47916 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Federal eRulemaking Portal (see device for the deaf (TDD) may call the ADDRESSES, below) must be received by Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. Fish and Wildlife Service 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: date. 50 CFR Part 17 Public informational meeting and Executive Summary [FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061; FF09E21000 public hearing: We will hold public Why we need to publish a rule. Under FXES11110900000 212] informational sessions from 5:00 p.m. to the Act, if we determine that a species 6:00 p.m., Central Time, followed by may be an endangered or threatened RIN 1018–BD16 public hearings from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 species throughout all or a significant p.m., Central Time, on September 14, portion of its range, we are required to Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 2021, and September 16, 2021. promptly publish a proposal in the and Plants; Endangered Species Federal Register and make a Status With Critical Habitat for ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: determination on our proposal within 1 Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas year. To the maximum extent prudent Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// and determinable, we must designate Pimpleback, and False Spike, and critical habitat for any species that we Threatened Species Status With www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061, which is determine to be an endangered or Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat threatened species under the Act. for Texas Fawnsfoot the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel on the left Listing a species as an endangered or AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, side of the screen, under the Document threatened species and designation of Interior. Type heading, check the Proposed Rules critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule. ACTION: Proposed rule. box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on What this document does. This SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and ‘‘Comment Now!’’ document proposes the Guadalupe Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail fatmucket (Lampsilis bergmanni), Texas propose to list six Central Texas mussel to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: fatmucket (Lampsilis bracteata), species: The Guadalupe fatmucket FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061, U.S. Fish and Guadalupe orb (Cyclonaias necki), (Lampsilis bergmanni), Texas fatmucket Wildlife Service, MS: JAO/1N, 5275 Texas pimpleback (Cyclonaias (Lampsilis bracteata), Texas fawnsfoot Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– (=Quadrula) petrina), and false spike (Truncilla macrodon), Guadalupe orb 3803. (Fusconaia (=Quincuncina) mitchelli) as (Cyclonaias necki), Texas pimpleback We request that you send comments endangered species and Texas fawnsfoot (Cyclonaias (=Quadrula) petrina), and only by the methods described above. (Truncilla macrodon) as a threatened false spike (Fusconaia (=Quincuncina) We will post all comments on http:// species. This document also proposes mitchelli) as endangered or threatened www.regulations.gov. This generally the designation of critical habitat for all under the Endangered Species Act of means that we will post any personal six species, as well as a 4(d) rule providing protective regulations for the 1973, as amended (Act). After review of information you provide us (see Texas fawnsfoot. the best available scientific and Information Requested, below, for more The basis for our action. Under the information). commercial information, we find that Act, we may determine that a species is Public informational meetings and listing Guadalupe fatmucket, Texas an endangered or threatened species public hearings: The public fatmucket, Guadalupe orb, Texas based on any of five factors: (A) The informational meetings and the public pimpleback, and false spike as present or threatened destruction, hearings will be held virtually using the endangered species is warranted, and modification, or curtailment of its Zoom platform. See Public Hearing, listing Texas fawnsfoot as a threatened habitat or range; (B) overutilization for below, for more information. species is warranted. We propose a rule commercial, recreational, scientific, or Availability of supporting materials: issued under section 4(d) of the Act educational purposes; (C) disease or For the critical habitat designation, the (‘‘4(d) rule’’) for the Texas fawnsfoot. If predation; (D) the inadequacy of coordinates or plot points or both from we finalize this rule as proposed, it existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) which the maps are generated are would add these species to the List of other natural or manmade factors included in the decision file and are Endangered and Threatened Wildlife affecting its continued existence. We available at https://www.fws.gov/ and extend the Act’s protections to the have determined habitat loss through southwest/es/AustinTexas/ESA_Sp_ species. We also propose to designate changes in water quality and quantity, Mussels.html and at http:// critical habitat for all six species under as well as increased fine sediments www.regulations.gov under Docket No. the Act. In total, approximately 1,944 (Factor A), are the primary threats to FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. Any river miles (3,129 river kilometers) in these species. Texas fall within the boundaries of the additional tools or supporting Under the Act, for any species that is proposed critical habitat designations. information that we may develop for the determined to be threatened, we must We also announce the availability of a critical habitat designation will also be provide protective regulations to draft economic analysis (DEA) of the available at the Service website set out provide for the conservation of that proposed designation of critical habitat. above, and may also be included in the species. For the Texas fawnsfoot, we are We also are notifying the public that we preamble and/or at http:// proposing to prohibit take and have scheduled two informational www.regulations.gov. possession. meetings followed by public hearings on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the the proposed rule. Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S. Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to DATES: Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin designate critical habitat concurrent Comment submission: We will accept Ecological Services Field Office, 10711 with listing to the maximum extent comments received or postmarked on or Burnet Rd., Suite 200, Austin, TX prudent and determinable. Section before October 25, 2021. Comments 78758; telephone (512) 490–0057. 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the submitted electronically using the Persons who use a telecommunications Secretary must make the designation on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47917

