Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). The colony individuals remained by April 2010, bat distinct at the subspecies level (see studied by Belwood (1981, p. 412) with seven occupying one house and Timm and Genoways 2004, pp. 852, consisted of eight adults and included three occupying another (S. Trokey, 856; McDonough et al. 2008, p. 1307), five post-lactating females, one pregnant pers. comm. 2010a, 2010b, 2010c). As of the most current scientific information female with a single fetus, and one male February 2012, there are 18 bats using confirms that E. floridanus is a full with enlarged testicles; the other female two houses at this location (S. Trokey, species and this taxonomic change has escaped before examination. The pers. comm. 2012). Sex ratio is not been accepted by the scientific pregnant female captured was the first known. Some movement between the community (Timm and Genoways 2004, record of a gestating Florida bonneted houses has been observed; the albino individual has been observed to be in p. 861; McDonough et al. 2008, pp. bat in September (Belwood 1981, p. one house one day and the other house 1306–1315; R. Timm, pers. comm. 412). However, Belwood (1981, p. 412) the next (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2006a). 2008b, 2009; Baker et al. 2009, pp. 9– noted that this finding is consistent with 10). The International Union for At the Fred C. Babcock/Cecil M. Webb the reproductive chronology of Wildlife Management Area (Babcock- Conservation of Nature and Natural bonneted bats in Cuba, which are Resources (Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales Webb WMA), 42 individuals are using polyestrous. Robson et al. (1989, p. 81) 2008, p. 1) and the Florida Natural 4 separate roosts, consisting of 7 bat found an injured pregnant female in Areas Inventory (FNAI) (FNAI 2012, p. houses among 4 sites (J. Myers, pers. Coral Gables in late August 1988, which 24) use the name E. floridanus. The comm. 2012a, 2012b; Marks and Marks aborted its fetus in early September Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 2012, pp. 8, 12, A61). These sites each 1988. A landowner with an active Commission (FWC) (FWC 2011a, pp. 1– consist of two bat houses on a single colony in North Fort Myers reported 11) also recognizes the species as E. pole, with the exception of one site, that she has seen young bats appear in floridanus, but their current threatened which has a pole containing only one spring and summer, generally with only and endangered list uses both names, house. The most recent counts from Florida bonneted (mastiff) bat, Eumops one or two births within the colony per simultaneous observations at these sites, (=glaucinus) floridanus (see also Factor year (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2006a). taken at emergence on April 19, 2012, D below). However, four young were noted in documented the following: 35 Florida 2004 (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2006a). A bonneted bats at 2 houses, 5 at 2 houses, Life History juvenile male caught in a mist net at 1 at 2 houses, and 1 at 1 house (J. Myers, Relatively little is known about the Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF) on pers. comm. 2012a; Marks and Marks Florida bonneted bat’s life history. December 17, 2009, suggested breeding 2012, pp. 12, 19, A61). It is not known Lifespan is not known. Based upon the in the area (Smith 2010, p. 1). Age was if there is movement between houses or work of Wilkinson and South (2002, pp. determined by viewing the epiphyseal- among roost locations or between 124–131), Gore et al. (2010, p. 1) diaphyseal fusion (level of bone growth artificial and unknown natural roosts inferred a lifespan of 10 to 20 years for and formation in the wings) under a within Babcock-Webb WMA. the Florida bonneted bat, with an magnifying glass and taking a The Florida bonneted bat is active average generation time of 5 to 10 years. photograph of the fusion, which was year-round and does not have periods of The Florida bonneted bat has a fairly independently confirmed by two hibernation or torpor. The species is not extensive breeding season during Florida bat experts (Smith 2010, pp. 1– migratory, but there might have been summer months (Timm and Genoways 2). The juvenile weighed 35 g (1.2 oz) seasonal shifts in roosting sites (Timm

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60754 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

and Genoways 2004, p. 860). Belwood Although the species can long meters (100 feet); call sequences are (1992, pp. 216–217) reported that, prior distances, it likely does not travel analyzed using software that compares to 1967, G.T. Hubbell routinely obtained farther than necessary to acquire food calls to a library of signature calls several individuals per year collected needed for survival (G. Marks, pers. (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 5). Florida during the winter from people’s houses. comm. 2012). bonneted bat calls are relatively easy to Precise foraging and roosting habits Bonneted bats are ‘‘fast hawking’’ bats identify because calls are issued at and long-term requirements are that rely on speed and agility to catch frequencies well below that of other unknown (Belwood 1992, p. 219). target insects in the absence of Florida bat species (Marks and Marks Active year-round, the species is likely background clutter, such as dense 2008a, p. 5). dependent upon a constant and vegetation (Simmons et al. 1979, pp. In general, open, fresh water and sufficient food supply, consisting of 16–21; Belwood 1992, p. 221; Best et al. wetlands provide prime foraging areas insects, to maintain its generally high 1997, p. 5). Foraging in open spaces, for bats (Marks and Marks 2008c, p. 4). metabolism. Based upon limited these bats use echolocation to detect Bats will forage over ponds, streams, information, Florida bonneted bats feed prey at relatively long range, roughly 3 and wetlands and drink when flying on flying insects of the following orders: to 5 meters (10 to 16 feet) (Belwood over open water (Marks and Marks Coleoptera (), Diptera (true ), 1992, p. 221). Based upon information 2008c, p. 4). During dry seasons, bats and (true bugs) (Belwood from G.T. Hubbell, Belwood (1992, p. become more dependent on remaining 1981, p. 412; Belwood 1992, p. 220; FBC 221) indicated that individuals leave ponds, streams, and wetland areas for 2005, p. 1). An analysis of bat guano roosts to forage after dark, seldom occur foraging purposes (Marks and Marks (droppings) from the colony using the below 10 meters (33 feet) in the air, and 2008c, p. 4). The presence of roosting pine flatwoods in Punta Gorda indicated produce loud, audible calls when flying; habitat is critical for day roosts, that the sample (by volume) contained calls are easily recognized by some protection from predators, and the coleopterans (55 percent), dipterans (15 humans (Belwood 1992, p. 221; Best et rearing of young (Marks and Marks percent), and hemipterans (10 percent) al. 1997, p. 5; Marks and Marks 2008a, 2008c, p. 4). For most bats, the (Belwood 1981, p. 412; Belwood 1992, p. 5). On the evening of April 19, 2012, availability of suitable roosts is an p. 220). No other similar analyses have Florida bonneted bats using bat houses important, limiting factor (Humphrey been performed, but researchers are at Babcock-Webb WMA emerged to 1975, pp. 341–343). Bats in south planning to conduct analyses of guano forage at dusk; emergence occurred from Florida roost primarily in trees and to determine dietary preferences and approximately 8:20 to 8:40 p.m. (J. manmade structures (Marks and Marks seasonal changes (Ridgley 2012, pp. 1– Myers, pers. comm. 2012; P. Halupa, 2008a, p. 8). 4; C. Marks, FBC, pers. comm. 2012; S. pers. obs. 2012). Available information on roosting Snow, Everglades National Park (ENP), sites for the Florida bonneted bat is Habitat pers. comm. 2012). This species may extremely limited. Roosting and prey upon larger insects, which may be Relatively little is known of the foraging areas appear varied, with the less abundant than smaller prey items ecology of the Florida bonneted bat, and species occurring in forested, suburban, (S. Snow, pers. comm. 2012). Since the long-term habitat requirements are and urban areas (Timm and Arroyo- species can take flight from the ground poorly understood (Robson 1989, p. 2; Cabrales 2008, p. 1). Data from like other Eumops spp., it may also prey Robson et al. 1989, p. 81; Belwood 1992, acoustical surveys and other methods upon ground insect species (Ridgley p. 219; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. suggests that the species uses a wide 2012, pp. 1–2). 859). Habitat for the Florida bonneted variety of habitats (see Table 1) (Marks Molossids, in general, seem adapted bat mainly consists of foraging areas and and Marks 2008a, pp. 13–14; 2008b, pp. to fast flight in open areas (Vaughan roosting sites, including artificial 2–5; 2008c, pp. 1–28; 2012, pp. 1–22; R. 1966, p. 249). Various morphological structures. At present, no active, natural Arwood, Inside-Out Photography, Inc., characteristics (e.g., narrow wings, high roost sites are known, and only limited pers. comm. 2008a, 2008b, 2012; Smith wing-aspect ratios (ratio of wing length information on historical sites is 2010, pp. 1–4; S. Snow, pers. comm. to its breadth) make Eumops well- available. 2011, 2012). adapted for efficient, rapid, and Recent information on foraging Use of Forests and Other Natural Areas prolonged flight in open areas (Findley habitat has been obtained largely et al. 1972, pp. 429–444; Freeman 1981, through acoustical surveys, designed to Bonneted bats are closely associated pp. 96–97; Norberg and Rayner 1987, detect and record bat echolocation calls with forested areas because of their tree- pp. 399–400; Vaughan, 1959 as cited in (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 5). roosting habits (Robson 1989, p. 2; Best et al. 1997, p. 3). Barbour and Davis Acoustical methods have generally been Belwood 1992, p. 220; Eger 1999, p. (1969, p. 234) noted that the species selected over mist netting as the primary 132), but specific information is limited. flies faster than smaller bats, but cannot survey methodology because this Belwood (1981, p. 412) found a small maneuver as well in small spaces. species flies and primarily forages at colony of Florida bonneted bats (seven Belwood (1992, p. 221) stated that E. heights of 9 meters (30 feet) or more females and one male, all adults) glaucinus is ‘‘capable of long, straight, (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 3). The roosting in a longleaf pine (Pinus and sustained flight,’’ which should Florida bonneted bat has a unique and palustris) in a pine flatwoods allow individuals to travel large easily identifiable call. While most community near Punta Gorda in 1979. distances. Norberg and Rayner (1987, p. North American bats vocalize The bats were roosting in a cavity 4.6 399) attributed long distance flights of echolocation calls in the ultrasonic meters (15.1 feet) high, which had been Brazilian free-tailed bats to their high range that are inaudible to humans, the excavated by a red-cockaded wing-aspect ratios, with that species Florida bonneted bat echolocates at the woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and later capable of traveling 65 km (40 miles) higher end of the audible range, which enlarged by a pileated woodpecker from its roosting site to its foraging areas can be heard by some humans as high- (Dryocopus pileatus) (Belwood 1981, p. (Barbour and Davis 1969, p. 203). pitched calls (Marks and Marks 2008a, 412). Belwood (1981, p. 412) suggested Nonetheless, average foraging distances p. 5). Most surveys conducted using that the bats were permanent residents for the Florida bonneted bat are not acoustical equipment can detect of the tree due to the considerable known (G. Marks, pers. comm. 2012). echolocation calls within a range of 30 accumulation of fecal material,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60755

approximately 1 meter (3.3 feet) in ( simaruba) (Silva-Taboada 1979 of other natural areas. Echolocation calls depth. Eger (1999, p. 132) noted that in as cited in Robson 1989, p. 2 and have been recorded in a wide array of forested areas, old, mature trees are Belwood 1992, p. 219). Another habitat types: pine flatwoods, pine essential roosting sites for this species. individual was found roosting in the rocklands, cypress, hardwood The species also uses foliage of palm foliage of the palm Copernicia hammocks, , wetlands, rivers, trees. Based upon information from G.T. vespertilionum (Silva-Taboada 1979 as lakes, canals, etc. (see Table 1). Table 1 Hubbell, specimens have been found in cited in Belwood 1992, p. 219). Belwood lists locations and habitat types where shafts of royal palms ( regia) (1992, pp. 219–220) noted that the Florida bonneted bats were recorded or (Belwood 1992, p. 219). majority of the approximately 80 observed (2003 to present) (Marks and Similar roosting habitats have been specimens of E. glaucinus from Marks 2008a, pp. 13–14; 2008b, pp. 2– reported for E. g. glaucinus in Cuba. housed in the U.S. National 5; 2008c, pp. 1–28; 2012, pp. 1–22; R. Nine of 19 known roost sites were Museum were collected from tree Arwood, pers. comm. 2008a, 2008b, located in tree cavities, including cavities in heavily forested areas. 2012; Smith 2010, pp. 1–4; S. Snow, woodpecker holes and cavities in royal More recent acoustical data and other pers. comm. 2011, 2012; FNAI 2012, pp. palms, ‘‘dagame’’ trees (Callycophyllum information indicate that the Florida 1–28). Additional details on key sites candidissimum), and mastic trees bonneted bat uses forests and a variety are provided below Table 1.

TABLE 1—LOCATIONS AND HABITAT TYPES RECORDED OR OBSERVED FOR FLORIDA BONNETED BATS (2003–2012)

Site Ownership Counties Management Habitat

Everglades National Park (ENP) (2 public ...... Monroe ...... National Park Service earth midden ham- backcountry sites along Wilderness Water- (NPS). mocks, mangroves. way [Darwin’s Place, Watson Place]). ENP (junction of Main Park Road and Long public ...... Miami-Dade ...... NPS ...... pine rocklands, wet- Pine Key). lands. L–31N Florida Power and Light (FPL) cor- private ...... Miami-Dade ...... NPS and FPL ...... canal, mixed. ridor, eastern boundary ENP. Homestead, FL ...... private ...... Miami-Dade ...... None ...... residential, urban. Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden (FTBG) .... private ...... Miami-Dade ...... FTBG ...... pine rockland, hard- wood hammock, water, tropical gar- den, residential. Zoo Miami ...... private and public ...... Miami-Dade ...... Miami-Dade ...... urban, landscaped; pine rocklands. Coral Gables (2 sites, including Granada private ...... Miami-Dade ...... None ...... residential, urban. Golf Course). Snapper Creek Park ...... public ...... Miami-Dade ...... Miami-Dade County ... residential, urban. Everglades City ...... private ...... Collier ...... None ...... residential, urban. Naples ...... private ...... Collier ...... None ...... residential, urban. Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park public ...... Collier ...... Florida Department of lake and canal near (FSPSP) (2 sites, including Ballard Pond, Environmental Pro- hardwood ham- Prairie Canal Bridge). tection (FDEP). mock, and pine flatwoods. Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF) ...... public ...... Collier ...... FFS ...... canal (juvenile male caught above Faka- Union Canal). Big Cypress National Preserve (multiple public ...... Collier ...... NPS ...... pine flatwoods, pal- sites). metto, cypress, mixed and hard- wood hammocks, mangroves, mixed shrubs, wet prairies, river. North Fort Myers (2 sites, including bat private ...... Lee ...... None; private land- residential, urban; bat houses). owner. houses. Babcock-Webb Wildlife Management Area public ...... Charlotte ...... Florida Fish and Wild- pinelands (and near (WMA) (3 sites, Tucker Grade east end, B/ life Conservation red-cockaded wood- W west area, and bat houses and near Commission (FWC). pecker clusters); bat red-cockaded woodpecker clusters). houses. Babcock Ranch (Telegraph Swamp) ...... public, private ...... Charlotte ...... Private entities, FWC, swamp. FFS, and Lee County. Kicco ...... public ...... Polk ...... FWC and SFWMD ..... oxbow along Kis- simmee River. Kissimmee River Public Use Area (Platt’s public ...... Okeechobee ...... FWC and SFWMD ..... boat ramp along Kis- Bluff). simmee River.