the basis of the best scientific data materials relating to this proposal can be and existing regulations that may be available and after taking into found at http://www.regulations.gov addressing those threats. consideration the economic impact, the under Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2019– (4) Additional information concerning impact on national security, and any 0061. the historical and current status, range, other relevant impacts of specifying any Because we will consider all distribution, and population size of particular area as critical habitat. comments and information received these species, including the locations of Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines during the comment period, our final any additional populations of the critical habitat as (i) the specific areas determinations may differ from this Central Texas mussels. within the geographical area occupied proposal. Based on the new information (5) Information on regulations that are by the species, at the time it is listed, we receive (and any comments on that necessary and advisable to provide for on which are found those physical or new information), we may conclude that the conservation of the Texas fawnsfoot biological features (I) essential to the any of these species are threatened and that the Service can consider in conservation of the species and (II) instead of endangered, or endangered developing a 4(d) rule for the species. In which may require special management instead of threatened, or we may particular, information concerning the considerations or protections; and (ii) conclude that any of these species do extent to which we should include any specific areas outside the geographical not warrant listing as either an of the section 9 prohibitions in the 4(d) area occupied by the species at the time endangered species or a threatened rule or whether any other forms of take it is listed, upon a determination by the species. Such final decisions would be should be excepted from the Secretary that such areas are essential a logical outgrowth of this proposal, as prohibitions in the 4(d) rule. for the conservation of the species. long as we: (a) Base the decisions on the (6) The reasons why we should or Supporting analyses. We prepared an best scientific and commercial data should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical analysis of the economic impacts of the available after considering all of the habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act, proposed critical habitat designations relevant factors; (2) do not rely on including information to inform the and hereby announce the availability of factors Congress has not intended us to following factors such that a designation the draft economic analysis for public consider; and (3) articulate a rational of critical habitat may be determined to review and comment. connection between the facts found and be not prudent: Our species status assessment report the conclusions made, including why (a) The species is threatened by taking (SSA report) documents the results of we changed our conclusion. or other human activity and the comprehensive biological status identification of critical habitat can be review for the central Texas mussels Information Requested expected to increase the degree of such and provides an account of the species’ We intend that any final action threat to the species; overall viability through forecasting of resulting from this proposed rule will be (b) The present or threatened the species’ condition in the future based on the best scientific and destruction, modification, or (Service 2019a, entire). Additionally, commercial data available and be as curtailment of a species’ habitat or range the SSA report contains our analysis of accurate and as effective as possible. is not a threat to the species, or threats required habitat and the existing Therefore, we request comments or to the species’ habitat stem solely from conditions of that habitat. information from other concerned causes that cannot be addressed through Peer review. In accordance with our governmental agencies, Native management actions resulting from joint policy on peer review published in American tribes, the scientific consultations under section 7(a)(2) of the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 community, industry, or any other the Act; FR 34270), and our August 22, 2016, interested parties concerning this (c) Areas within the jurisdiction of the memorandum updating and clarifying proposed rule. We particularly seek United States provide no more than the role of peer review of listing actions comments concerning: negligible conservation value, if any, for under the Act, we sought the expert (1) The species’ biology, range, and a species occurring primarily outside opinions of eight appropriate specialists population trends, including: the jurisdiction of the United States; regarding the species status assessment (a) Biological or ecological (d) No areas meet the definition of report. We received responses from six requirements of these species, including critical habitat. specialists, which informed this habitat requirements for feeding, (7) Specific information on: proposed rule. The purpose of peer breeding, and sheltering; (a) The amount and distribution of review is to ensure that our listing (b) Genetics, genomics, systematics, habitat for all six Central Texas mussels; determinations, critical habitat and taxonomy; (b) What areas, that were occupied at designations, and 4(d) rules are based (c) Historical and current range, the time of listing and that contain the on scientifically sound data, including distribution patterns; physical or biological features essential assumptions, and analyses. The peer (d) Historical and current population to the conservation of the species, reviewers have expertise in the biology, levels, abundance, and current and should be included in the designation habitat, and threats to the species. projected trends; and and why; We sought comments from (e) Past and ongoing conservation (c) Any additional areas occurring independent specialists on the SSA measures for these species, their within the range of the species, i.e., report to ensure that our proposal is habitats, or both. Anderson, Austin, Bastrop, Bell, Blanco, based on scientifically sound data and (2) Factors that may affect the Brazoria, Brazos, Brown, Burleson, analyses. We received feedback from six continued existence of the species, Caldwell, Coleman, Colorado, Comal, scientists with expertise in freshwater which may include habitat modification Concho, Dallas, DeWitt, Edwards, Ellis, mussel biology, ecology, genetics, or destruction, overutilization, disease, Falls, Fayette, Fort Bend, Freestone, climate science, and hydrology as peer predation, the inadequacy of existing Gillespie, Gonzales, Grimes, Guadalupe, review of the SSA report. The reviewers regulatory mechanisms, or other natural Hays, Henderson, Houston, Kaufman, were generally supportive of our or manmade factors. Kerr, Kendall, Kimble, Lampasas, Leon, approach and made suggestions and (3) Biological, commercial trade, or Llano, Madison, Mason, Matagorda, comments that strengthened our other relevant data concerning any McCulloch, McLennan, Menard, Milam, analysis. The SSA report and other threats (or lack thereof) to these species Mills, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47918 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Robertson, Runnels, San Saba, (12) Whether we could improve or public hearing by Zoom or telephone, Shackelford, Stephens, Sutton, Tom modify our approach to designating you must register. For information on Green, Travis, Throckmorton, Waller, critical habitat in any way to provide for how to register, or if you encounter Washington, Victoria, Wharton, and greater public participation and problems joining Zoom the day of the Williamson Counties, Texas, that should understanding, or to better meeting, visit https://www.fws.gov/ be included in the designation because accommodate public concerns and southwest/. Registrants will receive the they (1) are occupied at the time of comments. Zoom link and the telephone number listing and contain the physical or Please include sufficient information for the public informational meetings biological features that are essential to with your submission (such as scientific and public hearings. If applicable, the conservation of the species and that journal articles or other publications) to interested members of the public not may require special management allow us to verify any scientific or familiar with the Zoom platform should considerations, or (2) are unoccupied at commercial information you include. view the Zoom video tutorials (https:// the time of listing and are essential for Please note that submissions merely support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/ the conservation of the species; stating support for, or opposition to, the 206618765-Zoom-video-tutorials) prior (d) Special management action under consideration without to the public informational meetings considerations or protection that may be providing supporting information, and public hearings. needed in critical habitat areas we are although noted, will not be considered The public hearings will provide proposing, including managing for the in making a determination, as section interested parties an opportunity to potential effects of climate change; and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that present verbal testimony (formal, oral (e) What areas not occupied at the determinations as to whether any comments) regarding this proposed rule. time of listing are essential for the species is an endangered or a threatened While the public informational meetings conservation of the species. We species must be made ‘‘solely on the will be opportunities for dialogue with particularly seek comments: basis of the best scientific and the Service, the public hearings are not: (i) Regarding whether occupied areas commercial data available.’’ They are a forum for accepting formal are inadequate for the conservation of You may submit your comments and verbal testimony. In the event there is a the species; materials concerning this proposed rule large attendance, the time allotted for (ii) Providing specific information by one of the methods listed in oral statements may be limited. that supports the determination that ADDRESSES. We request that you send Therefore, anyone wishing to make an unoccupied areas will, with reasonable comments only by the methods oral statement at the public hearing for certainty, contribute to the conservation described in ADDRESSES. the record is encouraged to provide a of the species and contain at least one If you submit information via http:// prepared written copy of their statement physical or biological feature essential www.regulations.gov, your entire to us through the Federal eRulemaking to the conservation of the species; and submission—including any personal Portal, or U.S. mail (see ADDRESSES, (iii) Explaining whether or not identifying information—will be posted above). There are no limits on the length unoccupied areas fall within the on the website. If your submission is of written comments submitted to us. definition of ‘‘habitat’’ at 50 CFR 424.02 made via a hardcopy that includes Anyone wishing to make an oral and why. personal identifying information, you statement at the public hearings must (8) Land use designations and current may request at the top of your document register before the hearing (https:// or planned activities in the subject areas that we withhold this information from www.fws.gov/southwest/). The use of a and their possible impacts on proposed public review. However, we cannot virtual public hearing is consistent with critical habitat. guarantee that we will be able to do so. our regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3). (9) Any probable economic, national We will post all hardcopy submissions security, or other relevant impacts of on http://www.regulations.gov. Previous Federal Actions designating any area that may be Comments and materials we receive, Table 1, below, summarizes the included in the final designation, and as well as supporting documentation we petition history and proposed status of the related benefits of including or used in preparing this proposed rule, the Central Texas mussels under the excluding specific areas. will be available for public inspection Endangered Species Act. On June 25, (10) Information on the extent to on http://www.regulations.gov. 2007, we received a formal petition which the description of probable dated June 18, 2007, from Forest Public Hearing economic impacts in the draft economic Guardians (now WildEarth Guardians), analysis is a reasonable estimate of the We have scheduled two public for 475 species in the southwestern likely economic impacts and any informational meetings and public United States. The petitioned group of additional information regarding hearings on this proposed rule to list the species included the Texas fatmucket. probable economic impacts that we Central Texas mussels as endangered or On October 15, 2008, we received a should consider. threatened species with critical habitat. petition dated October 9, 2008, from (11) Whether any specific areas we are We will hold the public informational WildEarth Guardians, requesting that proposing for critical habitat meetings and public hearings on the the Service list as threatened or designation should be considered for date and at the times listed above under endangered and designate critical exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Public informational meeting and public habitat for six species of freshwater Act, and whether the benefits of hearing in DATES. We are holding the mussels, including the Texas potentially excluding any specific area public informational meetings and pimpleback, Texas fawnsfoot, and false outweigh the benefits of including that public hearings via the Zoom online spike. area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If video platform and via teleconference so On December 15, 2009, we published you think we should exclude any that participants can attend remotely. our 90-day finding that the above additional areas, please provide credible For security purposes, registration is petitions presented substantial scientific information regarding the existence of a required. To listen and view the meeting information indicating that listing the meaningful economic or other relevant and hearing via Zoom, listen to the Texas fatmucket, Texas pimpleback, impact supporting a benefit of meeting and hearing by telephone, or Texas fawnsfoot, and false spike may be exclusion. provide oral public comments at the warranted (74 FR 66260). As a result of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47919