In 2006, the species was found at documentation of the Florida bonneted include dry prairie, freshwater marsh, Babcock-Webb WMA in the general bat at this location since 1979 (Marks wet prairie, and pine flatwoods; all calls vicinity of the colony found by Belwood and Marks 2008a, pp. 6, 11, 13). Major were recorded in pinelands (Marks and (1981, p. 412); this was the first habitat types at Babcock-Webb WMA Marks 2008a, pp. A7, B38–B39; 2012,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60756 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

pp. 8, A61, B43). The species was also (Smith 2010, p. 1). Habitat composition Kicco; the other was at Platt’s Bluff boat recorded at an adjacent property, of PSSF includes wet prairie, cypress ramp at a public park on the Kissimmee Babcock Ranch in 2007; calls were stands, and pine flatwoods in the River (Marks and Marks 2008c, pp. 11, recorded at Telegraph Swamp, but not lowlands and subtropical hardwood 17). However, despite numerous in the pinelands surveyed (Marks and hammocks in the uplands, and the attempts, no additional calls were Marks 2008a, pp. A9, B55–B57). individual was captured in the net detected in the Lake Kissimmee areas or The species has been found within above the Faka-Union Canal (Smith along the Kissimmee River during the Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State 2010, p. 1). This was particularly subsequent surveys designed to more Park (FSPSP), using this area throughout notable because it may have been the completely define the northern part of the year (D. Giardina, Florida first capture of a Florida bonneted bat its range (C. Marks, pers. comm. 2012a; Department of Environmental Protection without a roost site being known (Smith Marks and Marks 2012, pp. 3, 5, 8, 10) (FDEP), pers. comm. 2006; C. Marks, 2010, p. 1). (see Current Distribution). pers. comm. 2006a, 2006b, M. Owen, In 2000, the species was found within FSPSP, pers. comm. 2012a, 2012b). In mangroves at Dismal Key within the Use of Parks, Residential, and Other 2006, this species was found at a small Ten Thousand Islands (Timm and Urban Areas lake and at a canal adjacent to tropical Genoways 2004, p. 861; Marks and The Florida bonneted bat uses human hardwood hammocks (Ballard Pond and Marks 2008a, pp. 6, A9, B53; 2012, p. structures and other nonnatural Prairie Canal Bridge) in the FSPSP 14). Subsequent surveys in 2000, 2006, environments. In Coral Gables (Miami (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 11, A7– and 2007 did not document any calls at area), specimens have been found in the A9, B50–B51). Available data and this location (Marks and Marks 2008a, shafts of royal palm leaves (Belwood observations indicate that the species pp. 6, 11, 14). In 2007, the species had 1992, p. 219). Based upon observations was regularly heard at FSPSP from 2000 been recorded at a backcountry from G.T Hubbell, past sightings in through 2012 at various locations, campsite (Watson’s Place) within ENP, Miami suggest that preferred diurnal primarily in the main strand swamp and comprised of mixed hardwoods (S. roosts may be the shingles under near royal palms (M. Owen, pers. comm. Snow, pers. comm. 2012). In 2012, the Spanish tile roofs (Belwood 1992, p. 2012a, 2012b; R. Rau, pers. comm. species was found within mangroves 219). The species also roosts in 2012). In November 2007, the species and mixed hardwoods at another buildings (e.g., in attics, rock or brick was observed along U.S. 41 at Collier- backcountry campsite (Darwin’s Place) chimneys of fireplaces, and especially Seminole State Park in Collier County along the Wilderness Waterway (Ten buildings dating from about 1920–1930) (S. Braem, FDEP, pers. comm. 2012). Thousand Island area), approximately (Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). The FDEP also suggests that the species 4.8 kilometers (km) (3 miles) east- One individual recently reported that a may occur at Charlotte Harbor Preserve southeast of Watson’s Place within ENP single Florida bonneted bat had come State Park in Charlotte County and (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. 8, 17, A53, down the chimney and into his Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Park in B35, B38; C. Marks, pers. comm. 2012; residence in Coral Gables in the fall Collier County (P. Small, FDEP, pers. S. Snow, pers. comm. 2012). However, about 5 years ago (D. Pearson, pers. comm. 2012). the species was not located in similar comm. 2012). Belwood (1992, p. 220) The Florida bonneted bat has been habitats during 18 survey nights in 2012 suggested that urban bats would appear found in various habitats within Big (Marks and Marks 2012, p. 14). to benefit from using Spanish tile roofs Cypress National Preserve (BCNP). In 2011–2012, the species was found on dwellings, since the human During surveys conducted in a variety of in various natural habitats elsewhere in population in south Florida is growing, habitats in 2006–2007, the majority ENP and vicinity (S. Snow, pers. comm. and such structures are more common consisting of cypress swamps and 2011, 2012; Marks and Marks 2012, pp. now than in the past. However, it is wetlands, only one call was recorded in 8, 14). It was found in wetlands and important to recognize that bats using 16 survey nights in 2007 (Marks and pinelands at the junction of the main old or abandoned and new dwellings Marks 2008a, pp. 11, A12–A14). The park road and road to Long Pine Key (S. are at significant risk; bats are removed call was recorded at Deep Lake along Snow, pers. comm. 2011, 2012; Marks when structures are demolished or the western edge of BCNP and the and Marks 2012, p. 8, 14, 17), and also when they are no longer tolerated by eastern side of the FSPSP; the lake was along the L–31N canal in a rural area, humans and eradicated or excluded surrounded by cypress and hardwood at the eastern boundary of ENP (S. from dwellings (see Summary of Factors hammocks similar to the habitat around Snow, pers. comm. 2012; Marks and Affecting the Species, Factor E). Ballard Pond in the FSPSP (see above) Marks 2012, pp. 8, 14, 17, A59). In This species may also roost in rocky (R. Arwood, pers. comm. 2008b). The March 2012, one suspect (presumed, but crevices and outcrops on the ground, species was recorded again in February not confirmed) call sequence was also based on the discovery of an adult for 2012 at another location (Cal Stone’s recorded on SR 9336 in an area of rural which the specimen tag says ‘‘found camp) in an area of pine and palmetto residential and agricultural habitat in under rocks when bull-dozing ground’’ with cypress domes in the surrounding Miami-Dade County (S. Snow, pers. (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 860). A area (R. Arwood, pers. comm. 2012; comm. 2012). In January 2012, another colony was found in a limestone Marks and Marks 2012, p. 13). Data suspect call was recorded from the outcropping on the north edge of the derived from recordings taken in 2003 suburban streets of the village of University of Miami campus in Coral and 2007 by a contractor and provided Palmetto Bay in Miami-Dade (S. Snow, Gables; the limestone contained a large to the Service (S. Snow, pers. comm. pers. comm. 2012). number of flat, horizontal, eroded 2012) and available land use covers In 2008, the Florida bonneted bat was fissures in which the bats roosted derived from a geographic information found at two locations along the (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 860). It system also suggest that the species uses Kissimmee River during a survey of is not known to what extent such roost a wide array of habitats within BCNP. public areas contracted by FWC (J. sites are suitable. As noted earlier, FWC biologists and Morse, pers. comm. 2008, 2010; Marks Recent acoustical surveys (2006, 2008, volunteers caught a free-flying juvenile and Marks 2008b, pp. 2–5; 2008c, pp. 1– 2012) confirmed that the species male Florida bonneted bat in 2009 using 28). One location was at an oxbow along continues to use a golf course in urban a mist net in the PSSF in Collier County the Kissimmee River in a pasture in Coral Gables (Marks and Marks 2008a,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60757

pp. 6, 11, A4; 2008b, pp. 1–6; 2012, pp. to fall from the roosts before flying (S. p. 857; Morgan 1991, p. 188). Holocene 8, 14, 16, 19, A24, B16). Despite Trokey, pers. comm. 2012). remains are known from Vero Beach, numerous efforts, attempts to locate the The species also occupies bat houses Indian River County (Ray 1958, Martin roost site have been unsuccessful. within pinelands at Babcock-Webb 1977, and Morgan 1985, 2002 as cited in Recordings taken continuously from a WMA in Punta Gorda, Charlotte County Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 857; balcony from a fifth floor condominium (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. 8, A61). In Morgan 1991, pp. 187–188, 200), and also detected presence in Naples (R. winter 2008, two colonies were found also Monkey Jungle Hammock (Morgan Arwood, pers comm. 2008a). Recordings using bat houses (Morse 2008, p. 8; N. 1991, p. 188). The largest fossil sample taken from a house and at a boat dock Douglass, FWC, pers. comm. 2009). In (9 specimens) was reported from the along the Barron River in Everglades 2010, approximately 25 individuals Holocene stratum at Vero Beach City also detected presence in this area were found at two additional bat (Morgan 1985 as cited in Morgan 1991, (R. Arwood, pers comm. 2008a). houses, bringing the potential total at p. 200). The fossil records from Brevard The species has been documented at Babcock-Webb WMA to 58 individuals, County and Indian River County are Zoo Miami within an urban public park occupying four houses (J. Birchfield, considerably farther north than where in Miami-Dade County (C. Marks, pers. FWC, pers. comm. 2010; Marks and living individuals have typically been comm. 2011; Ridgley 2012, p. 1; Marks Marks 2012, pp. 12, A61). In 2012, 42 recorded (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. and Marks 2012, pp. 8, 14, 16, A26). A individuals were found to use four roost 857; Marks and Marks 2008b, p.5). dead specimen was found on Zoo sites, consisting of a total of seven bat Timm and Genoways (2004, p. 856) Miami (then known as Miami Metrozoo) houses, situated approximately 5 meters noted that E. floridanus is one of the few grounds at the Asian Elephant barn in (17 feet) above the ground with north species of Recent that was 2004 (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 6). and south orientations (J. Myers, pers. described from the Pleistocene fossil Miami-Dade County biologists observed comm. 2012a; Marks and Marks 2012, record before the discovery of living seven bats similar in size to Florida pp. 12, 19, A61). Roosts at Babcock- individuals. The type specimen (first bonneted bats and heard chatter at the Webb WMA are mainly in hydric and specimen used to describe the species), correct frequency a few years ago, but mesic pine flatwoods with depression described by Allen (1932, pp. 256–259) were unable to obtain definitive and basin marshes and other mixed is from Melbourne in Brevard County, recordings (S. Thompson, Miami-Dade habitat in the vicinity (J. Myers, pers. Florida (Morgan 1991, pp. 187, 200). Park and Recreation Department, pers. comm. 2012b). The type specimen is dated from the comm. 2010) until a single call was In summary, relatively little is known late Rancholabrean Melbourne Bed, in recorded by FBC outside the same of the species’ habitat requirements. Brevard County (Morgan 1991, pp. 187, enclosure in September 2011 (Ridgley Based upon available data above, it 200; Timm and Genoways 2004, pp. 2012, p. 1; Marks and Marks 2012, pp. appears that the species can use a wide 858, 860). 8, 14, 16, A26). Surrounding habitats array of habitat types (see Table 1 Most of the historical records and include natural areas and horticulturally above). Available information on sightings for this species are several altered landscape, with a variety of roosting sites is extremely limited and decades old from the cities of Coral manmade structures (Ridgley 2012, p. particularly problematic, since the Gables and Miami in extreme 1). availability of suitable roosts is an southeastern Florida, where the species In 2011 and 2012, the species was important, limiting factor for most bat was once believed to be common recorded within tropical gardens at species. Existing roost sites need to be (Belwood 1992, pp. 216, 219; Timm and Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden identified so they can be preserved and Genoways 2004, p. 857; Timm and (FTBG) in Miami-Dade County (S. protected (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). G.T. Snow, pers. comm. 2011, 2012; Marks 15). Uncertainty regarding the location Hubbell also reported a female with and Marks 2012, pp. 8, 13–14, 17, A35, of natural and artificial roost sites may young from Fort Lauderdale in Broward A37). contribute to the species’ vulnerability County; all of his sightings of Florida (see Summary of Factors Affecting the bonneted bats were near human Use of Artificial Structures Species, Factors A and E below). Since dwellings (Belwood 1992, p. 219). Prior The Florida bonneted bat can use the location of key roost sites is not to 1967, G.T. Hubbell regularly heard artificial structures (Marks and Marks known, inadvertent impacts to and loud, distinctive calls at night as the 2008a, p. 8; Morse 2008, pp. 1–14; S. losses of roosts may be more likely to bats foraged above buildings and he Trokey, pers. comm. 2012). In fact, all occur, placing the species at greater risk. routinely obtained several individuals of the active known roosting sites for the If key roost sites are located, actions per year that were collected during the species are bat houses (two at a private could be taken to avoid or minimize winter months from people’s houses landowner’s house; four at Babcock- losses. (Belwood 1992, pp. 216–217). Layne Webb WMA). (1974, p. 389) stated, ‘‘This bat has the The species occupies bat houses on Historical Distribution most restricted range of any Florida private land in North Fort Myers, Lee Records indicating historical range are , being only known from County; until recently, this was the only limited. Morgan (1991, p. 200) indicated Miami, Coral Gables, and Coconut known location of an active colony roost that E. glaucinus had been identified Grove, where it inhabits buildings in anywhere (S. Trokey, pers. comm. from four late Pleistocene residential areas with lush vegetative 2006a, 2008b; Marks and Marks 2008a, (approximately 11,700 years ago) and growth’’ (Barbour, 1936; Schwartz pp. 7, 15). The Florida bonneted bat has Holocene (time period beginning 10,000 1952a; Jennings, 1958). used this property for over 9 years (S. years ago) fossil sites in the southern Other early literature also mentioned Trokey, pers. comm. 2012). The bat half of the Florida peninsula. Late Fort Lauderdale as an area where the houses are located near a small pond, Pleistocene remains are known from species occurred (Barbour and Davis situated approximately 5 meters (17 Melbourne, Brevard County, and 1969, p. 231; Belwood 1992, pp. 218– feet) above the ground with a south by Monkey Jungle Hammock in Miami- 219). However, in their comprehensive southwest orientation (S. Trokey, pers. Dade County (Allen 1932, pp. 256–259; review, none of the specimens comm. 2012). The relatively high height Martin 1977, as cited in Belwood 1981, examined by Timm and Genoways of the houses may allow the large bats p. 412 and Timm and Genoways 2004, (2004, pp. 856–857, 864) were from

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60758 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Broward County. Belwood (1981, p. Morse 2008, p. 2); (3) surveys conducted (2) Surveys along the Kissimmee River 412) found a colony in Punta Gorda; within BCNP in 2003 and 2007, funded Surveys conducted for the FWC in the however, the longleaf pine in which the by the NPS (S. Snow, pers. comm. Lake Wales Ridge and Kissimmee River bats roosted was felled during highway 2012); (4) surveys conducted in 2011– areas in 2008 indicated presence within construction. Recent specimens are only 2012 in ENP by NPS staff (S. Snow, Polk and Okeechobee Counties, at two known from extreme southern and pers. comm. 2012); (5) surveys locations along the Kissimmee River southwestern Florida, including Miami- conducted in 2010–2012, funded by the (see Table 1; Marks and Marks 2008b, p. Dade County on the east coast and Service, to fill past gaps and better 2; 2008c, pp. 1–28). As part of these Charlotte, Collier, and Lee Counties on define the northern and southern extent studies, select areas in the Kissimmee the Gulf coast (Timm and Genoways of the species’ range (Marks and Marks River area (9 nights at 25 locations) and 2004, pp. 856–857). 2012, pp. 1–22 and appendices); and (6) As part of a status survey, Robson along the Lake Wales Ridge (6 nights at recordings taken from proposed wind 13 locations) were surveyed for possible (1989, pp. 8–9) examined available energy facilities in Glades and Palm specimens from museum collections presence (Marks and Marks 2008c, pp. Beach Counties (C. Coberly, Merlin 1–28; 2008d, pp. 1–21). Detection of (University of Miami, Miami-Dade Environmental, pers. comm. 2012; C. Community College, and Florida presence along the Kissimmee River was Newman, Normaneau Associates, Inc, significant as this was the first time the Museum of Natural History) dating from pers. comm. 2012). These survey efforts 1951–1989. Of the 21 specimens species had been found north of Lake and results are described in more detail Okeechobee except in fossil records and examined, 11 were from Coral Gables, 4 below. were from Miami, 3 were from North effectively extended the known range 80 Miami, and 3 were from Punta Gorda (1) Range-Wide Survey km (50 miles) north (Marks and Marks 2008b, pp. 2, 5; 2008c, pp. 1–28). Calls (Robson 1989, p. 8). As part of the same Results of range-wide acoustical study, Robson (1989, p. 9) investigated were recorded at Kicco and Platt’s Bluff surveys in 2006–2007 documented along the Kissimmee River in Polk and 44 reports of bats throughout southern presence in Charlotte, Lee, Collier, and Florida in 1989, but did not collect or Okeechobee Counties in May 2008 (see Miami-Dade Counties (see Table 1; Table 1) (Marks and Marks 2008b, p. 2; observe the Florida bonneted bat. Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 11). As part Another 25 sites were selected for 2008c, pp. 11, 17). The Platt’s Bluff of this study, all previous known finding is 85 km (53 miles) northeast of acoustical sampling as part of this locations for the Florida bonneted bat study. Records of bats from the selected the nearest previously recorded and other previously unsurveyed areas location, which was in Telegraph sites were generally scant or were surveyed to determine presence nonexistent; only one record from Coral Swamp within the Babcock Ranch (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 3). In total, (Marks and Marks 2008b, p. 3). Gables was found (Robson 1989, p. 9). 50 survey nights were conducted at Despite considerable effort (1,724 stops Additional surveys to better assess the select locations in south Florida with 48 population in the Kissimmee River area during 86.2 hours), no additional areas surveyed (Marks and Marks 2008a, evidence of the species was found in were recommended as a future action pp. 9–10; 2012, p. 5). Echolocation calls this study (Robson 1989, pp. 9, 15). (Marks and Marks 2008b, p. 5). were recorded by researchers at six of Other stationary and roving acoustical Current Distribution the areas surveyed (Marks and Marks surveys of select public lands in the Endemic to Florida, the Florida 2008a, p. 10). Although Broward County southwest region of Florida contracted bonneted bat has one of the most was previously considered part of the by FWC in 2007–2008 did not produce restricted distributions of any species of species’ range (Barbour and Davis 1969, any additional occurrences (Morse 2008, bat in the New World (Belwood 1992, p. 231; Belwood 1992, pp. 218–219; pp. 1–14). The bat was only found at pp. 218–219; Timm and Genoways Hipes et al. 2001, page not numbered), Babcock-Webb WMA and at two WMAs 2004, pp. 852, 856–858, 861–862). Marks and Marks (2008a, p. 13) did not along the Kissimmee River; however, it Although numerous acoustical surveys record any Florida bonneted bat calls in was not found at Chassahowitzka, for the Florida bonneted bat have been the Fort Lauderdale or surrounding Hilochee, or Hickory Hammock WMAs conducted in the past decade by various areas. The species was not recorded on or during surveys along the Lake Wales parties, the best scientific information the east coast of Florida north of Coral Ridge (Morse 2008, pp. 1–14; Marks and indicates that the species exists only Gables as part of the 2006–2007 survey Marks 2008b, p. 3). It was not found within a very restricted range, confined (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 10). elsewhere in Highlands, Okeechobee, or to south Florida (Timm and Genoways Following this study, Marks and Polk Counties (Marks and Marks 2008c, 2004, pp. 852, 856–858, 861–862; Marks Marks (2008a, p. 10) concluded that pp. 1–28; 2008d, pp. 1–21). and Marks 2008a, p. 15; 2012, pp. 10– ‘‘based on the surveys conducted to 11). date, the full extent of the Florida (3) Surveys in Big Cypress The majority of information relating bonneted bat population exists within a Acoustical surveys conducted in 2003 to current distribution comes from the very limited range extending from the and 2007 documented presence within following recent studies: (1) Range-wide Babcock Webb WMA through southwest BCNP at numerous locations (see Table surveys conducted in 2006–2007, Florida to south Miami and 1; S. Snow, pers. comm. 2012). In 2003, funded by the Service, to determine the Homestead.’’ More detailed information positive calls were found at nine status of the Florida bonneted bat regarding locations is provided above locations over 24 nights. In 2007, following the 2004 hurricane season, (see Habitat and Table 1 above and positive calls were found at 15 locations and followup surveys in 2008 (Marks Population/Status below). Although over 22 nights. and Marks 2008a, pp. 1–16 and there was no detection of presence in appendices; 2008b, pp. 1–6); (2) surveys the Everglades region during the 2006– (4) Surveys in the Everglades Region conducted in 2008 along the Kissimmee 2007 range-wide survey, additional Acoustical surveys conducted on 41 River and Lake Wales Ridge, funded by work within ENP was recommended nights in the Everglades region from the FWC, as part of bat conservation and because this area links the east and west October 2011 to May 2012 by Skip land management efforts (Marks and portions of the range (Marks and Marks Snow (pers. comm. 2012) documented Marks 2008c, pp. 1–28; 2008d, pp. 1–21; 2008a, p. 15). presence at several locations within