the finding, we initiated status reviews Texas pimpleback were included in all now a newly described species. for these four species. On October 6, of our subsequent annual Candidate Similarly, the Guadalupe fatmucket was 2011, we published a 12-month finding Notices of Review (77 FR 69993, split from the Texas fatmucket in 2018 for five Texas mussels, including the November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, (Inoue et al. 2018, entire) and described Texas fatmucket, Texas fawnsfoot, and November 22, 2013; 79 FR 72450, in 2019 (Inoue et al. 2019, in press). As Texas pimpleback, that listing was December 5, 2014; 80 FR 80584, both species were part of the original warranted but precluded by higher December 24, 2015; 81 FR 87246, petitioned entities, we evaluated both of priority actions, and these species were December 2, 2016; and 84 FR 54732, these new species as well as the four added to the candidate list (76 FR October 10, 2019). original species in our SSA, and all six The distribution of the newly 62166). Candidates are those fish, species are included in this proposed wildlife, and plants for which we have described Guadalupe orb was rule. on file sufficient information on previously fully contained within the biological vulnerability and threats to distribution of the Texas pimpleback. This document constitutes our support preparation of a listing Genetic information received in 2018 concurrent 12-month warranted petition proposal, but for which development of (Burlakova et al. 2018, entire) confirmed finding for the false spike and proposed a listing rule is precluded by other that the Guadalupe orb is a separate listing rule and proposed critical habitat higher priority listing activities. The species distinct from the Texas rule for all six Central Texas mussel Texas fatmucket, Texas fawnsfoot, and pimpleback, and the Guadalupe orb is species.