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60759

ENP and surrounding locations (see would be a significant finding, as the occurrence since 1967 (Belwood 1981, Table 1). These findings are significant species was not previously documented p. 412). A 6-week field trip in 1980 to since the importance of the Everglades in Glades County. Recordings from locate other occurrences was region to the Florida bonneted bat had another proposed wind energy facility unsuccessful and led to the belief that been previously in question. In in Palm Beach County did not confirm this species was ‘‘probably extinct in addition, some findings (e.g., FTBG, L– presence (C. Newman, pers. comm. Florida’’ (Belwood 1992, p. 217). No 31N canal) represented new occurrences 2012). Of 175,802 bat calls analyzed new evidence of this species was found within the species’ known range. over 12 months at 4 locations at the from 1979 until 1988 when Robson et al. project site in Palm Beach County, no (1989, p. 81) found a pregnant female in (5) Surveys To Examine Extent of Range Florida bonneted bat calls have been Coral Gables (Robson 1989, p. 2). Surveys conducted in 2010–2012 identified (C. Newman, pers. comm. Timm and Genoways (2004, p. 861) designed to specifically examine past 2012). surmised that the Florida bonneted bat gaps and better define the northern and In summary, the Florida bonneted bat may have been uncommon for several southern extent of the species’ range appears to be restricted to south and decades, based upon the work of improved understanding of the species’ southwest Florida. The core range may previous researchers (Barbour 1945 as geographic extent (Marks and Marks primarily consist of habitat within cited in Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 2012, pp. 1–22 and appendices). As part Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and 861; Jennings 1958, p. 102; Layne 1974, of this study, 48 locations were Miami-Dade Counties. Recent data also pp. 389–390), who noted the scarcity of surveyed, including 15 nights in the suggest use of portions of Okeechobee bats in southern Florida. Owre (1978, p. area surrounding Lake Kissimmee or and Polk counties and possible use of 43) observed fewer than a dozen along the Kissimmee River (Marks and areas within Glades County. However, individuals in roughly 25 years and Marks 2012, pp. 5, 9). Results of this given available data, it is not clear to noted that few mammalogists had study and additional work by what extent areas outside of the core success in finding the species. Robson researchers did not suggest presence range may be used. It is possible that (1989, p. 5) indicated that the decline of north of Punta Gorda or east of Babcock areas outside of the south and southwest specimens and sightings in the mid- Ranch in Charlotte County (Marks and Florida are used only seasonally or 1960s is reflected in the museum record Marks 2012, p. 10). In addition, Florida sporadically. Alternatively, these areas and noted that the 1950s and 1960s was bonneted bat calls were not recorded may be used consistently, but the a period of rapid growth in the Miami between Lake Okeechobee and the east species was not regularly detected due area. Robson (1989, pp. 5–9) suggested coast of Florida, which supports to the limitations of available data, that the resulting disturbance and previous work indicating no evidence of survey methods, and search efforts. destruction of native habitat may have the species on the east coast north of flushed a large number of specimens out Population Estimates and Status Miami (Marks and Marks 2012, p. 10). of established roosts, resulting in a high Although new findings in the southern Little information exists on historical collection rate. A status survey portion of the established range were population levels. The Florida bonneted conducted in 1989, encompassing 25 confirmed (e.g., FTBG, L–31N canal, bat was considered common in the sites within natural areas within a nine- Long Pine Key in ENP, Zoo Miami, and Miami–Coral Gables area because of county area, found no new evidence of Darwin’s place), presence was not regular collection of specimens from this species (Robson 1989, pp. 1, 3–5, 8). detected in other areas (e.g., Key Largo 1951 to 1965 (Robson 1989, p. 2; or Card Sound Road) (Marks and Marks Belwood 1992, p. 216). Jennings (1958, Population Size Estimates 2012, pp. 8–10). Consequently, p. 102) indicated that the species was Based upon available data and researchers concluded that the proposed not abundant, noting that a total of 20 information, the Florida bonneted bat range map from 2008 should remain individuals had been taken from 1936 to occurs within a restricted range and in unchanged, as the previous recordings 1958. Prior to 1967, G.T. Hubbell low abundance (Marks and Marks in the Kissimmee River area were regularly heard loud, distinctive calls at 2008a, p. 15; 2012, pp. 9–15; Timm and unexplained outliers (Marks and Marks night as the bats foraged above buildings Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1; FWC 2011a, 2008a, p. 11; 2012, pp. 10–11). In their in the Miami area, and he routinely pp. 3–4; FWC 2011b, pp. 3, 6; R. Timm, view, the species’ range encompasses obtained several individuals per year pers. comm. 2012). Actual population Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and that were collected from people’s size is not known, and no population Miami-Dade Counties, with only houses (Belwood 1992, pp. 216–217). viability analyses are available (FWC fractions of Glades, Hendry, and Barbour and Davis (1969, p. 234) 2011a, p. 4). However, population size Broward Counties included (Marks and indicated that, on average, about two is thought to be less than that needed for Marks 2012, p. 11). individuals per year are brought to the optimum viability (Timm and Arroyo- Crandon Park Zoo in Miami, due to Cabrales 2008, p. 1). As part of their (6) Recordings at Proposed Wind Energy injuries, but no time period was evaluation of listing criteria for the Sites specified. species, Gore et al. (2010, p. 2) found In 2011, possible Florida bonneted bat Unpublished data from a survey of that the extent of occurrence appears to calls were reported in Glades County 100 pest control companies in 1982 on have declined on the east coast, but near a proposed wind farm project, the southeastern coast of Florida trends on the west coast could not be located in mixed habitat types, west of showed that requests to remove inferred due to limited information. Lake Okeechobee (D. Torcolacci, ‘‘nuisance’’ bats from this area all but In his independent review of the HurricaneWind, Ridgeline Energy, pers. ceased beginning in the 1960s (Belwood FWC’s biological status report, Ted comm. 2012; C. Coberly, pers. comm. 1992, p. 217), indicating a sharp decline Fleming, Emeritus Professor of biology 2012). At this time, recordings (from 7 in bats in general. Timm and Genoways at University of Miami, noted that nights) are considered unconfirmed due (2004, p. 861) found only three records anecdotal evidence from the 1950s and to current disagreement between experts of Florida bonneted bats in the greater 1960s suggests that this species was and are best classified as ‘‘possible’’ Miami area after 1965. The colony more common along Florida’s southeast Florida bonneted bat calls (C. Coberly, found near Punta Gorda in 1979 coast compared with the present (FWC pers. comm. 2012). If present, this appeared to be the only recorded 2011b, p. 3). Fleming stated that, ‘‘There

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60760 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

can be no doubt that E. floridanus is an total Florida bonneted bat population at nights at 13 locations along the Lake uncommon bat throughout its very 286 bats (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. Wales Ridge in May 2008. small range. Its audible echolocation 12–15). Recordings taken continuously (24 calls are distinctive and easily Similarly, the 2011 International hours a day) from a fifth floor balcony recognized, making it relatively easy to Union for Conservation of Nature Red of a condominium in Naples generated survey in the field’’ (FWC 2011b, p. 3). List of Threatened Species lists the only 5 Florida bonneted bat calls in 398 He also stated that he does not doubt species as ‘‘’’ nights of recording (R. Arwood, pers. that the total State population numbers because ‘‘its population size is comm. 2008a; Marks and Marks 2008a, ‘‘in the hundreds or low thousands’’ estimated to number fewer than 250 p. 11). The number of Florida bonneted (FWC 2011b, p. 3). mature individuals, with no bat calls was exceedingly low, Similarly, in response to a request for subpopulation greater than 50 considering that on an average night information as part of the Service’s individuals, and it is experiencing a more than 1,000 total calls (i.e., all bat annual Candidate Notice of Review, continuing decline’’ (Timm and Arroyo- species) were recorded (R. Arwood, Robert Timm (pers. comm. 2012), Cabrales 2008, p. 1). The FNAI (2012, pers. comm. 2008a). Recordings taken in Curator of Mammals at Department of pp. 24, 28) also considers the global Everglades City generated 33 Florida Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and element rank of the Florida bonneted bonneted bat calls in 328 nights of Biodiversity Institute at the University bat to be G1, meaning it is critically sampling (R. Arwood, pers. comm. of Kansas, indicated that numbers are imperiled globally because of extreme 2008a; Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 11). low, in his view, as documented by rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or less Results from 42 acoustical surveys (36 survey attempts. ‘‘Eumops are very than 1000 individuals) or because of mobile and 6 stationary) conducted on obvious bats where they occur because extreme vulnerability to extinction due 41 nights (from October 2011 to May of their large size and distinctive calls. to some natural or manmade factor. 2012) in the ENP and surrounding areas Given the efforts to locate them (see Surveys in the Everglades region Acoustical Survey Efforts as Indicators throughout southern Florida, if they above) also produced relatively few call of Rarity were there in any significant numbers, sequences indicating presence of the they would have been located’’ (R. Results of the original 2006–2007 Florida bonneted bat (S. Snow, pers. Timm, pers. comm. 2012). acoustical range-wide survey (see comm. 2012). One call sequence was Results of the 2006–2007 range-wide Range-wide survey above) indicated that recorded at the junction of Main Park survey (see Range-wide survey above) of 4,938 calls recorded and analyzed, Road and the road to Long Pine Key suggested that the Florida bonneted bat only 37 (0.75 percent) were from Florida campground in an acoustic mobile is a rare species with limited range and bonneted bats (Marks and Marks 2008a, survey route that was run 24 times low abundance (Marks and Marks acoustical data). Of these, 13 were from (covering a total of 1,108.5 km (688.8 2008a, p. 15). Based upon results of both the FSPSP, 11 from Babcock Ranch, 6 miles)). On the evening of March 29, the range-wide study and survey of near the bat houses in Lee County, 3 2012, a total of 11 call sequences were select public lands, the species was from Babcock-Webb WMA, 3 from Coral confirmed for the Florida bonneted bat found at 12 locations (Marks and Marks Gables, and 1 from the Homestead area along the L–31N canal FPL corridor 2008b, p. 4), but the number and status (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 11, along a 13.7-km (8.5-mile) stretch. On of the bat at each location are unknown. acoustical data). Although this survey December 22, 2011, and January 9, 2012, Based upon the small number of had targeted areas that likely support a total of five call sequences were locations where calls were recorded, the the Florida bonneted bat (i.e., all confirmed for the Florida bonneted bat low numbers of calls recorded at each previous known locations and other at FTBG. Additional suspect calls were location, and the fact that the species previously unsurveyed areas), the recorded along SR 9336 in a rural and forms small colonies, Marks and Marks species’ echolocation calls were only agricultural area and along the suburban (2008a, p. 15) stated that it is possible recorded at 6 of the 48 areas surveyed streets of the village of Palmetto Bay. that the entire population of Florida over 50 survey nights (Marks and Marks Results of the 2010–2012 study to bonneted bats may number less than a 2008a, pp. 3, 9–10). examine the northern and southern few hundred individuals. Additional work in the Coral Gables, parts of the species’ range (see Surveys Results of the 2010–2012 surveys (see South Miami, and Homestead area in to examine extent of range above) Surveys to examine extent of range) and September 2008 helped to better located the species in only 8 of 48 additional surveys by other researchers determine presence in these areas and locations, 3 of which were previously identified new occurrences within the resulted in 42 additional Florida known (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. 1– established range (i.e., within Miami bonneted bat calls (39 in Coral Gables, 22 and appendices). Given that area, areas of ENP and BCNP) (S. Snow, 2 in Homestead, and 1 at Snapper Creek researchers were specifically targeting pers. comm. 2011, 2012; R. Arwood, Park). However, no additional calls were areas to maximize the chances of pers. comm. 2012; Marks and Marks recorded in five other areas searched recording the species (G. Marks, pers. 2012, p. 8), however, not in sufficient (Marks and Marks 2008b, p. 5). comm. 2012), the number of presences numbers to alter previous population In the 2008 study of WMAs along the recorded was extremely low. Of 5,289 estimates. In their 2012 report on the Kissimmee River (see Surveys along the calls recorded and analyzed, only 33 status of the species, Marks and Marks Kissimmee River above), of 673 call (0.71 percent) were from Florida (2012, p. 12) provided an updated sequences recorded and analyzed, only bonneted bats (Marks and Marks 2012, estimation of population size, based 10 (1.4 percent) were the Florida pp. 16–18 and acoustical data). upon 120 nights of surveys at 96 bonneted bat (Marks and Marks 2008c, Overall, considering existing locations within peninsular Florida, pp. 7–17). This study involved 9 nights literature and data by multiple parties results of other known surveys, and at 25 locations in May 2008 (Marks and and expert opinion (see above), it personal communications with others Marks 2008c, pp. 1–28). Additionally, appears that the species has a very small involved in Florida bonneted bat work. none of the 533 call sequences along the population. Given so few Florida Based upon an average colony size of 11 Lake Wales Ridge area were of the bonneted bat calls recorded with and an estimated 26 colonies within the Florida bonneted bat (Marks and Marks considerable survey efforts, it is not species’ range, researchers estimated the 2008d, pp. 7–13). That study involved 6 likely that abundance is appreciably