TABLE 1—LIST OF THE PETITION FINDINGS FOR THE SIX CENTRAL TEXAS MUSSELS

Scientific name Common name River basins Petition received date 90-day finding date 12-month finding date

Lampsilis bergmanni .. Guadalupe fatmucket Guadalupe ...... Previously included in Texas fatmucket.

Lampsilis bracteata .... Texas fatmucket ...... Colorado ...... June 25, 2007 ...... December 15, 2009 .. October 6, 2011. Truncilla macrodon ..... Texas fawnsfoot ...... Trinity, Brazos, Colo- October 15, 2008 ...... December 15, 2009 .. October 6, 2011. rado.

Cyclonaias necki ...... Guadalupe orb ...... Guadalupe ...... Previously included in Texas pimpleback.

Cyclonaias petrina ...... Texas pimpleback ..... Colorado ...... October 15, 2008 ...... December 15, 2009 .. October 6, 2011. Fusconaia mitchelli ..... False spike ...... Brazos, Colorado, October 15, 2008 ...... December 15, 2009 .. This finding. Guadalupe.

I. Proposed Listing Determination host’s tissue, draw nutrients from the (Yeager et al. 1994, p. 220). Adult Background fish, and develop into juvenile mussels mussels typically remain within the (Arey 1932, pp. 214–215). The glochidia same general location where they General Mussel Biology will remain encysted for about a month dropped off (excysted) from their host Freshwater mussels, including the six through a transformation to the juvenile fish as juveniles. Central Texas mussels, have a complex stage. Once transformed, the juveniles Host specificity can vary across life history involving parasitic larvae, will excyst from the fish and drop to the mussel species, which may have called glochidia, which are wholly substrate. specialized or generalized relationships dependent on host fish. As freshwater Freshwater mussel species vary in with one or more taxa of fish. Mussels mussels are generally sessile both onset and duration of spawning, have evolved a wide variety of (immobile), dispersal is accomplished how long developing larvae are held in adaptations to facilitate transmission of primarily through the behavior of host the marsupial gill chambers (gills used glochidia to host fish including: fish and their tendencies to travel for holding eggs and glochidia), and Display/mantle lures mimicking fish or upstream and against the current in which fish species serve as hosts. The invertebrates; packages of glochidia rivers and streams. Mussels are mechanisms employed by mussel (conglutinates) that mimic worms, broadcast spawners; males release species to increase the likelihood of insect larvae, larval fish, or fish eggs; sperm into the water column, which is interaction between host fish and and release of glochidia in mucous webs taken in by the female through the glochidia vary by species. that entangle fish (Strayer et al. 2004, p. incurrent siphon (the tubular structure Mussels are generally immobile; their 431). Polymorphism (existence of used to draw water into the body of the primary opportunity for dispersal and multiple forms) of mantle lures and mussel). The developing larvae remain movement within the stream comes conglutinates frequently exists within with the female until they mature and when glochidia attach to a mobile host mussel populations (Barnhart et al. are ready for release as glochidia, to fish (Smith 1985, p. 105). Upon release 2008, p. 383), representing important attach on the gills, head, or fins of fishes from the host, newly transformed adaptive capacity in terms of genetic (Vaughn and Taylor 1999, p. 913; juveniles drop to the substrate on the diversity and ecological representation. Barnhart et al. 2008, pp. 371–373). bottom of the stream. Those juveniles Glochidia die if they fail to find a host that drop in unsuitable substrates die Guadalupe Fatmucket fish, attach to the wrong species of host because their immobility prevents them The Guadalupe fatmucket (Lampsilis fish, attach to a fish that has developed from relocating to more favorable bergmanni) was recently discovered to immunity from prior infestations, or habitat. Juvenile freshwater mussels be a separate and distinct species from attach to the wrong location on a host burrow into interstitial substrates and Texas fatmucket (L. bracteata; Inoue et fish (Neves 1991, p. 254; Bogan 1993, p. grow to a larger size that is less al. 2018, pp. 5–6; Inoue et al. 2019, in 599). Successful glochidia encyst susceptible to predation and press), and the Service now recognizes (enclose in a cyst-like structure) on the displacement from high flow events the Guadalupe fatmucket as a new

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47920 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

species that occurs only in the The Guadalupe fatmucket is a small to 13–25 years (Haag and Rypel 2010, pp. Guadalupe River basin. Because the medium-sized freshwater mussel (to 4 4–6). Guadalupe fatmucket has recently been inches (in) (100 millimeters (mm))) that Guadalupe fatmucket is currently exhibits sexual dimorphism and has a split from Texas fatmucket, the species found in one population, which occurs yellow-green-tan shell, and is similar in are very similar, and better information in 54 miles (87 km) of the Guadalupe is not yet available, we believe the appearance to the Texas fatmucket (a more detailed description of the Texas River basin in Kerr and Kendall Guadalupe fatmucket has similar habitat Counties, Texas (Randklev et al. 2017, needs (headwater habitats in gravel or fatmucket is found in Howells et al. 2011, pp. 14–16). Related species in the p. 4) (table 2; figure 1). For more bedrock fissures) and host fish information on this population, see the (sunfishes) as the Texas fatmucket. genus Lampsilis from the southeast United States reach a maximum age of SSA report.

TABLE 2—CURRENT GUADALUPE FATMUCKET POPULATION

Occupied Recent collection Population Streams included Counties reach length years (mi (km)) (numbers)

Guadalupe River...... Guadalupe River; North Fork, Kerr and Kendall Co., TX ...... 54 (87) 2018 (22), 2019 Guadalupe River; Johnson (shells). Creek.

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:21 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47921

Current Known Populations of Guadalupe Fatmucket

.f uan_o.,.~ ___ ,- -,, - .-1' ... ,,--,, ___ ,, __ ,,---r'' ,,-- ': ~ ~---,--~ L----,------1------,-----)

-..,,,. 1 ~,r,.."'..,, '

Medina L J j

\ ',l

Q - Populations - - - - Rivers Mi O 4 [ ] County Boundaries ~ Lakes LJn = lnterstates El Cities Km04

Figure 1. Map showing location of known Guadalupe fatmucket population.