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60761

larger than the current available 2008a, p. 7). This was the first record of comm. 2008b; Marks and Marks 2008a, population estimates given above. this species using a bat house as a roost pp. 11, A12–A14). In 2012, five calls and the only known location of an were recorded at Cal Stone’s camp Estimating Colony Sizes and Locations active colony roost located on private during 2 nights of survey (R. Arwood, Actual colony sizes or locations of land (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2006a; pers. comm. 2012; Marks and Marks roosts other than bat houses are not Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 7–15). The 2012, pp. 13–14). Based upon their known. However, some limited colony had included approximately 20 experience of calls recorded on only two information from natural and artificial to 24 individuals in 2 houses (S. Trokey, occasions with considerable effort, roosting sites exists (see Life History pers. comm. 2008a, 2008b), but only 10 researchers estimate there are three above). Based upon roosting information remained by April 2010 after the colonies using this area (Marks and from Belwood (1981, pp. 411–413) and prolonged cold temperatures in January Marks 2012, pp. 13–14). However, since current bat houses (at Babcock-Webb and February 2010 (S. Trokey, pers. the area is large and protected, WMA and North Fort Myers), Marks and comm. 2010a, 2010b, 2010c) (see also additional colonies may also exist in Marks (2012, p. 12) estimated an average Summary of Factors Affecting the this area. colony size of 11 for the species. Based Species, Factor E below). In May 2011, Everglades City—Available data upon the surveys conducted to date and researchers found 20 Florida bonneted suggest that the species is present in the experience with the species, researchers bats using this site (S. Trokey, pers. area (R. Arwood, pers. comm. 2008a), estimated 26 colonies at the following comm. 2011), and as of February 2012, but due to the paucity of positive calls, 11 locations (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. they found 18 individuals using 2 researchers estimate that one colony 13–14). houses (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2012). occurs in the area (Marks and Marks Babcock-Webb Wildlife Management Surveys in the area did not detect 2012, p. 14). Area—The colonies at Babcock-Webb additional Florida bonneted bat calls Everglades National Park WMA are the only known roosts on (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 11). (mainland)—Despite significant effort public lands and effectively tripled the Researchers counted the bat houses as (see above) in 2011 and 2012, only one number of known active colonies (N. two colonies (Marks and Marks 2012, p. call sequence was recorded at the Douglass, pers. comm. 2009). The 33 13). junction of main park road and Long individuals recorded in 2009 appeared Naples—Available data from a single Pine Key campground road in an to be the largest single discovery of the fixed site suggest that the species is acoustic mobile survey route run 24 species recorded in recent years (N. present in the area (R. Arwood, pers. times (S. Snow, pers. comm. 2012). Douglass, pers. comm. 2009). In 2010, comm. 2008a; Marks and Marks 2008a, Results of the 2006–2008 survey did not monitoring by FWC indicated p. 11). The few positive calls are not detect Florida bonneted bat calls in the approximately 25 individuals at 2 indicative of a large number of Florida Long Pine Key area, which was thought additional bat houses, bringing the bonneted bats in the area; however, to be the most likely location for the potential total at Babcock-Webb WMA researchers estimate that at least one species (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 10; to 58 individuals, occupying 4 roosts (J. colony occurs in the area (Marks and 2012, p. 14). Researchers estimate one Birchfield, pers. comm. 2010). In 2012, Marks 2012, p. 13). colony at Long Pine Key, given the few researchers found 42 individuals using Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State calls detected and considerable survey 4 roosts (J. Myers, pers. comm. 2012a). Park and Picayune Strand State effort (Marks and Marks 2012, p. 14). In addition, FWC biologists report also Forest—A large number of Florida Other areas of marshland are not likely hearing Florida bonneted bat calls in the bonneted bat calls have been reported in to support colonies, due to lack of vicinity of red-cockaded woodpecker recent years in the FSPSP and vicinity suitable roosting sites (Marks and Marks cavity trees on site (J. Myers, pers. (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 6, 11). A 2012, p. 14). comm. 2012a). Researchers counted the juvenile male was captured in a mist net Ten Thousand Islands area—The occupied bat houses as four colonies, above a canal in PSSF in 2009, but no Florida bonneted bat was found at but believe that there may be an other Florida bonneted bats were Dismal Key in Ten Thousand Islands additional two natural roost sites within captured during additional trapping National Wildlife Refuge in 2000 (Timm the area for a possible total of 6 colonies efforts (14 trap nights) (K. Smith, pers. and Genoways 2004, p. 861; B. (Marks and Marks 2012, p. 13, 15). In comm. 2010; Smith 2010, p. 1). Nottingham, pers. comm. 2006; T. their estimation, the low numbers of Researchers suspect that there are at Doyle, pers. comm. 2006; C. Marks, calls recorded during numerous roving least two and possibly three colonies pers. comm. 2006c; Marks and Marks surveys did not support estimating more using this area; they estimated three 2008a, p. 6). Calls were not recorded colonies in this area (Marks and Marks colonies, based upon the large number during the 2006–2007 survey in areas 2012, p. 13). of calls recorded consistently at these searched by boat from Dismal Key to Babcock Ranch—Calls recorded at adjacent sites (Marks and Marks 2012, p. Port of the Islands (Marks and Marks Telegraph Swamp at Babcock Ranch in 13). 2008a, pp. 11, 14, A9). In 2012, only one 2007 are believed to represent separate Big Cypress National Preserve—Calls call was recorded at Darwin’s Place in colonies from those at Babcock-Webb have been recorded at various locations ENP in 18 survey nights in areas WMA (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. A9; (e.g., Deep Lake, Cal Stone’s camp, Loop searched from Flamingo to Everglades 2012, p. 13). Due to the property’s size, Road) by multiple parties (R. Arwood, City (Marks and Marks 2012, pp. 8, 14, more than one colony may be present; pers. comm. 2008b, 2012; S. Snow, pers. A50). Darwin’s Place is approximately researchers estimated two colonies comm. 2012; Marks and Marks 2008a, 4.8 km (3 miles) from Watson’s Place, (based upon area), until additional pp. 11, A12–A14; 2012, pp. 13–14). where another researcher (Laura Finn, survey work can be completed (Marks Survey efforts from 2003 and 2007 by Fly-By-Night) had recorded 10 Florida and Marks 2012, p. 13). one contractor (Fly-By-Night) recorded bonneted bat calls in 2007 (Marks and North Fort Myers—In Lee County, the presence at several locations (S. Snow, Marks 2012, p. 14; S. Snow, pers. comm. Florida bonneted bat has continually pers. comm. 2012). However, results of 2012). Researchers estimate that there is used bat houses on one private property the rangewide survey in 2006–2008 one colony near Dismal Key and one since December 2002 (S. Trokey, pers. recorded only one call at Deep Lake in colony in the Watson/Darwin area of comm. 2006a; 2012; Marks and Marks 12 nights of surveys (R. Arwood, pers. ENP (Marks and Marks 2012, p. 14).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60762 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Homestead area—Calls recorded in 1) or when structures are modified to and urban or developed areas in Florida the Homestead area in 2006 and in 2008 exclude bats. Although the species’ between 1985–1989 and 2003 (B. Stys, suggest that one colony exists, possibly habitat preferences and extent of range pers. comm. 2005; Service 2008, p. 38). located east of U.S. 1 (Marks and Marks are not well understood, significant land Based upon this analysis, approximately 2008a, pp. 11, A6–A7; 2008b, p. 5; 2012, use changes have occurred in south 1,476 km2 (570 mi2) of natural and p. 14). Florida and additional habitat losses are seminatural lands in Glades, Hendry, Coral Gables and Miami area— expected in the future, placing the Lee, Collier, Broward, Monroe, and Florida bonneted bat calls have been species at risk. Uncertainty regarding Miami-Dade Counties were converted consistently recorded in acoustical the species’ specific habitat needs and during this time period (FWC, surveys at the Granada Golf Course in requirements arguably contributes to the unpublished data). Of these, Coral Gables, but not elsewhere in the degree of this threat. Without approximately 880 km2 (340 mi2) were vicinity (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 6, information on key roosting sites and conversions to agricultural uses and 596 A4; 2008b, pp. 1–6; 2012, p. 14). Since foraging areas, inadvertent impacts to km2 (230 mi2) to urban uses. In calls are recorded so shortly after and losses of habitat may be more likely Charlotte County, 26,940 acres (10,902 sunset, the species may be roosting on to occur through various sources and hectares) (9.6 percent of the county) or adjacent to the golf course (Marks and stressors (see below), and habitat losses were converted to agriculture, and Marks 2012, p. 14). Calls recorded at will likely be more difficult to avoid. 21,712 acres (8,787 hectares) (7.8 Snapper Creek Park in south Miami in percent) were converted to urban uses Land Use Changes and Human 2008, Zoo Miami in 2011, FTBG in 2011 in the time period examined. In Lee Population Growth and 2012, and the L31–N canal in 2012 County, 16,705 acres (6,760 hectares) suggest that colonies are at or near these Significant land use changes have (6.3 percent) were converted to locations (Marks and Marks 2008b, pp. occurred through time in south Florida, agriculture, and 44,734 acres (18,103 1–2; 2012, pp. 1–22 and appendices; including major portions of the species’ hectares) (16.8 percent) were developed. Ridgley 2012, p. 1; S. Snow, pers. historical and current range. In his In Collier County, 34,842 acres (14,100 comm. 2011, 2012). Overall, researchers examination of Florida’s land use hectares) (3.1 percent) were converted to estimate four colonies in southwestern history, Solecki (2001, p. 350) stated agriculture, and 38,331 acres (15,512 Miami and Coral Gables (Marks and that tremendous land use changes took hectares) (3.4 percent) were developed. Marks 2012, pp. 14–15). place from the early 1950s to the early Habitat loss and human population and mid-1970s. During this time, ‘‘an growth in south Florida are continuing. Summary of Factors Affecting the almost continuous strip of urban The human population in south Florida Species development became present along the has increased from fewer than 20,000 Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), Atlantic coast’’ and urban land uses people in 1920 to more than 4.6 million and its implementing regulations at 50 became well established in the extreme by 1990 (Solecki 2001, p. 345). The CFR part 424, set forth the procedures southeastern portion of the region, population of Miami–Dade County, one for adding species to the Federal Lists particularly around the cities of Miami area where the Florida bonneted bat was of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Fort Lauderdale and along the historically common, increased from and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the entire coastline northward to West Palm fewer than 500,000 people in 1950 to Act, we may list a species based on any Beach (Solecki 2001, p. 350). Similarly, nearly 2.5 million in 2010 (http:// of the following five factors: (A) The Solecki (2001, p. 345) found tremendous quickfacts.census.gov). In one present or threatened destruction, urban expansion within the Gulf coast projection, all counties with current modification, or curtailment of its region, particularly near Ft. Myers since Florida bonneted bat occurrences were habitat or range; (B) overutilization for the 1970s, with the rate of urban land forecasted to increase in human commercial, recreational, scientific, or conversion superseding the rate of population density, with most counties educational purposes; (C) disease or agricultural conversion in recent expected to grow by more than 750 predation; (D) the inadequacy of decades. people per square mile by 2060 (Wear existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) In another examination, the extent of and Greis 2011, pp. 26–27). other natural or manmade factors land use conversions for southwest In another model, three counties with affecting its continued existence. Listing Florida (Collier, Lee, Hendry, Charlotte, current known occurrences of the actions may be warranted based on any and Glades Counties) between 1986 and Florida bonneted bat—Charlotte, Lee, of the above threat factors, singly or in 1996 was estimated using a change and Collier—are expected to reach combination. Each of these factors is detection analysis performed by Beth buildout (fully develop) before 2060 discussed below. Stys (FWC, unpublished data) (Service (Zwick and Carr 2006, pp. 12–13, 16). 2008, p. 37). The area of disturbed lands For the period between 2040 and 2060, Factor A. The Present or Threatened increased 31 percent in these five the population of Lee and Collier Destruction, Modification, or counties between 1986 and 1996, with Counties is projected to exceed the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range the greatest increases in disturbed lands available vacant land area, so the Habitat loss and alteration in forested occurring in Hendry and Glades population was modeled to allow and urban areas are major threats to the Counties. Most (66 percent) of the land spillover into adjacent counties (Zwick Florida bonneted bat (Belwood 1992, p. use change over the 10-year period was and Carr 2006, p. 13). According to 220; Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. due to conversion to agricultural uses. human population distribution models, 1). In natural areas, this species may be Forest cover types accounted for 42 south Florida is expected to become impacted when forests are converted to percent of land use conversions, dry mostly urbanized, with the exception of other uses or when old trees with prairies accounted for 37 percent, some of the agricultural lands north and cavities are removed (Belwood 1992, p. freshwater marsh accounted for 9 south of Lake Okeechobee (Zwick and 220; Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. percent, and shrub and brush lands Carr 2006, p. 2). Even the 1). In urban settings, this species may be accounted for 8 percent. region, at what would be the northern impacted when buildings with suitable In another analysis, Stys calculated limit of this species’ distribution, will roosts are demolished (Robson 1989, p. the extent of seminatural and natural be almost entirely urbanized (Zwick and 15; Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. lands that were converted to agricultural Carr 2006, p. 2). In an independent

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60763

review of the FWC’s biological status Resource Assessment, Florida was urban areas. Cyndi and George Marks report for the species, Fleming stated, identified as one of the areas expected (pers. comm. 2008) stated that Florida ‘‘Continued urbanization of south to experience substantial losses of forest bonneted bats can move into new Florida will undoubtedly have a in response to human population and buildings as well and ‘‘the fact that they negative impact on this bat’’ (FWC changes in income (Wear and Greis adapt well to manmade structures has 2011b, p. 3). 2002, p. 164). In the Southern Forest most likely been a large factor in their Futures Project, peninsular Florida is decline’’ (see Factor E). The use of Loss of Forested Habitat forecasted to lose the most forest land buildings or other structures inhabited Loss of native forested habitat and (34 percent) of any of the 21 sections by or near humans places bats at risk of roost sites are major threats to the analyzed in the south (Wear and Greis inadvertent or purposeful removal and Florida bonneted bat. A highway 2011, p. 35). displacement (see Factor E). construction project in Punta Gorda in 1979 destroyed a roost tree (Belwood Land Management Practices Climate Change and Sea Level Rise 1981, p. 412; 1992, p. 220). One Although species occurrences on Our analyses under the Act include museum specimen was originally conservation lands are inherently more consideration of ongoing and projected discovered under a rock that was turned protected than those on private lands, changes in climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ over by a bulldozer clearing land habitat alteration during management and ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the (Robson 1989, p. 9). Robson (1989, pp. practices may impact natural roosting Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 1–18) attributed the loss of native sites because the locations of such sites Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the forested habitat, reduced insect are unknown. Removal of old or live mean (average) and variability of abundance (see Factor E), and the trees with cavities during activities different types of weather conditions ‘‘active persecution of bats by humans’’ associated with forest management (e.g., over time, with 30 years being a typical (see Factor E) as the likely major thinning, pruning), prescribed fire, period for such measurements, although impacts on the Florida bonneted bat in exotic species treatment, or trail shorter or longer periods also may be Miami-Dade County. Similarly, maintenance may inadvertently remove used (IPCC 2007, p. 78). The term Belwood (1992, pp. 217, 220) indicated roost sites, if such sites are not known. ‘‘climate change’’ thus refers to a change that bats in south Florida, including this Loss of an active roost or removal in the mean or variability of one or more species, appear to have declined during critical life-history stages (e.g., measures of climate (e.g., temperature or drastically in numbers in recent years when females are pregnant or rearing precipitation) that persists for an due to loss of roosting sites and effects young) can have severe ramifications, extended period, typically decades or of pesticides (see Factor E). More considering the species’ small longer, whether the change is due to recently, Timm and Genoways (2004, p. population size and low fecundity (see natural variability, human activity, or 861) stated that habitat loss from Factor E). both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types development, in combination with other Overall, occupied and potential of changes in climate can have direct or threats (i.e., pesticides and hurricanes, habitat for the Florida bonneted bat on indirect effects on species. These effects see Factor E), may have had a significant forested or wooded lands, both private may be positive, neutral, or negative, impact upon the already low numbers of and public, continues to be at risk due and they may change over time, Florida bonneted bats. to habitat loss, degradation, and depending on the species and other Belwood (1992, p. 220) stated that fragmentation from a variety of sources. relevant considerations, such as the forested areas are becoming rare as a Additional searches for potential effects of interactions of climate with result of human encroachment and that roosting sites in forested and other other variables (e.g., habitat this will severely affect the forest natural areas are especially needed. fragmentation) (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, occurrences of this species. Similarly, 18–19). In our analyses, we use our Loss of Artificial Structures Robson (1989, p. 15) indicated that pine expert judgment to weigh relevant rockland, live oak, and tropical Since the Florida bonneted bat will information, including uncertainty, in hardwood hammocks constituted most use human dwellings and other artificial our consideration of various aspects of of the remaining, natural forest in the structures, it is also vulnerable to climate change. Miami area and that these communities habitat loss and alteration in urban Climatic changes, including sea level are essential to this species’ survival. environments (Belwood 1992, p. 220; rise, are major threats to south Florida, Belwood (1992, p. 220) argued that tree Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). including the Florida bonneted bat and cavities are rare in southern Florida and Owre (1978, p. 43) stated that all recent its habitat. In general, the IPCC reported competition for available cavities (e.g., specimens had been collected within that the warming of the world’s climate southern flying squirrel [Glaucomys the suburbs of greater Miami from system is unequivocal based on volans], red-headed woodpecker structures built in the 1920s and 1930s. documented increases in global average [Melanerpes erythrocephalus], corn Owre (1978, p. 43) indicated that three air and ocean temperatures, snake [Elaphe guttata guttata]) is specimens were taken on the ground, unprecedented melting of snow and ice, intense. She suggested that nonurban one in a rocky field that was being and rising average sea level (IPCC 2007, natural areas such as ENP, Big Cypress/ bulldozed, one next to sewer conduits p. 2; 2008, p. 15). On a global scale, sea Fakahatchee areas, and State WMAs piled near freshly dug excavations, and level rise results from the thermal may be the only areas where this species one on a lawn near a university building expansion of warming ocean water, may be found in the future, provided in which the bats roosted. Removal of water input to oceans from the melting old trees with hollows and cavities are buildings with spaces suitable for of ice sheets, glaciers, and ice caps, and retained (Belwood 1992, p. 220) (see roosting is a threat to this species (Timm the addition of water from terrestrial Land Management Practices). and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). Robson systems (United Nations (UN) 2009, p. Approximately 90 percent of the (1989, p. 15) stated that seemingly 26). Sea level rise is the largest climate- forested habitats in Florida have been innocuous activities like destroying driven challenge to low-lying coastal altered or eliminated, and losses are abandoned buildings and sealing barrel- areas and refuges in the subtropical expected to continue (Wear and Greis tile roof shingles may have a severe ecoregion of southern Florida (U.S. 2002, p. 56). In the Southern Forest impact on remaining populations in Climate Change Science Program [CCSP]

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60764 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

2008, pp. 5–31, 5–32). Loss of land due additional human developments The ranges of recent projections of to sea level rise in south Florida is encroach. Any deleterious changes to global sea level rise (Pfeffer et al. 2008, expected to increase development important roosting sites or foraging p. 1340; Vermeer and Rahmstorf 2009, pressure inland and to the north, which areas could further diminish the p. 21530; Grinsted et al. 2010, pp. 469– may accelerate urbanization and likelihood of the species’ survival and 470; Jevrejeva et al. 2010, Global exacerbate fragmentation from recovery. Climate Change Impacts in the United development (CCSP 2008, p. 5–32). Scientific evidence that has emerged States 2009, pp. 25–26) all indicate In a technical paper following its 2007 since the publication of the IPCC Report substantially higher levels than the report, the IPCC (2008, p. 28) (2007) indicates an acceleration in projection by the IPCC in 2007, emphasized it is very likely that the global climate change. Important aspects suggesting that the impact of sea level average rate of sea level rise during the of climate change seem to have been rise on south Florida could be even 21st century will exceed that from 1961 underestimated previously, and the greater than indicated above. These to 2003, although it was projected to resulting impacts are being felt sooner. recent studies also show a much larger have substantial geographical For example, early signs of change difference (approximately 0.9 to 1.2 variability. Partial loss of the Greenland suggest that the 1 °C of global warming meters (3 to 4 feet)) from the low to the and Antarctic ice sheets could result in the world has experienced to date may high ends of the ranges, which indicates many feet (several meters) of sea level have already triggered the first tipping the magnitude of global mean sea level rise, major changes in coastlines, and point of the Earth’s climate system—the rise at the end of this century is still inundation of low-lying areas (IPCC disappearance of summer Arctic sea ice. quite uncertain. 2008, pp. 28–29). Low-lying islands and This process could lead to rapid and river deltas will incur the largest abrupt climate change, rather than the Alternative Future Landscape Models impacts (IPCC 2008, pp. 28–29). gradual changes that were forecasted. Various model scenarios developed at According to CCSP (2008, p. 5–31), Other processes to be affected by the Massachusetts Institute of much of low-lying, coastal south Florida projected warming include Technology have projected possible ‘‘will be underwater or inundated with temperatures, rainfall (amount, seasonal trajectories of future transformation of saltwater in the coming century.’’ This timing, and distribution), and storms the south Florida landscape by 2060 means that some occupied, suitable, and (frequency and intensity) (see Factor E). based upon four main drivers: climate potential roosting and foraging habitat In the southeast, drier conditions and change, shifts in planning approaches for the Florida bonneted bat in low- increased variability in precipitation and regulations, human population lying areas (e.g., Everglades and other associated with climate change are change, and variations in financial coastal areas) will likely be either expected to hamper successful resources for conservation (Vargas- submerged or affected by increased regeneration of forests and cause shifts Moreno and Flaxman 2010, pp. 1–6). flooding. in vegetation types through time (Wear The Service used various MIT scenarios The IPCC (2008, pp. 87, 103) and Greis 2011, p. 58). In their study on in combination with available acoustical concluded that climate change is likely the impact and implications of climate data to predict what may occur with to increase the occurrence of saltwater change on bats, Sherwin et al. (2012, p. Florida bonneted bat colonies in the intrusion as sea level rises. Since the 8) suggested that bats specialized in future, assuming that all colonies are 1930s, increased salinity of coastal individual roost sites (i.e., cave and tree known, that acoustical data represented waters contributed to the decline of roosts) at distinct life-history stages are approximate location of a colony’s cabbage palm forests on the west coast at great risk from changing vegetation roosting site in the future, and that of Florida (Williams et al. 1999, pp. and climatic conditions. Rebelo et al. projected impacts to a colony are solely 2056–2059), expansion of mangroves (2010, pp. 561–576) found that tree- tied to assumed roosting location. into adjacent marshes in the Everglades roosting bats in Europe may face a Potential impacts to foraging habitat (Ross et al. 2000, pp. 108, 110–111), and reduction in suitable roosts if the rate of could not be analyzed, since foraging loss of pine rockland in the Keys (Ross climate change is too rapid to allow the distance is not known. et al. 1994, pp. 144, 151–155). Such development of equivalent areas of In the best-case scenario, which changes will likely impact the species, mature broadleaf forests in new assumes low sea level rise, high since the Florida bonneted bat uses ‘climatically suitable areas’ as their financial resources, proactive planning, forested areas and coastal habitats. range extends northward. Decreases in and only trending population growth, Hydrology has a strong influence on forest regeneration may further limit analyses suggest that three colonies may distribution in these and other available roosting sites for the Florida be lost. Based upon the above coastal areas (IPCC 2008, p. 57). Such bonneted bat or increase competition for assumptions, colonies in North Fort communities typically grade from salt to them. Myers, the Ten Thousand Islands area, brackish to freshwater species. Human Drier conditions and increased and the Miami area appear to be most developments will also likely be variability in precipitation are also susceptible to future losses, with losses significant factors influencing whether expected to increase the severity of attributed to increases in sea level and natural communities can move and wildfire events. Climate changes are human population. In the worst-case persist (IPCC 2008, p. 57; CCSP 2008, p. forecasted to extend fire seasons and the scenario, which assumes high sea level 7–6). Climate change, human frequency of large fire events throughout rise, low financial resources, a ‘business population growth, forest management, the Coastal Plain (Wear and Greis 2011, as usual’ approach to planning, and a and land use changes are also expected p. 65). Increases in the scale, frequency, doubling of human population, six to increase water stress (water demand or severity of wildfires could also have colonies may be lost—the colonies exceeding availability) within areas of severe ramifications on the Florida noted in the areas above and also some the south, and south Florida is bonneted bat, considering its forest- in Homestead and BCNP. Actual considered a hot spot for future water dwelling nature and general impacts may be greater or less than stress (Wear and Greis 2011, pp. 46–50). vulnerability due to its small population anticipated based upon high variability For the Florida bonneted bat, this means size, restricted range, few colonies, low of factors involved (e.g., sea level rise, that some habitat in coastal areas will fecundity, and relative isolation (see human population growth) and likely change as vegetation changes and Factor E). assumptions made.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60765

Summary of Factor A Factor C. Disease or Predation contended that bats are excellent potential bioindicators because they are We have identified a number of The effects of disease or predation are not well known. Because the Florida reservoirs of a wide range of emerging threats to the habitat of the Florida infectious diseases whose epidemiology bonneted bat which have operated in bonneted bat is known from only a few locations and population size appears may reflect environmental stress. Jones the past, are impacting the species now, et al. 2009 (p. 109) suggested that an and will continue to impact the species small, both disease and predation could pose threats to its survival. increased incidence of disease in bats in the future. Habitat loss, may be an important bioindicator of fragmentation, and degradation, and Disease habitat degradation in general. Sherwin associated pressures from increased White-nose syndrome (WNS) is an et al. (2012, p. 14) suggest that warming human population are major threats; emerging infectious disease affecting temperatures associated with climate these threats are expected to continue, insectivorous, cave-dwelling bats. It was change may increase the spread of placing the species at greater risk. In first documented in 2006 in caves west disease (along with other impacts, see natural or undeveloped areas, the of Albany, New York. Since its Factor E), which could cause significant Florida bonneted bat may be impacted discovery, WNS has spread rapidly mortalities to bat populations in general. when forests are converted to other uses throughout the eastern and central At this time, it is difficult to assess or when old trees with cavities are and southeastern Canada, whether disease is currently or likely to removed. Routine land management killing millions of bats. It is expected to become a threat to the Florida bonneted activities (e.g., thinning, prescribed fire) continue spreading westward and bat. With anticipated climatic changes may also cause impacts to roost sites. In southward. By May 2012, WNS had and increased environmental stress, it is urban areas, suitable roost sites may also been confirmed in well over 200 caves possible that disease will have a greater be lost when buildings are demolished and mines within 20 states and 4 impact on the Florida bonneted bat in or when structures are modified to Canadian provinces (J. Coleman, pers. the future. exclude bats. Uncertainty regarding the comm. 2012). It has not yet been Predation species’ specific habitat needs and documented in Florida. requirements (i.e., location of roost In general, such as owls, WNS is caused by the cold-loving hawks, raccoons, skunks, and snakes sites) arguably contributes to these Geomyces destructans, a newly threats, by increasing the likelihood of prey upon bats (Harvey et al. 1999, p. described fungus, and is named after the 13). However, few animals consume inadvertent impacts to and losses of white fungal growth that often occurs on habitat. The effects resulting from bats as a regular part of their diet the muzzle of affected bats (Gargas et al. (Harvey et al. 1999, p. 13). There is only climatic change, including sea level rise, 2009, pp. 147–154; Lorch et al. 2011, are expected to become severe in the one record of natural predation on this pp. 376–379). In North America, G. species (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. future and result in additional habitat destructans appears to infect bats only losses, including the loss of roost sites 860). A skull of one specimen was during winter hibernation. Mortality found in a regurgitated owl pellet at the and foraging habitat. Although efforts rates have been observed to vary by are being made to conserve natural FSPSP in June 2000 (Timm and species and site, but have been as high Genoways 2004, pp. 860–861; C. Marks, areas, the long-term effects of large-scale as 100 percent at some hibernacula and wide-ranging habitat modification, pers. comm. 2006a; Marks and Marks (winter bat roosts). 2008a, p. 6; M. Owen, pers. comm. destruction, and curtailment will last WNS has been recorded in seven 2012a, 2012b). Our review of the best into the future. Therefore, based on our North American bat species, all of available information does not suggest analysis of the best available which are known to hibernate in caves that predation is impacting the species information, present and future loss and and mines. WNS and G. destructans at this time. modification of the species’ habitat is a have not been detected in bats that threat to the Florida bonneted bat typically live outside of caves, such as Summary of Factor C throughout all of its range. eastern red-bats (Lasiurus borealis), and Disease and predation have the Factor B. Overutilization for the fungus is believed to need the cave potential to impact the Florida bonneted Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or environment to survive. Because the bat’s continued survival, given its few Educational Purposes Florida bonneted bat spends its entire colonies, low abundance, and restricted life cycle outside of caves and mines, range. However, our review of the best There is a general lack of information and in subtropical environments where available information does not indicate about the species. Few individuals no torpor or hibernation is required, we that disease (including WNS) and appear to have studied the species, and do not anticipate that it will be predation are threats to the Florida the majority of recent data comes from adversely affected by WNS. bonneted bat at this time. nonintrusive acoustical recordings. To Prior to the discovery of WNS, our knowledge, those individuals who infectious diseases had rarely been Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing have studied or are actively studying the documented as a large-scale cause of Regulatory Mechanisms Florida bonneted bat are sensitive to its mortality in bat populations and had not Despite the fact that regulatory rarity and endemism (restricted range). been considered a major issue mechanisms provide several protections Consequently, collection for scientific (Messenger et al. 2003 as cited in Jones for the Florida bonneted bat, Federal, and educational purposes is extremely et al. 2009, p. 108). Jones et al. (2009, State, and local laws have not been limited. We are not aware of any known pp. 108–109) contended that, because sufficient to prevent past and ongoing commercial or recreational uses for the increased environmental stress can impacts to the species and its habitat species. For these reasons, we find that suppress the immune systems of bats within its current and historical range. overutilization for commercial, and other animals, increased prevalence The taxon was originally listed as recreational, scientific, or educational of diseases may be a consequence of endangered in the State of Florida as the purposes does not pose a threat to the altered environments (i.e., bats may be Florida mastiff bat (Eumops glaucinus species or is likely to become so in the more susceptible to disease if they are floridanus) (Florida Administrative future. stressed by other threats). These authors Code, Chapter 68). As such, it is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60766 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

afforded protective provisions specified another person to take nuisance wildlife a list of qualified exclusion devices, but in Chapter 68A–27 rules (68A–27.0011 on their behalf. Although these rules do it is not clear how often work is and 68A–27.003). This designation not authorize the taking of species listed performed by recommended personnel prohibits any person from pursuing, under Chapter 68A–27 (without an or if it is in accordance with State molesting, harming, harassing, incidental take permit from the State), regulations. It is also not clear if those capturing, possessing, or selling this these rules do allow other bat species to who install exclusion devices can species, or parts thereof, except as be taken under certain circumstances. readily distinguish between Florida authorized by specific permit, with These include when: (1) the take is bonneted bats and other bat species in permits being issued only when the incidental to the use of an exclusion Florida (M. Tucker, pers. comm. 2012). permitted activity will clearly enhance device, a device which allows escape Despite regulations, in some cases, the survival potential of the species. The from and blocks reentry into a roost site nuisance bats are likely being removed protection currently afforded the Florida located within a structure, or incidental by nuisance wildlife trappers through bonneted bat by the State of Florida to the use of a registered chemical methods that are not approved (e.g., primarily prohibits direct take of repellant, at any time from August 15 to removed from roosts with vacuum individuals (J. Gore, pers. comm. 2009). April 15; or (2) the take is incidental to cleaner-like apparatuses) or excluded However, there is no substantive permanent repairs that prohibit the during time periods that are not protection of habitat or protection of egress of bats from a roost site located permitted (e.g., inside the maternity potentially suitable habitat at this time. within a structure, provided an season) (A. Kropp, FWC, pers. comm. As a consequence of the revision of exclusion device is used as above for a 2009). the FWC’s listing classification system, minimum of 4 consecutive days or In addition, there is conflict between the Florida bonneted bat’s status (and nights for which the low temperature is legislation passed by the Florida the status of other imperiled species) in forecasted to remain above 10 °C (50 °F) Department of Agriculture and Florida was changed to ‘‘threatened’’ on prior to repairs and during the time Consumer Services (FDACS), which November 8, 2010. However, the period specified. Chapter 68A–9.010 classifies bats as rodents, and the species’ original protective measures provides the methods that may not be current FWC nuisance wildlife remained in place (68A–27.003, used to take nuisance wildlife, regulations above (Florida Bat Working amended). As part of the FWC’s revision including any method prohibited Group [FBWG] 2009, p. 3). According to of its classification system, biological pursuant to Section 828.12 of the FDACS Chapter 482, bats may be status review reports were prepared for Florida Statutes (Florida Cruelty to considered pests, and pest control numerous imperiled species in Florida, Animals Statutes). including methods to prevent, destroy, including the Florida bonneted bat. Use of bat exclusion devices or any control, or eradicate pests in, on, or Based upon a literature review and the other intentional device or materials at under a structure, lawn, or ornamental biological review group’s findings, FWC a roost site that may prevent or inhibit are allowable under certain rules and staff recommended that the Florida the free ingress or egress of bats is provisions. Bat advocacy groups are bonneted bat remain listed as a prohibited from April 16 through concerned over the lack of awareness of threatened species (FWC 2011a, p. 5). August 14. While these restrictions help the regulations among people paid to The biological status review recognized to limit potential impacts during the perform exclusions (FBWG 2009, p. 3). the taxon as the Florida bonneted bat, maternity season for many bat species in Education is needed about the dates and the State’s current threatened and Florida, regulations do not require during which exclusion is prohibited for endangered list uses both names, definitive identification of the bat nuisance wildlife trappers, pest control Florida bonneted (mastiff) bat, Eumops species to be excluded prior to the use companies, law enforcement, county (=glaucinus) floridanus. of the device. In addition, it is not clear health departments, and local animal As part of the FWC’s revision to if this time period is broad enough to control (FBWG 2010, p. 3). FDACS is Florida’s imperiled species rule, prevent potential impacts to the Florida currently developing a limited license management plans will be developed for bonneted bat, which is possibly for those individuals or companies that all species (68A–27), including the polyestrous and more tropical in nature, conduct wildlife removal services in or Florida bonneted bat. One component of with a potentially prolonged sensitive near structures (M. Tucker, in litt. 2012). these management plans is to include time window where females and young To obtain this license, operators will be needed regulations and protections that are especially vulnerable. Pregnant required to complete an educational are not provided in the current rule (M. Florida bonneted bats have been found program and pass a test based on a Tucker, in litt. 2012). A first draft for the in June through September (Marks and training manual in development by staff Florida bonneted bat management plan Marks 2008a, p. 9), and a second with the University of Florida-Institute is in development (M. Tucker, in litt. birthing season can occur possibly in of Food and Agricultural Sciences (M. 2012; J. Myers, pers. comm. 2012). January–February (Timm and Genoways Tucker, in litt. 2012). The manual will When completed, the management plan 2004, p. 859; FBC 2005, p. 1). During the include information on proper should allow for tailored protections for early portion of the maternal period, exclusion techniques and existing the species, which may improve the females may give birth to young and regulations protecting bats during the ability of FWC to address habitat issues leave them in the roost while making maternity season (M. Tucker, in litt. in addition to take of individuals (M. multiple foraging excursions to support 2012). Tucker, in litt. 2012). lactation (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. Additional educational efforts are Humans often considered bats to be 8–9). Therefore, despite regulations underway. To better address violations ‘‘nuisance’’ species when they occur in restricting the use of exclusion devices, of the maternity season and exclusion or around human dwellings or it is still possible that use of such rule, FWC is training Law Enforcement infrastructure (see Factor E). The rules devices can affect the species during officers (M. Tucker, in litt. 2012). for taking of nuisance wildlife are sensitive time periods, including Training on the importance of bats and provided under Florida Administrative possible impacts to pregnant females, the rules relating to exclusions has been Code Chapter 68A–9.010. Under these newborns, or juvenile pups. provided to some officers in the rules, property owners can take The FWC, FBC, Bat Conservation northern part of the State, and an online nuisance wildlife or may authorize International, and other groups maintain training module is being developed as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60767