Texas Fatmucket bracteatus by A.A. Gould in 1855 (p. a new species (Inoue et al. 2019, in 228) from the ‘‘Llanos River’’ in press); therefore, the Texas fatmucket A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the Texas ‘‘Upper’’ Texas. The species is currently occurs only in the Colorado River basin. fatmucket is presented in the SSA recognized as Lampsilis bracteata The Texas fatmucket is a small to report. Texas fatmucket has been (Williams et al. 2017, pp. 35, 39). medium-sized freshwater mussel (to 4 characterized as a rare Texas endemic Recently, individuals that had been in (100 mm)) that exhibits sexual (Burlakova et al. 2011a, p. 158) and was known as Texas fatmucket in the dimorphism (males and females have originally described as the species Unio Guadalupe River basin were found to be different shapes) and has a yellow-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.025 47922 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

green-tan shell (Howells et al. 2011, pp. the marsupium where the glochidia are but can survive in backwater areas, such 14–16). For a detailed morphological held, thereby becoming infested by as in areas upstream of lowhead dams description see Howells et al. 1996 (p. glochidia. These species are long-term (e.g. Llano Park Lake (BioWest, Inc., 61) and Howells 2014 (p. 41). brooders (bradytictic), spawning and 2018, pp. 2–3)). Host fishes for Texas fatmucket are becoming gravid in the fall and Texas fatmucket currently occur only members of the Family Centrarchidae releasing glochidia in the spring in the upper reaches of major tributaries (sunfishes) including bluegill (Lepomis (Barnhart et al. 2008, p. 384). macrochirus), green sunfish (L. within the Colorado River basin cyanellus), Guadalupe bass (Micropterus Related species in the genus Lampsilis (Randklev et al. 2017, p. 4) in five treculii), and largemouth bass (M. from the southeast United States reach populations: Lower Elm Creek, upper/ salmoides) (Howells 1997, p. 257; a maximum age of 13–25 years (Haag middle San Saba River, Llano River, Johnson et al. 2012, p. 148; Howells and Rypel 2010; pp. 4–6). Texas Pedernales River, and lower Onion 2014, p. 41; Ford and Oliver 2015, p. 4; fatmucket occur in firm mud, stable Creek (table 3; figure 2). Isolated Bonner et al. 2018, p. 9). sand, and gravel bottoms, in shallow individuals not considered part of larger Related species can expel waters, sometimes in bedrock fissures or functioning populations have been conglutinates (packets of glochidia) and among roots of bald cypress (Taxodium found in Cherokee Creek, Bluff Creek, are known to use mantle lures (Barnhart distichum) and other aquatic vegetation and the North Llano River. For more et al. 2008, pp. 377, 380) to attract sight- (Howells 2014, p. 41). The species information on these populations, see feeding fishes that attack and rupture typically occurs in free-flowing rivers the SSA report.

TABLE 3—CURRENT TEXAS FATMUCKET POPULATIONS

Occupied Population Streams included Counties reach length Recent collection years (mi (km)) (number collected)

Lower Elm Creek ...... Elm Creek ...... Runnels Co., TX ...... 12.5 (20) * 2005 2008 (1) 2019 (1) Upper/Middle San Saba River San Saba River ...... Menard, Mason, San Saba, 62 (100) 2016 (29) and McCulloch Co., TX. 2017 (87) 2017 (71) Llano River ...... Llano River, South Llano Kimble, Mason, Llano Co., TX 127 (204) 2016 (72) River. 2017 (47) 2017 (5) Pedernales River ...... Pedernales River, Live Oak Gillespie, Hays, and Blanco 79 (127) 2017 (17) Creek. Co., TX. Lower Onion Creek ...... Onion Creek ...... Travis Co., TX ...... 5 (8) 2010 (3) 2018 (1) * No live animals.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47923

Current Known Populations of 'lexas Fatmucket

, , ~/ I ,, J ' I ,, ~

-Populations ~ -- - Rivers Mi O 10 County Boundaries ffl lakes L__J tl = Interstates I:J Cities KmO 10

Figure 2. Map showing locations of known Texas fatmucket populations.