part of the FWC law enforcement contain additional measures that can affected. In some cases, excluded educational curriculum that all officers help protect habitat. However, we do individuals may not be able to readily must complete (M. Tucker, in litt. 2012). not have information to indicate that the locate other suitable roosts (due to The Service and other agencies and aforementioned regulations and competition with other species, lack of partners are also planning to increase programs, which currently do not offer availability, or other factors). awareness among land managers, adequate protection to the Florida In his dissertation on the ecological environmental professionals, pest bonneted bat, will be revised and distribution of bats in Florida, Jennings control operators, and others who may sufficiently supported, so that they (1958, p. 102) stated that Florida be in a position to have an impact on would be adequate to provide protection bonneted bats are encountered more bat habitat or bat roosts. It is not clear for the species in the future. Therefore, often by humans than other bat species to what extent training programs will be we find that the existing regulatory known to frequent the Miami area. He supported in the future or how effective mechanisms are inadequate to address attributed this to the species’ habits, efforts to raise awareness will be in threats to the species throughout all of which make it more conducive to reducing violations. its range. discovery by humans. Jennings (1958, p. The Florida bonneted bat’s presence 102) noted, ‘‘Some individuals were on Federal, State, and county lands Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade taken in shrubbery by gardners [sic], provides some protection, but does not Factors Affecting Its Continued some flew into houses at dusk and other insulate it from many threats (e.g., see Existence isolated individuals were taken under Factor A and Factor E). The NPS In general, bat populations are in conditions indicating injury of some manages the natural resources on their decline due to their sensitivity to kind.’’ The Florida bonneted bat’s lands in accordance with NPS-specific environmental stresses and other ability to adapt well to manmade statutes, including the NPS Organic Act, factors, such as slow reproductive rates structures contributes to its as well as other general environmental (Jones et al. 2009, pp. 93–115). The vulnerability and has likely been a laws and applicable regulations. Florida bonneted bat is likely affected factor in its decline (C. Marks and G. Similarly, all property and resources by a wide array of natural and Marks, pers. comm. 2008). Since owned by FDEP are generally protected anthropogenic threats, operating singly roosting sites are largely unknown, the from harm in Chapter 62D–2.013(2), and or synergistically, and in varying potential to remove and exclude Florida animals are specifically protected from immediacy, severity, and scope. bonneted bats from human dwellings unauthorized collection in Chapter Inadvertent and Purposeful Impacts and artificial structures, either 62D–2.013(5) of the Florida Statutes. From Humans inadvertently or accidentally, is high. Despite these protections, risks to the Despite regulatory protections provided Florida bonneted bat on conservation In general, bats using old or under Florida law (see Factor D above), lands remain. For example, routine land abandoned and new dwellings are at direct and indirect threats from humans management practices can cause the significant risk. Bats are often removed continue, especially in urban, suburban, loss of roost sites, especially since when they are no longer tolerated by and residential areas. locations of natural roosts are unknown humans or inadvertently killed or Similarly, Robson (1989, p. 15) stated (see Factor A). Use of pesticides may displaced when structures are that urban development has resulted in increase the likelihood of direct demolished. Adverse human impacts on the persecution of bats wherever they exposure or may impact the prey base bats involve direct killing, persecution, come in contact with humans. (see Factor E). vandalism, and disturbance of ‘‘Seemingly innocuous activities like Collecting permits can be issued ‘‘for hibernating and maternity colonies removing dead pine or royal palm trees, scientific or educational purposes.’’ (Harvey et al. 1999, p. 13). Unpublished pruning landscape trees (especially Permits are required from the FWC for data from a survey of 100 pest control cabbage palms), sealing barrel-tile roof scientific research on the Florida companies on the southeastern coast of shingles with mortar, destroying bonneted bat. For work on Federal lands Florida showed that requests to remove abandoned buildings, and clearing small (e.g., ENP, BCNP), permits are required ‘‘nuisance’’ bats from this area all but lots of native vegetation cumulatively from the NPS or the Service, if work is ceased in the 1960s (Belwood 1992, p. may have a severe impact on remaining on National Wildlife Refuges. For work 217), indicating a sharp decline in bats. populations in urban areas’’ (Robson on State lands, permits are required Homeowners and professionals use a 1989, p. 15). Harvey et al. (1999, p. 13) from FDEP. Permits are also required for variety of methods to remove bats, indicated that disturbance to summer work on county-owned lands. including lethal means (C. Marks and G. maternity colonies of bats is extremely Marks, pers. comm. 2008). Even when detrimental. In general, maternity Summary of Factor D attempts are made to remove bats colonies of bats do not tolerate Despite existing regulatory humanely, bats may be sealed into disturbance, especially when flightless mechanisms, the Florida bonneted bat buildings (C. Marks and G. Marks, pers. newborns are present (Harvey et al. remains at risk due to the effects of a comm. 2008). Despite regulations (see 1999, p. 13). Newborns or immature bats wide array of threats (see Factors A and Factor D above), in some situations, bats may be dropped or abandoned by adults E). Based on our analysis of the best are still likely removed through if disturbed (Harvey et al. 1999, p. 13). available information, we find that inhumane and prohibited methods (e.g., Disturbance to maternity colonies of the existing regulatory measures, due to a removed from roosts with vacuum Florida bonneted bat may be variety of constraints, do not provide cleaner-like apparatuses) and excluded particularly damaging because of this adequate protection, and, in some from artificial roost sites during species’ low fecundity and low instances, may be harmful (i.e., taking of sensitive time periods (e.g., inside the abundance. In short, wherever this bats as ‘‘nuisance’’ wildlife). maternity season before young are species occurs in or near human Educational efforts and training should volant (capable of flying)) (A. Kropp, dwellings or structures, it is at risk of help to raise awareness and address pers. comm. 2009). Such activities can inadvertent or purposeful removal, some violations of existing regulations. result in direct mortality or injury of displacement, and disturbance. When finalized, the FWC’s Florida adults, juveniles, dependent newborn Routine maintenance and repair of bonneted bat management plan may pups, or fetuses, if pregnant females are bridges and overpasses is a potential

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60768 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

threat. The Florida bonneted bat has not Based upon data modified from higher incidence of bat fatalities from been documented to use these Johnson (2005 as cited in Arnett et al. wind energy facilities (see also Barclay structures. However, a large colony of 2008, p. 64), researchers found that the et al. 2007, pp. 381–387). In short, the Brazilian free-tailed bats uses the I–75 Brazilian free-tailed bat comprised 85.6 large pliable lungs of bats expand when overpass at the entrance of Babcock- percent of bat mortalities noted at a exposed to sudden drop in pressure, Webb WMA and a single Florida wind energy facility in Woodward, causing tissue damage, whereas birds’ bonneted bat call was recorded within Oklahoma, and 41.3 percent of bat compact, rigid lungs do not respond in 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of this overpass; given mortalities at a High Wind, California, the same manner (Baerwald et al. 2008, the species’ flight capabilities and wind energy facility. Since the Florida pp. 695–696). roosting behavior, the Florida bonneted bonneted bat is also a free-tailed bat, it Wind turbine facilities are being bat could be using this overpass (S. may demonstrate some similar planned for sites east and west of Lake Trokey, pers. comm. 2008c; C. Marks behaviors that place it at risk when Okeechobee, and these may have an and G. Marks, pers. comm. 2008). When encountering wind energy facilities. impact on the Florida bonneted bat (M. bridges and overpasses are cleaned Bat mortalities at wind energy Tucker, in litt. 2012). One proposed (typically by the Florida Department of facilities may be seasonal in nature facility in Glades County is roughly 14.5 Transportation), bats are subjected to (Johnson 2005, as cited in Kunz et al. km (9 miles) south of locations where high water pressure from hoses, which 2007, p. 317). Most documented the species was recorded on the likely results in death or injury (C. mortalities in North America occurred Kissimmee River in 2008 (M. Tucker, in Marks, pers. comm. 2007). Bats using between late summer and early fall litt. 2012). In 2011, ‘‘possible’’ Florida the I–75 overpass at the entrance of (Johnson 2005, as cited in Arnett et al. bonneted bat calls were also recorded Babcock-Webb WMA are at risk (C. 2008, p. 66); Kunz et al. 2007, p. 317; on the proposed project site (C. Coberly, Marks, pers. comm. 2007). During the Arnett et al. 2008, pp. 65–66). Taller pers. comm. 2012). Potential impacts fall of 2009, the FWC constructed a turbines with greater rotor-swept areas from this proposed facility cannot be community bat house near the overpass may be responsible for more bat accurately assessed at this time because to provide an alternate roost site; while mortalities than shorter turbines with it is not clear that the species uses the it is not known if Florida bonneted bats smaller rotor-swept areas (Arnett et al. site (i.e., occurs on site or moves to it will use community bat houses, space 2008, p. 68). Bat mortalities are absent during activities such as foraging). The was included to accommodate larger- where turbines are not spinning, other proposed facility in Palm Beach bodied bats in that structure (J. Morse, indicating that bats do not strike County has not recorded Florida pers. comm. 2010). To date, the species stationary blades or towers (Kerns et al. bonneted bat calls on site (C. Newman, has not been found in the large 2005, p. 91). Fatalities at wind energy pers. comm. 2012), and this county is community bat house at this site. facilities tend to occur when wind not part of the species’ known historical speeds are <6 meters/second (19.7 feet/ or current range. Both wind energy Proposed Wind Energy Facilities second) (Kerns et al. 2005, p. 76). Bat development companies have indicated mortalities were also negatively that areas around Lake Okeechobee are Wind power is one of the fastest correlated with rain (Kerns et al. 2005 the most suitable sites in Florida for growing sectors of the energy industry p. 76). It should be noted, however, that wind development, and if successfully (Horn et al. 2008, p. 123; Cryan and mortality monitoring at wind energy developed, additional sites could be Barclay 2009, p. 1330), and the facilities is not standardized, and there proposed, increasing the risk of impacts development of wind energy facilities in is a paucity of data for analysis. Most from wind energy to the Florida Florida may be of particular concern for studies include less than a full field bonneted bat (M. Tucker, in litt. 2012). the Florida bonneted bat. season and may miss significant bat While bat fatalities from wind energy Migratory, tree-dwelling, and mortality events. Differences between facilities are well documented, potential insectivorous bat species are being sites including scavenging rates, carcass impacts to the Florida bonneted bat are killed at wind turbines in large numbers detection, and observer bias may all difficult to evaluate at this time, partly across North America (Kunz et al. 2007, contribute to variations in bat mortality due to the uncertainty involving many pp. 317–320; Cryan and Barclay 2009, records (Arnett et al. 2008, pp. 71–72). factors (e.g., location of facilities, pp. 1330–1340). Although it is not clear The cause of bat mortality at wind operations, foraging distance). Certain why such species are particularly energy facilities is not a simple one of aspects of the species’ status and life susceptible (Boyles et al. 2011, p. 41), direct contact with blades or towers. history may increase vulnerability to Kunz et al. (2007, pp. 315–324) Baerwald et al. (2008, pp. 695–696) this threat. The species’ small proposed 11 hypotheses for the large found that barotrauma is the cause of population and low fecundity make any numbers of fatalities at wind energy death in a high proportion of bats found additional potential sources of mortality facilities. Some of these include: at wind energy facilities. Barotrauma cause for concern. The species’ high and attraction to tall structures as potential involves tissue damage to air-containing strong flight capabilities and fast- roost sites, attraction to enhanced structures (such as lungs) caused by hawking foraging behavior may increase foraging opportunities (e.g., insects rapid or excessive pressure change; risk. Conversely, since the species is attracted to heat of turbines), wind turbine blades may create zones of nonmigratory, potential impacts from echolocation failure, electromagnetic low pressure as air flows over them. In wind energy facilities may not be as field disorientation, and decompression their examination, Baerwald et al. great in magnitude as perhaps other bat (rapid pressure changes causing internal (2008, pp. 695–696) found 90 percent of species that are migratory. injuries or disorientation of bats while the bat fatalities involved internal Implementation of the Service’s new foraging). Similarly, Cryan and Barclay hemorrhaging consistent with land-based wind energy guidelines may (2009, pp. 1330–1340) categorized the barotrauma, while direct contact with also help to avoid and minimize some causes of fatalities into two categories: turbine blades only accounted for about impacts (Service 2012, pp. 1–71). proximate, which explain the direct half of the fatalities. Baerwald et al. means by which bats die, and ultimate, (2008, pp. 695–696) suggested that the Pesticides and Contaminants which explain why bats come close to differences in respiratory anatomy The life history of the Florida turbines. between bats and birds may explain the bonneted bat may make it susceptible to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60769

both direct and indirect impacts from Grue et al. (1997, pp. 369–388) A reduction in the number of flying mosquito control and other pesticide reviewed the sublethal effects of OPs insects is a potential secondary effect to application activities. Mosquito control and carbamates on captive small consider when evaluating the impact of spraying activities commonly begin at mammals and birds and found impaired pesticides, and mosquito control dusk when mosquitoes are most active thermoregulation, reduced food chemicals in particular, on the Florida (http://www.miamidade.gov/pubworks/ consumption, and reproductive bonneted bat. In his status survey for the spraying_insecticides.asp). Because the alterations. Clark (1986, p. 193) Florida bonneted bat, Robson (1989, p. Florida bonneted bat forages at dusk and observed a depression in cholinesterase 15) suggested that mosquito control after dark, the possibility exists for activity in little brown bats following programs are contributing to reduced individuals to be directly exposed to both oral and dermal application of the food supplies for bats. Robson (1989, p. airborne mosquito control chemicals or OP pesticide methyl parathion. Bats 14) attributed the general reduced to consume invertebrates containing with reduced cholinesterase activity activity of bats along the southeastern pesticide residues from recent may suffer loss of coordination, coastal ridge to the reduction of forested applications. Additionally, because the impaired echolocation, and elongated habitat and reduced insect abundance. Florida bonneted bat has been response time. Alteration of Although insect activity was not documented to roost in residential areas thermoregulation could have serious measured, Robson (1989, p. 14) noted (Belwood 1992, pp. 219–220), it is ramifications to bats, given their high that the ‘‘lack of insects on the possible for individuals to be exposed, metabolic and energy demands (Sparks southeastern coastal ridge was striking either directly or through diet, to a 2006, pp. 1–2). Reduced reproductive when contrasted to all other areas.’’ variety of undocumented, localized success would be of concern because While it is reasonable to suggest that pesticide applications conducted by the Florida bonneted bat already reduced food supply or increased homeowners. displays a low reproductive rate (Sparks exposure to pesticides may have led to Organochlorine (OC) pesticides have 2006, p. 2). In order to accurately the decline of the population in the been linked to lethal effects in bats evaluate the impact of such pesticides Miami area, this link is only speculative (Clark et al. 1978, p. 1358; Clark et al. on the Florida bonneted bat, additional because no rigorous scientific studies or 1983, pp. 215–216; O’Shea and Clark work characterizing both pesticide direct evidence exists. Timm and 2002, p. 239). Such pesticides have not exposure and effects in bats is needed. Genoways (2004, p. 861) indicated that the extant, although small, population been registered for use in the United In addition to pesticide exposure, of the bat in the Fakahatchee-Big States for several decades, but due to the mercury represents another potential Cypress area of southwest Florida is extreme ability of OCs to persist in the threat to the Florida bonneted bat that located in one of the few areas of south environment, residues are still has not been investigated. According to Florida that has not been sprayed with detectable in soil and sediment in some the National Atmospheric Deposition pesticides. Marks and Marks (2008a, p. locations in south Florida. The Program, the mercury deposition rate in 15) contended that if the species’ rarity possibility exists that the Florida south Florida is among the highest in and vulnerability are due to a bonneted bat may consume the United States (http:// dependence on a limited food source or invertebrates with elevated OC nadp.isws.illinois.edu). The movement habitat, then the protection of that food concentrations in areas with substantial of mercury through the aquatic system source or habitat is critical. OC environmental concentrations, and into the terrestrial food web through In summary, the effects of pesticides though this scenario would be limited to emergent invertebrates has been and contaminants on bat populations in specific sites and would not be expected documented in other areas (Konkler and general have not been studied to be a widespread threat. No studies Hammerschmidt 2012, p. 1659; Cristol thoroughly. In the case of the Florida have been conducted that attempt to et al. 2008, p. 335). Assuming that a bonneted bat, data concerning the assess the historical impact of OC similar mechanism is occurring in south effects of pesticides and other pesticides on the Florida bonneted bat. Florida coupled with high mercury contaminants is virtually nonexistent. Currently, OC pesticides have largely deposition rates, the consumption of Despite this lack of data, the possibility been replaced with organophosphate such invertebrates may constitute a certainly exists for the Florida bonneted (OP), carbamate, and pyrethroid pathway for the Florida bonneted bat to bat to be exposed to a variety of pesticides. Carbamate and OP pesticides be exposed to mercury. Nam et al. compounds through multiple routes of act as cholinesterase inhibitors and are (2012, pp. 1096–1098) documented exposure. Additionally, areas with generally more toxic to mammals than mercury concentrations in brain, liver, intensive pesticide activity may not OC pesticides. However, they are not as and fur in little brown bats near a support an adequate food base for the persistent in the environment and do mercury-contaminated site in Virginia species. Pesticides and contaminants not tend to bioaccumulate in organisms. that were significantly greater than might be impacting the Florida Despite this lack of persistence, Sparks mercury concentrations in the same bonneted bat, but further studies are (2006, pp. 3–4, 6–7) still found OP tissues of little brown bats at a reference required to fully assess whether they are residues in both bats and guano in site, indicating the potential for bats to impacting the species at the population Indiana and suspected that the residues be exposed to and accumulate mercury level and are, therefore, posing a threat. originated from consuming near mercury-impacted systems. It is contaminated insects. Pyrethroids, one likely that the Florida bonneted bat Effects of Small Population Size, of which is permethrin, are commonly experiences some degree of mercury Isolation, and Other Factors used mosquito control pesticides in exposure when foraging to a large extent The Florida bonneted bat is south Florida and interfere with sodium above mercury-impacted water bodies. vulnerable to extinction due to its small channel function and display greater While no known studies have attempted population size, restricted range, few persistence than OP and carbamate to evaluate the impact of mercury on bat colonies, low fecundity, and relative pesticides, but still degrade much more populations in south Florida, the isolation. The Florida bonneted bat only rapidly than OC pesticides and are neurotoxic effects of mercury on occurs in south Florida and only in believed to exhibit low toxicity to mammals in general have been well limited numbers (Timm and Genoways mammals. characterized in the scientific literature. 2004, pp. 861–862; Marks and Marks

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60770 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

2008a, pp. 11, 15; 2008b, p. 4; 2012, pp. extinction due to genetic drift (loss of windspeeds of more than 145 mph and 12–15). Based on the small number of unique genes through time), inbreeding gusts exceeding 175 mph (Timm and locations where calls were recorded, the depression (reduced fitness or survival Genoways 2004, p. 861). The winds low numbers of calls recorded at each due to low genetic diversity), extreme destroyed the majority of older trees location, and the fact that the species weather events (e.g., hurricanes), and within several kilometers of the coast forms small colonies, Marks and Marks random or chance changes to the that were potentially available as roost (2008a, p. 15) stated that it is possible environment (Lande 1988, pp. 1455– trees (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. that the entire population of Florida 1459; Smith 1990, pp. 310–321) that can 861). Timm and Genoways (2004, p. bonneted bats may number less than a significantly impact its habitat (see 861) indicated that habitat loss from few hundred individuals. Due to its Environmental Stochasticity below). development (see Factor A), increased small population size and restricted Information on the extent of genetic use of pesticides, and Hurricane range, the species is considered to be diversity in historical or current Andrew may have had a significant one of the most critically endangered populations is lacking. impact on an already small population mammals in North America (Timm and In general, isolation, whether caused of the Florida bonneted bat. Genoways 2004, p. 861). In general, by geographic distance, ecological Several less intense hurricanes have species with restricted ranges are often factors, or reproductive strategy, will impacted both coasts of Florida during characterized by small population sizes likely prevent the influx of new genetic the past decade. Acoustical surveys and high habitat specialization and are, material and can result in low diversity, conducted in south Florida prior to the therefore, more vulnerable to stochastic, which may impact viability and hurricane season of 2004 (from 1997 demographic, and environmental fecundity (Chesser 1983, pp. 66–77). through 2003) were compared with processes (Lande et al. 2003 as cited in Distance between subpopulations or results after the hurricanes (Marks and Lee and Jetz 2010, p. 5). colonies, the small sizes of colonies, and Marks 2008a, pp. 12, D1–D6, E1–E26). In a vulnerability assessment, the the general low number of bats may The limited number of locations and FWC’s biological status review team make recolonization unlikely if any site low number of recorded calls suggested determined that the species met criteria is extirpated. Isolation of habitat can that the species was rare before the 2004 or listing measures for geographic range, prevent recolonization from other sites storm season and that the population population size and trend, and and potentially result in extinction. The remained low afterward (Marks and population size and restricted area (Gore probability of extinction increases with Marks 2008a, pp. 12–15). Prior to the et al. 2010, pp. 1–2). For geographic decreasing habitat availability (Pimm et 2004 hurricane season, calls were range, the review team estimated that al. 1988, pp. 758–762, 776; Noss and recorded at 4 of 10 locations; after the the species occurs in a combined area of Cooperrider 1994, pp. 162–165; Thomas hurricane season, calls were recorded at roughly 17,632 km2 (6,808 mi2), well 1994, pp. 373–378; Kale 1996, pp. 7– 9 of 44 locations (Marks and Marks below the criterion of < 20,000 km2 11). Although changes in the 2008a, pp. 12–15). Actions taken by a (7,722 mi2). The review team also environment may cause populations to private landowner to reinforce bat estimated potentially three fluctuate naturally, small and low- houses prior to Hurricane Charlie in subpopulations in a fragmented range, density populations are more likely to 2004 and Hurricane Wilma in 2005 all of which occur in coastal locations fluctuate below a minimum viable likely prevented the only known extant susceptible to hurricanes and other population (i.e., the minimum or roost site (at that time) from being losses in habitat (see Climate Change threshold number of individuals needed destroyed; these storms caused and Sea Level Rise and Land Use in a population to persist in a viable significant damage to both trees and Changes and Human Population Growth state for a given interval) (Shaffer 1981, other property on the site (S. Trokey, above). The review team also inferred pp. 131–134; Shaffer and Samson 1985, pers. comm. 2008c). continuing decline in both extent of pp. 146–151; Gilpin and Soule´ 1986, pp. Major impacts of intense storms may occurrence and area, extent, or quality 19–34). If populations become include mortality during the storm, of habitat. For population size and fragmented, genetic diversity will be exposure to predation immediately trend, the review team estimated <100 lost as smaller populations become following the storm, loss of roost sites, individuals known in roosts, with an more isolated (Rossiter et al. 2000, pp. and impacts on foraging areas and insect assumed total of mature individuals, 1131–1135). Fragmentation and aspects abundance (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. well below the criterion of 10,000. of the species’ natural history (e.g., 7–9). In general, bats could be blown Similarly, for population size and reliance on availability of suitable roost into stationary objects or impacted by restricted area, the review team sites, constant supply of insects) can flying debris, resulting in injury or estimated a total population of mature contribute to and exacerbate other mortality (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 7). individuals at <1,000, with <100 threats facing the species. Trees with cavities can be snapped at individuals in known roosts, and all Overall, the Florida bonneted bat is their weakest point, which for the three subpopulations were located in at- vulnerable to a wide array of factors, Florida bonneted bat may have the most risk coastal zones. including small population size, severe impact since the species uses Slow reproduction and low fecundity restricted range, few occurrences, low cavities (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 8), are also serious concerns because this fecundity, and relative isolation. These competition for available cavities in species produces only one young at a threats are significant and expected to south Florida is intense (Belwood 1992, time and roosts singly or in small continue or possibly increase. p. 220), and suitable roosting sites in groups (FBC 2005, p. 1; Timm and general are often limiting factors Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1). Assuming a Environmental Stochasticity (Humphrey 1975, pp. 341–343). lifespan of 10 to 20 years for bats of this Natural events such as severe Displaced bats may be found on the size (Wilkinson and South 2002, pp. hurricanes may cause the loss of old ground or other unsuitable locations 124–131), the average generation time is trees with roosting cavities (Timm and and exposed to natural predators, estimated to be 5 to 10 years (Gore et al. Genoways 2004, p. 861). In August domestic pets, and humans (Marks and 2010, p. 7). The small numbers within 1992, , a category 5 Marks 2008a, p. 8). As pregnant females localized areas may also make the hurricane, struck southern Miami-Dade have been found in June through Florida bonneted bat vulnerable to County with sustained surface September, hurricanes in Florida can

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60771

occur at critical life-history stages— other severe weather event, it is possible Marks, pers. comm. 2011). South when females are pregnant or rearing that multiple colonies could become Florida again experienced cold young—possibly resulting in losses of extirpated, even from one storm event. temperatures in December 2010. pregnant females, newborns, or juvenile Due to the bat’s overall vulnerability, Temperatures in December 2010 were pups (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 7–9). intense hurricanes are a significant among the coldest on record within ENP Because the entire population may be threat, which is expected to continue or (J. Sadle, NPS, pers. comm. 2011). In the less than a few hundred individuals increase in the future. short term, the severe and prolonged (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 15; 2012, Other processes to be affected by cold events in south Florida resulted in pp. 12–15), the Florida bonneted bat climate change include temperatures, mortality of at least several adult Florida may not be able to withstand losses rainfall (amount, seasonal timing, and bonneted bats at one observed site. from intense storms or storms at a distribution), and storms (frequency and However, it is not known if the species critical life-history stage. Alternatively, intensity). Temperatures are projected to persisted at all sites previously less intense hurricanes or mild, isolated rise approximately 2 °C to 5 °C (3.6 °F documented following the prolonged storms may create roosting to 9 °F) for North America by the end of and repeated cold temperatures in 2010. opportunities, if tree snags (dead trees) this century (IPCC 2007, pp. 7–9, 13). Overall, the long-term effects of are left in place. Based upon modeling, Atlantic prolonged and repeated cold events on According to the Florida Climate hurricane and tropical storm the species are not known. Center, Florida is by far the most frequencies are expected to decrease Molossids, the family of bats which vulnerable State in the United States to (Knutson et al. 2008, pp. 1–21). By includes the Florida bonneted bat, hurricanes and tropical storms (http:// 2100, there should be a 10–30 percent appear to be an intermediate between coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/ decrease in hurricane frequency due to tropical and temperate zone bat families tropicalweather.shtml). Based on data more wind shear impeding initial (Arlettaz et al. 2000, pp. 1004–1014). gathered from 1856 to 2008, Klotzbach hurricane development. However, the Members of this family that inhabit the and Gray (2009, p. 28) calculated the intensity of hurricanes is expected to warmer temperate and subtropical zones climatological and current-year increase, with a 5–10 percent increase incur much higher energetic costs for probabilities for each State being in wind. This is due to more hurricane thermoregulation during cold weather impacted by a hurricane and major energy available for intense hurricanes. events than those inhabiting northern hurricane. Of the coastal States In addition to climate change, weather regions (Arlettaz et al. 2000, pp. 1004– analyzed, Florida had the highest variables are extremely influenced by 1014). At such temperatures, bats are climatological probabilities for other natural cycles, such as El Nin˜ o likely unable to find food, and cannot hurricanes and major hurricanes, with a Southern Oscillation with a frequency re-warm themselves. Such a stochastic, 51 percent probability of a hurricane of every 4–7 years, solar cycle (every 11 but potentially severe, event poses a and a 21 percent probability of a major years), and the Atlantic Multi-decadal significant threat to the entire hurricane over a 152-year timespan. Of Oscillation. All of these cycles influence population. Impacts of the cold weather the States analyzed, Florida also had the changes in Floridian weather. The exact event are evident, but the effect on all highest current-year probabilities, with severity, direction, and distribution of colonies is not known. Additional a 45 percent probability of a hurricane all of these changes at the regional level extreme weather events are anticipated and an 18 percent probability of a major are difficult to project. in the future, and such extremes can hurricane (Klotzbach and Gray 2009, p. This species is also vulnerable to turn into ‘‘disasters for small 28). Based upon data from the period prolonged extreme cold weather events. populations of mammals’’ (R. Timm, 1886–1998, Neumann et al. (1999, pp. Air temperatures dropped to below pers. comm. 2012). 29–30) also found that the number of freezing and reached a low of ¥2.0 °C Aspects of the Species’ Life History and tropical cyclones within south Florida is (28 °F) in ENP on January 11, 2010; air Climate Change Implications high; analyses suggested that areas temperatures at Royal Palm for the first within the species’ range (e.g., Fort 2 weeks of January marked the coldest For bats in general, climate changes Myers, Miami) are expected to period recorded over the previous 10 can affect food availability, timing of experience more than 50 occurrences years (Hallac et al. 2010, p. 1). The hibernation, frequency of torpor, rate of (tropical cyclones) per 100 years. In effects of this severe and prolonged cold energy expenditure, reproduction, and addition, the analyses suggested that the event on the Florida bonneted bats or development rate (Sherwin et al. 2012, incidence of hurricanes in south Florida other bats in Florida are not known, but pp. 1–18). Although increased was roughly 30 per 100 years, higher some mortality was observed. At least 8 temperatures may lead to benefits (e.g., than any other area except for North Florida bonneted bats were lost from the increased food supply, faster Carolina (Neumann et al. 1999, pp. 29– North Fort Myers colony during the development, range expansion), other 30). The number of major hurricanes event, before 12 remaining bats were negative outcomes may also occur (e.g., (roughly 14 per 100 years) was higher brought into captivity, warmed, and fed extreme weather, reduced water than any other area examined (S. Trokey, pers. comm. 2010). Those availability, spread of disease) (Sherwin (Neumann et al. 1999, p. 30). rescued were emaciated and in poor et al. 2012, p. 14). Food abundance is a If hurricanes and tropical storms condition. Initially, only 9 individuals fundamental factor influencing bat increase in severity, frequency, or appeared to survive after this event, activity (Wang et al. 2010, pp. 315–323). distribution, vulnerable, tropical tree- although 10 individuals were still alive Insectivorous bats are dependent upon roosting bat species may be heavily at this site in April 2010 (S. Trokey, ectothermic (cold-blooded) prey, whose impacted (Gannon and Willig 2009, pp. pers. comm. 2010a, 2010b, 2010c). activity is affected by climate conditions 281–301). Given the Florida bonneted Approximately 30 Brazilian free-tailed (Burles et al. 2009, pp. 132–138). Aerial- bat’s tree-roosting habits, small bats were found dead below a bat house hawking species such as the Florida population size, few isolated colonies, in Everglades City during this event (R. bonneted bat are likely highly sensitive and use of coastal areas, the species is Arwood, pers. comm. 2010). Overall, to climatic changes due to their at risk from hurricanes, storms, or other approximately 100 Brazilian free-tailed dependence on a food supply that is extreme weather. Depending on the bats using bat houses were found dead highly variable in both time and space location and intensity of a hurricane or following this severe cold event (C. (Sherwin et al. 2012, p. 3). In assessing

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60772 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

implications of climate change, Sherwin Proposed Determination threats to the Florida bonneted bat et al. (2012, p. 4) identified two risk We have carefully assessed the best extend throughout its entire range, we factors directly related to foraging: bats scientific and commercial information have determined that the species is inhabiting water-stressed regions and available regarding the past, present, currently in danger of extinction aerial-hawking species, reliant on and future threats to the Florida throughout all of its range. Because spatially variable food sources. Bats bonneted bat. The species occurs in threats extend throughout the entire generally have higher rates of limited numbers in a restricted range in range, it is unnecessary to determine if evaporative water loss than other south Florida. Habitat loss, degradation, the Florida bonneted bat is in danger of similarly sized terrestrial mammals and and modification from human extinction throughout a significant birds (Herreid and Schmidt-Nielsen population growth and associated portion of its range. Therefore, on the 1966, Studier 1970 as cited in Chruszcz development and agriculture have basis of the best available scientific and and Barclay 2002, p. 24 and Webb et al. impacted the Florida bonneted bat and commercial information, we have determined that the Florida bonneted 1995, p. 270). Due to their high surface are expected to further curtail its limited area to volume ratios and large, naked bat meets the definition of an range (see Factor A). Environmental flight membranes (wings), the potential endangered species under the Act. In effects from climatic change, especially for loss of evaporative water is generally other words, we find that a threatened sea level rise, are expected to become high (Webb et al. 1995, pp. 269–278). species status is not appropriate for the severe in the future, resulting in Travelling farther to access water and Florida bonneted bat because of the additional habitat losses that are food entails more energy expenditure severity and immediacy of the threats, expected to place the species at greater and may affect reproductive success the restricted range of the species, and risk (see Factor A). (Sherwin et al. 2012, p. 4). Considering its small population size. Consequently, The Florida bonneted bat is also foraging risk alone, the Florida bonneted we propose to list the Florida bonneted currently threatened by a wide array of bat may be especially susceptible to bat as an endangered species throughout natural and manmade factors (see Factor climate changes since it is an its entire range. E). Effects of small population size, insectivorous, aerial-hawking species restricted range, few colonies, slow Available Conservation Measures restricted to south Florida, a region reproduction, low fecundity, and expected to become water-stressed in Conservation measures provided to relative isolation contribute to the the future (see Factor A above). species listed as endangered or species’ vulnerability. Other aspects of threatened species under the Act Summary of Factor E the species’ natural history (e.g., aerial- include recognition, recovery actions, Based on our analysis of the best hawking foraging, tree-roosting habits) requirements for Federal protection, and available information, we have and environmental stochasticity may prohibitions against certain practices. identified a wide array of natural and also contribute to its imperilment. Recognition through listing results in manmade factors affecting the Multiple anthropogenic factors (e.g., public awareness and conservation by continued existence of the Florida impacts or intolerance by humans, wind Federal, State, Tribal, and local bonneted bat. Inadvertent or purposeful energy projects) are also threats of agencies, private organizations, and impacts by humans caused by varying severity. As an insectivore, the individuals. The Act encourages intolerance or lack of awareness (e.g., species is also likely exposed to a cooperation with the States and requires removal, landscaping activities, bridge variety of pesticides and contaminants that recovery actions be carried out for maintenance) can lead to mortality or through multiple routes of exposure; all listed species. The protection disturbances to maternity colonies. The pesticides may also affect its prey base. required by Federal agencies and the Florida bonneted bat’s ability to adapt Given its vulnerability, disease and prohibitions against certain activities well to manmade structures has likely predation (see Factor C) have the are discussed, in part, below. been a factor in its decline because the potential to impact the species. Finally, The primary purpose of the Act is the bat tends to inhabit structures that place existing regulatory mechanisms (see conservation of endangered and it at risk from inadvertent or purposeful Factor D), due to a variety of constraints, threatened species and the ecosystems harm by humans. Proposed wind energy do not provide adequate protection for upon which they depend. The ultimate facilities in the species’ habitat can the species. Overall, impacts from goal of such conservation efforts is the cause mortalities. The species may be increasing threats, operating singly or in recovery of these listed species, so that exposed to a variety of chemical combination, place the species at risk of they no longer need the protective compounds through multiple routes of extinction. measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of exposure, and intensive pesticide use Section 3 of the Act defines an the Act requires the Service to develop may alter insect prey availability. Small endangered species as ‘‘any species and implement recovery plans for the population size, restricted range, low which is in danger of extinction conservation of endangered and fecundity, and few and isolated colonies throughout all or a significant portion of threatened species. The recovery are serious ongoing threats. Catastrophic its range’’ and a threatened species as planning process involves the and stochastic events are of significant ‘‘any species which is likely to become identification of actions that are concern. All colonies are at risk due to an endangered species within the necessary to halt or reverse the species’ hurricanes, which can cause mortality, foreseeable future throughout all or a decline by addressing the threats to its loss of roost sites, and other impacts. significant portion of its range.’’ By all survival and recovery. The goal of this Extreme cold weather events can also indications, the species occurs only in process is to restore listed species to a have severe impacts on the population limited numbers within a restricted point where they are secure, self- and increase risks from other threats by range and faces considerable and sustaining, and functioning components extirpating colonies or further reducing immediate threats, which place it at risk of their ecosystems. colony sizes. Collectively, these threats of extinction. Aspects of the species’ Recovery planning includes the have operated in the past, are impacting natural history may also contribute to development of a recovery outline the species now, and will continue to and exacerbate threats and increase its shortly after a species is listed, impact the Florida bonneted bat in the vulnerability to extinction. Since preparation of a draft and final recovery future. immediate and ongoing significant plan, and revisions to the plan as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60773