Texas Fawnsfoot macrodon (Williams et al. 2017, pp. 35, Host fish species are not confirmed 44). for the Texas fawnsfoot, but we The Texas fawnsfoot was originally Texas fawnsfoot is a small- to conclude they use freshwater drum described as Unio macrodon 1859 from (Aplodinotus grunniens; Howells 2014, a location near Rutersville, Fayette medium-sized (2.4 in (60 mm)) mussel with an elongate oval shell (Howells p. 111), like other Truncilla species County, Texas (Lea 1859, pp. 154–155). 2014, p. 111). For a detailed description, occurring in Texas and elsewhere (Ford Texas fawnsfoot is recognized by the see Howells et al. 1996 (p. 143) and and Oliver 2015, p. 8). Freshwater drum scientific community as Truncilla Howells 2014 (p. 111). are molluscivorous (mollusk-eating) and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.026 47924 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

become infested with glochidia when sand, and gravel substrates (Howells historically distributed throughout the they consume gravid female mussels 2014, p. 111). Adults are most often Colorado and Brazos River basins (Barnhart et al. 2008, p. 373). This found in bank habitats and occasionally (Howells 2014, pp. 111–112; and strategy of host infestation may limit in backwater, riffle, and point bar reviewed in Randklev et al. 2017c, pp. population size, as reproductively habitats, with low to moderate velocities 136–137) and in the Trinity River basin successful females are sacrificed (i.e., that appear to function as flow refuges (Randklev et al. 2017b, p. 11). Texas eaten by freshwater drum). Related during high flow events (Randklev et al. fawnsfoot historically occurred in, but is species are bradytictic, brooding larvae 2017c, p. 137). now absent from, the Leon River over the winter instead of releasing Texas fawnsfoot occurs in the lower (Popejoy et al. 2016, p. 477). Randklev them immediately (Barnhart et al. 2008, reaches of the Colorado and Brazos et al. (2017c, p. 135) surveyed the Llano, p. 384). Other species in the genus Rivers, and in the Trinity River San Saba, and Pedernales Rivers and Truncilla from the Southeast and (Randklev et al. 2017b, p. 4) in seven found neither live individuals nor dead Midwest reach a maximum age ranging populations: East Fork Trinity River, shells of Texas fawnsfoot. Isolated from 8–18 years (Haag and Rypel 2010, Middle Trinity River, Clear Fork Brazos individuals not considered part of pp. 4–6). River, Upper Brazos River, Middle/ functioning populations have been Texas fawnsfoot are found in Lower Brazos River, San Saba/Colorado found in the Little River. For more medium- to large-sized streams and Rivers, and Lower Colorado River (table information on Texas fawnsfoot rivers with flowing waters and mud, 4; figure 3). Texas fawnsfoot was populations, see the SSA report.

TABLE 4—CURRENT TEXAS FAWNSFOOT POPULATIONS

Recent Occupied collection Population Streams included Counties reach length years (mi (km)) (numbers)

East Fork Trinity River ...... East Fork Trinity River ...... Kaufman Co., TX ...... 12 (19) 2017 (40) 2018 (12) Middle Trinity River ...... Trinity River ...... Navarro, Anderson, Leon, Hous- 140 (225) 2016—2017 ton, and Madison Co., TX. (59) Clear Fork Brazos River ...... Clear Fork Brazos River ...... Shackelford and Throckmorton 13 (21) 2010 (1) Co., TX. 2018 (0) Upper Brazos River ...... Brazos River ...... Palo Pinto and Parker Co., TX ...... 62 (100) 2017 (23) Middle/Lower Brazos River ...... Brazos River ...... McLennan, Falls, Robertson, 346 (557) 2014 (188) Milam, Brazos, Burleson, 2017 (28) Grimes, Washington, Waller, Austin, and Fort Bend Co., TX. San Saba/Colorado Rivers ...... San Saba River, Colorado River ... San Saba and Mills Co., TX ...... 43 (69) 2017 (0) 2018 (2) Lower Colorado River ...... Colorado River ...... Colorado, Wharton, and 109 (175) 2010 (52) Matagorda Co., TX. 2015 (10) 2017 (9)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47925

Current Known Populations of Texas Fawnsfoot

,' ' ' t ' I ' "'..,r.- ...... ,, ., J , '

e -Populations - -- - Rivers Mi 0 25 County Boundaries ~ Lakes II Interstates G Cities KmO 25

Figure 3. Map showing locations of known Texas fawnsfoot populations.

Guadalupe Orb and is a small-sized mussel with a shell and the umbo is more compressed than length that reaches up to 2.5 in (63 mm) in Texas pimpleback (Burlakova et al. Burlakova et al. (2018, entire) recently (Burlakova et al. 2018, p. 48). 2018, p. 48). Individuals collected from described the Guadalupe orb Guadalupe orb shells are thinner and the upper Guadalupe River (near (Cyclonaias necki) from the Guadalupe more compressed but otherwise Comfort, Texas) averaged 1.9 in (48 mm) River basin as a separate species distinct morphologically similar to the closely (Bonner et al. 2018, p. 221). Channel from Texas pimpleback. The Guadalupe related Texas pimpleback. The posterior catfish, flathead catfish, and tadpole orb occurs only in the Guadalupe basin ridge is more distinct and prominent, madtom are host fish for the Guadalupe