significant new information becomes information you may have for recovery wildlife that has been taken illegally. available. The recovery outline guides planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER Certain exceptions apply to agents of the the immediate implementation of urgent INFORMATION CONTACT). Service and State conservation agencies. recovery actions and describes the Section 7(a) of the Act requires The Florida bonneted bat is listed by the process to be used to develop a recovery Federal agencies to evaluate their State of Florida; therefore, certain State plan. The recovery plan identifies site- actions with respect to any species that laws also apply. Listing would also specific management actions that will is proposed or listed as an endangered require Federal agencies to avoid achieve recovery of the species, or threatened species and with respect actions that might jeopardize the species measurable criteria that determine when to its critical habitat, if any is (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)), and would a species may be downlisted or delisted, designated. Regulations implementing provide opportunities for funding of and methods for monitoring recovery this interagency cooperation provision conservation measures and land progress. Recovery plans also establish of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part acquisition that would not otherwise be a framework for agencies to coordinate 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires available to them (16 U.S.C. 1534, their recovery efforts and provide Federal agencies to confer with the 1535(d)). estimates of the cost of implementing Service on any action that is likely to We may issue permits to carry out recovery tasks. Recovery teams jeopardize the continued existence of a otherwise prohibited activities (comprising species experts, Federal species proposed for listing or result in involving endangered and threatened and State agencies, nongovernmental destruction or adverse modification of wildlife species under certain organizations, and stakeholders) are proposed critical habitat. If a species is circumstances. Regulations governing often established to develop recovery listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for plans. When completed, the recovery the Act requires Federal agencies to endangered species, and at 17.32 for outline, draft recovery plan, and the ensure that activities they authorize, threatened species. With regard to final recovery plan will be available on fund, or carry out are not likely to endangered wildlife, a permit must be our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ jeopardize the continued existence of issued for the following purposes: for endangered), or from our South Florida the species or destroy or adversely scientific purposes, to enhance the Ecological Services Office (see FOR modify its critical habitat. If a Federal propagation or survival of the species, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). action may affect a listed species or its and for incidental take in connection Implementation of recovery actions critical habitat, the responsible Federal with otherwise lawful activities. generally requires the participation of a agency must enter into consultation It is our policy, as published in the broad range of partners, including other with the Service. Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR Federal agencies, States, Tribal, Federal agency actions within the 34272), to identify to the maximum nongovernmental organizations, species’ habitat that may require extent practicable at the time a species businesses, and private landowners. conference or consultation or both as is listed, those activities that would or Examples of recovery actions include described in the preceding paragraph would not constitute a violation of habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of include, but are not limited to: section 9 of the Act. The intent of this native vegetation), research, captive management and any other landscape- policy is to increase public awareness of propagation and reintroduction, and altering activities on Federal lands the effect of a proposed listing on outreach and education. The recovery of administered by the Department of proposed and ongoing activities within many listed species cannot be Defense, Fish and Wildlife Service, the range of the species proposed for accomplished solely on Federal lands National Park Service, and U.S. Forest listing. because their range may occur primarily Service; issuance of section 404 Clean We estimate that the following or solely on non-Federal lands. To Water Act permits by the Army Corps of activities would be likely to result in a achieve recovery of these species Engineers; permitting of construction violation of section 9 of the Act; requires cooperative conservation efforts and management of gas pipeline, power however, possible violations are not on private, State, and Tribal lands. line rights-of-way, and wind energy limited to these actions alone: If this species is listed, funding for facilities by the Federal Energy (1) Unauthorized possession, recovery actions will be available from Regulatory Commission; and collecting, trapping, capturing, killing, a variety of sources, including Federal construction and maintenance of roads, harassing, sale, delivery, or movement, budgets, State programs, and cost share highways, or bridges by the Federal including interstate and foreign grants for non-Federal landowners, the Highway Administration. commerce, or harming or attempting academic community, and The Act and its implementing any of these actions, of Florida bonneted nongovernmental organizations. In regulations set forth a series of general bats (research activities where Florida addition, pursuant to section 6 of the prohibitions and exceptions that apply bonneted bats are handled, captured Act, the State of Florida would be to all endangered wildlife. The (e.g., netted, trapped), tagged, or eligible for Federal funds to implement prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, collected will require authorization management actions that promote the codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for endangered pursuant to the Act). protection and recovery of the Florida wildlife, in part, make it illegal for any (2) Incidental take of the Florida bonneted bat. Information on our grant person subject to the jurisdiction of the bonneted bat without authorization programs that are available to aid United States to take (includes harass, pursuant to section 7 or section 10 species recovery can be found at: harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, (a)(1)(B) of the Act. http://www.fws.gov/grants. trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt (3) Sale or purchase of specimens of Although the Florida bonneted bat is any of these), import, export, ship in this taxon, except for properly only proposed for listing under the Act interstate commerce in the course of documented antique specimens of this at this time, please let us know if you commercial activity, or sell or offer for taxon at least 100 years old, as defined are interested in participating in sale in interstate or foreign commerce by section 10(h)(1) of the Act. recovery efforts for this species. any listed species. Under the Lacey Act (4) Unauthorized destruction or Additionally, we invite you to submit (18 U.S.C. 42–43; 16 U.S.C. 3371–3378), alteration of Florida bonneted bat any new information on this species it is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, habitat (including unauthorized grading, whenever it becomes available and any carry, transport, or ship any such leveling, plowing, mowing, burning,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60774 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

herbicide spraying, or other destruction (2) Specific areas outside the establish procedures, and provide or modification of occupied or geographical area occupied by the guidance to ensure that our decisions potentially occupied habitat or pesticide species at the time it is listed, upon a are based on the best scientific data application in known occupied habitat) determination that such areas are available. They require our biologists, to in ways that kills or injures individuals essential for the conservation of the the extent consistent with the Act and by significantly impairing the species’ species. with the use of the best scientific data essential breeding, foraging, sheltering, Conservation, as defined under available, to use primary and original or other essential life functions. section 3 of the Act, means to use and sources of information as the basis for (5) Unauthorized release of biological the use of all methods and procedures recommendations to designate critical control agents that attack any life stage that are necessary to bring an habitat. of this taxon. endangered or threatened species to the When we are determining which areas (6) Unauthorized removal or point at which the measures provided should be designated as critical habitat, destruction of cavity trees and other pursuant to the Act are no longer our primary source of information is natural structures being utilized as necessary. Such methods and generally the information developed roosts by the Florida bonneted bat that procedures include, but are not limited during the listing process for the results in take of the species. to, all activities associated with species. Additional information sources (7) Unauthorized removal or scientific resources management such as may include the recovery plan for the exclusion from buildings or artificial research, census, law enforcement, species, articles in peer-reviewed structures being used as roost sites by habitat acquisition and maintenance, journals, conservation plans developed the species, resulting in take of the propagation, live trapping, and by States and counties, scientific status species. transplantation, and, in the surveys and studies, biological (8) Unauthorized maintenance or extraordinary case where population assessments, other unpublished repair of bridges or overpasses that are pressures within a given ecosystem materials, or experts’ opinions or being used as roost sites by the Florida cannot be otherwise relieved, may personal knowledge. include regulated taking. bonneted bat that result in take of the Critical Habitat Prudency species. Critical habitat receives protection Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as (9) Unauthorized building and under section 7 of the Act through the amended, and implementing regulations operation of wind energy facilities requirement that Federal agencies (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the within areas used by the Florida ensure, in consultation with the Service, maximum extent prudent and bonneted bat, which results in take of that any action they authorize, fund, or determinable, the Secretary designate the species. carry out is not likely to result in the critical habitat at the time the species is We will review other activities not destruction or adverse modification of determined to be endangered or identified above on a case-by-case basis critical habitat. The designation of threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR to determine whether they may be likely critical habitat does not affect land 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation to result in a violation of section 9 of the ownership or establish a refuge, of critical habitat is not prudent when Act. We do not consider these lists to be wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other one or both of the following situations exhaustive, and we provide them as conservation area. Such designation does not allow the government or public exist: (1) The species is threatened by information to the public. taking or other human activity, and Questions regarding whether specific to access private lands. Such designation does not require identification of critical habitat can be activities would constitute a violation of implementation of restoration, recovery, expected to increase the degree of threat section 9 of the Act should be directed or enhancement measures by non- to the species; or (2) such designation of to the Field Supervisor of the Service’s Federal landowners. Where a landowner critical habitat would not be beneficial South Florida Ecological Services Office requests Federal agency funding or to the species. (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). authorization for an action that may We have carefully considered all Requests for copies of the regulations affect a listed species or critical habitat, known threats to the species to concerning listed animals and general the consultation requirements of section determine the prudency of critical inquiries regarding prohibitions and 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even habitat for the species. Because humans permits may be addressed to the U.S. in the event of a destruction or adverse may be intolerant of bats in general, Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered modification finding, the obligation of some individual Florida bonneted bats Species Permits, 1875 Century the Federal action agency and the may be threatened by taking or other Boulevard, Atlanta, GA 30345 (Phone landowner is not to restore or recover human activity in instances where they 404–679–7313; Fax 404–679– 7081). the species, but to implement reside in conflict with humans (e.g., Critical Habitat reasonable and prudent alternatives to roosting in an occupied human avoid destruction or adverse dwelling). However, we are not aware of Background modification of critical habitat. any current situations where this is the Critical habitat is defined in section 3 Section 4 of the Act requires that we case, and we do not have any evidence of the Act as: designate critical habitat on the basis of that this was a major threat previously. (1) The specific areas within the the best scientific data available. Based upon available information, geographical area occupied by the Further, our Policy on Information taking by humans does not appear to be species, at the time it is listed in Standards Under the Endangered a primary threat to the species. accordance with the Act, on which are Species Act (published in the Federal Furthermore, as discussed in Summary found those physical or biological Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), of Factors Affecting the Species, Factors features the Information Quality Act (section 515 A and E, Florida bonneted bats could be (a) Essential to the conservation of the of the Treasury and General inadvertently killed or displaced if their species and Government Appropriations Act for roost sites are not known, and the (b) Which may require special Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. species could possibly benefit from management considerations or 5658)), and our associated Information having additional roosting and foraging protection; and Quality Guidelines provide criteria, locations identified. Therefore, we do

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60775

not anticipate that identification of Critical Habitat Determinability Key features of the basic life history, critical habitat would be expected to Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2)) ecology, reproductive biology, and increase the degree of threat to the further state that critical habitat is not habitat requirements of many bats, species, and designation of essential determinable when one or both of the including the Florida bonneted bat, are habitat, particularly roosting sites, could following situations exist: (1) unknown. Species-specific ecological actually reduce the degree of threat to Information sufficient to perform the requirements have not been determined the species. required analysis of the impacts of the (e.g., natural roost sites, seasonal Designation of critical habitat would designation is lacking, or (2) the changes in roosting habitat, dietary needs, seasonal changes in diet, prime offer other benefits to the species. The biological needs of the species are not foraging habitat). Population dynamics, principal benefit of including an area in sufficiently well known to permit such as species interactions and a critical habitat designation is the identification of an area as critical community structure, population requirement for Federal agencies to habitat. When we find that critical trends, and population size and age ensure actions they fund, authorize, or habitat is not determinable, the Act class structure necessary to maintain carry out are not likely to result in the provides for an additional year to long-term viability, have not been destruction or adverse modification of publish a critical habitat designation (16 determined. As we are unable to any designated critical habitat, the U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). identify many physical and biological regulatory standard of section 7(a)(2) of In accordance with sections 3(5)(A)(i) features essential to the conservation of the Act under which consultation is and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations the Florida bonneted bat, we are unable completed. Federal agencies must also at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which to identify areas that contain features consult with us on actions that may areas to propose as critical habitat, we affect a listed species and refrain from necessary for long-term viability. must consider those physical and Therefore, we find that critical habitat is undertaking actions that are likely to biological features essential to the jeopardize the continued existence of not determinable at this time. conservation of the species. These We are, therefore, seeking information such species. The analysis of effects of include, but are not limited to: a proposed project on critical habitat is from the public regarding which (1) Space for individual and physical or biological features or separate and different from that of the population growth and for normal effects of a proposed project on the specific areas may be essential to the behavior; conservation of the Florida bonneted species itself. The jeopardy analysis (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or evaluates the action’s impact to survival bat. Please see Information Requested other nutritional or physiological above for specific information we are and recovery of the species, while the requirements; destruction or adverse modification seeking to assist us in trying to identify (3) Cover or shelter; the biological requirements for the analysis evaluates the action’s effects to (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, Florida bonneted bat. We are the designated habitat’s contribution to and rearing (or development) of particularly in need of information on conservation. Therefore, the difference offspring; and location of natural roosts, roosting and in outcomes of these two analyses (5) Habitats that are protected from foraging habitat preferences, dietary represents the regulatory benefit of disturbance or are representative of the requirements, and foraging distance. critical habitat. This will, in some historical, geographical, and ecological Information gleaned from the public instances, lead to different results and distribution of a species. comment period, as well as from different regulatory requirements. Thus, We have done a preliminary ongoing research efforts we are critical habitat designations may evaluation to find if the designation of employing with the help of our partners provide greater benefits to the recovery critical habitat for the Florida bonneted (new survey technologies, computer of a species than those provided solely bat is prudent and determinable at this modeling, etc.), will hopefully yield by listing. time. Based on that evaluation, we are sufficient new information on those Designation of critical habitat for the currently unable to identify the physical physical and biological features Florida bonneted bat may also benefit and biological features essential for the essential to the species to allow us to the species by focusing conservation conservation of the Florida bonneted bat propose critical habitat. efforts on the restoration and because information on those features maintenance of ecosystem functions for this species is not known at this Peer Review that are essential for attaining short- and time. The apparent poor viability of the In accordance with our joint policy on long–term viability and recovery. The species recorded in recent years peer review published in the Federal designation of critical habitat can also indicates that current conditions are not Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), serve to inform management and sufficient to meet the basic biological we will seek the expert opinions of at conservation decisions by identifying requirements of the species in most least three appropriate and independent any additional physical and biological areas of its current range. Because the specialists regarding this proposed rule. features of the ecosystem that may be Florida bonneted bat has not been found The purpose of peer review is to ensure essential for the conservation of the for decades in many of its historical that our proposed listing determination species. Critical habitat designation can locations, and much of the habitat in is based on scientifically sound data, also help raise awareness and educate which it still persists has been assumptions, and analyses. We have landowners about the potential drastically altered, the optimal invited these peer reviewers to comment conservation value of the area. conditions that would provide the during this public comment period on We, therefore, find that designation of biological or ecological requisites of this our proposal to list the Florida bonneted critical habitat for the Florida bonneted species are not known. Although we can bat as an endangered species. bat is prudent, because once surmise that habitat loss and We will consider all comments and determined, critical habitat would be degradation from a variety of factors has information received during this beneficial, and there is no evidence that contributed to the decline of the species, comment period on this proposed rule the designation of critical habitat would we do not know specifically what during preparation of a final result in an increased threat from taking essential physical or biological features determination. Accordingly, the final or other human activity for this species. of that habitat are currently lacking. decision may differ from this proposal.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60776 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Public Hearings Send a copy of any comments that References Cited concern how we could make this rule A complete list of references cited in Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for easier to understand to Office of one or more public hearings on this this rulemaking is available on the Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov proposal, if requested. Requests must be Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street NW., received within 45 days after the date of and upon request from the Field Washington, DC 20240. You also may publication of this proposed rule in the Supervisor, South Florida Ecological email the comments to this address: Federal Register. Such requests must be Services Office (see FOR FURTHER [email protected]. INFORMATION CONTACT sent to the address shown in FOR ). FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Authors schedule public hearings on this U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) The primary authors of this package proposal, if any are requested, and are the staff members of the South announce the dates, times, and places of This proposed rule does not contain Florida Ecological Services Office. those hearings, as well as how to obtain any new collections of information that reasonable accommodations, in the require approval by OMB under the List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Federal Register and local newspapers Endangered and threatened species, at least 15 days before the hearing. U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not Exports, Imports, Reporting and impose recordkeeping or reporting Required Determinations recordkeeping requirements, requirements on State or local Transportation. Clarity of the Rule governments, individuals, businesses, or organizations. An agency may not Proposed Regulation Promulgation Executive Order 12866 requires each conduct or sponsor, and a person is not Accordingly, we propose to amend agency to write regulations that are easy required to respond to, a collection of part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title to understand. We invite your information unless it displays a 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, comments on how to make this rule currently valid OMB control number. as set forth below: easier to understand including answers to questions such as the following: (1) National Environmental Policy Act (42 PART 17—[AMENDED] Are the requirements in the rule clearly U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) stated? (2) Does the rule contain 1. The authority citation for part 17 technical language or jargon that We have determined that continues to read as follows: interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the environmental assessments and Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. format of the rule (grouping and order environmental impact statements, as 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– of sections, use of headings, defined under the authority of the 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its National Environmental Policy Act 2. In § 17.11(h) add an entry for ‘‘Bat, clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not Florida bonneted’’ to the List of understand if it were divided into more be prepared in connection with listing Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in (but shorter) sections? (5) Is the a species as an endangered or alphabetical order under Mammals, to description of the rule in the threatened species under the read as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Endangered Species Act. We published the preamble helpful in understanding a notice outlining our reasons for this § 17.11 Endangered and threatened the emergency rule? What else could we determination in the Federal Register wildlife. do to make the rule easier to on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). * * * * * understand? (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate popu- Historic range lation where endan- Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name gered or threatened habitat rules

MAMMALS

******* Bat, Florida Eumops floridanus U.S.A. (FL) ...... U.S.A. (FL) ...... E ...... NA NA bonneted.

*******

* * * * * Dated: September 20, 2012. Daniel M. Ashe, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2012–24300 Filed 10–3–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Oct 03, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\04OCP2.SGM 04OCP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2