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.027 47926 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

orb (Dudding et al. 2019, p. 15). The best available information leads us Guadalupe River and the lower Dudding et al. (2019, p. 16) cautioned to believe that reproduction, ecological Guadalupe River (table 5; figure 4). An that the apparent clumped distribution interactions and habitat requirements of isolated individual not considered part of Guadalupe orb (and closely related Guadalupe orb are similar to those of of a functioning population has been species) in ‘‘strongholds’’ could be the closely related Texas pimpleback. found in the Blanco River, a tributary to related to observed ongoing declines in The Guadalupe orb occurs only in the the San Marcos River (Johnson et al. native catfishes, including the small and Guadalupe River basin in two separate 2018, p. 7). For more information on rare tadpole madtom, a riffle specialist. and isolated populations: The upper these populations, see the SSA report.

TABLE 5—CURRENT GUADALUPE ORB POPULATIONS

Recent Occupied collection Population Streams included Counties reach length years (mi (km)) (numbers)

Upper Guadalupe River ...... Guadalupe River ...... Kerr, Kendall, and Comal Co., TX 95 (153) 2013 (1) 2017 (10) 2018 (2) Lower Guadalupe River...... Guadalupe River, San Marcos Caldwell, Guadalupe, Gonzales, 181 (291) 2014–2015 River. DeWitt, and Victoria Co., TX. (893) 2017 (41)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47927

Current Known Populations of Guadalupe Orb

Q -Populations ---- Rivers Mi O 10 County Boundaries ~ Lakes L__j II = Interstates G Cities KmO 10

Figure 4. Map showing locations of known Guadalupe orb populations.

Texas Pimpleback entire) recently described the mussel with a moderately inflated, Guadalupe orb (C. necki) from the yellow, brown, or black shell, The Texas pimpleback was originally described as Unio petrinus from the Guadalupe River basin as a separate occasionally with vague green rays or ‘‘Llanos River’’ in ‘‘Upper’’ Texas species distinct from Texas pimpleback. concentric blotches (Howells 2014, p. (Gould 1855, p. 228). The species is now Texas pimpleback is now considered to 93). recognized as Cyclonaias petrina by the occur only in the Colorado River basin Recent laboratory studies of the scientific community (Williams et al. of Texas. Texas pimpleback is a small- closely related Guadalupe orb suggest 2017, pp. 35, 37). Burlakova et al. (2018, to medium-sized (up to 4 in (103 mm)) that channel catfish (Ictalurus

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.028 47928 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

punctatus), flathead catfish (Pylodictus glochidia soon after the larvae mature) Colorado River, Llano River, and the olivarus) and tadpole madtom (Noturus (Barnhart et al. 2008, p. 384). Texas Lower Colorado River (table 6; figure 5). gyrinus) are host fish for Texas pimpleback are reproductively active Only the Lower San Saba and Llano pimpleback (Dudding et al. 2019, p. 2). between April and August (Randklev et River populations are known to be Related species have miniature al. 2017c, p. 110). Related species live successfully reproducing. Texas glochidia and use catfish as hosts as long as 15–72 years (Haag and Rypel pimpleback was historically distributed (Barnhart et al. 2008, pp. 373, 379). 2010, p. 10). throughout the Colorado River basin Additionally, related species can also Texas pimpleback occurs in the (Howells 2014, pp. 93–94; reviewed in produce conglutinates (Barnhart et al. Colorado River basin in five isolated Randklev et al. 2017, pp. 109–110). For 2008, p. 376) and tend to exhibit short- populations: Concho River, Upper San more information on Texas pimpleback term brooding (tachytictia; releasing Saba River, Lower San Saba River/ populations, see the SSA report.

TABLE 6— CURRENT TEXAS PIMPLEBACK POPULATIONS

Recent Occupied collection Population Streams included Counties reach length years (mi (km)) (numbers)

Concho River ...... Concho River ...... Concho Co., TX ...... 14 (23) 2008 (47) 2012 (1) Upper San Saba River ...... San Saba River ...... Menard Co., TX ...... 30 (48) 2017 (1) Lower San Saba/Colorado Rivers .. San Saba River, Colorado River ... San Saba, McCulloch, Mills, 178 (286) 2012 (247) Brown, and Coleman Co., TX. 2014 (481) 2017 (97) 2018 (42) Llano River ...... Llano River ...... Mason Co., TX ...... 5 (8) 2012 (10) 2016 (1) 2017 (23) Lower Colorado River ...... Colorado River ...... Colorado and Wharton Co., TX ..... 98 (158) 2014 (49) 2017 (8) 2018 (30)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47929

Current Known Populations of 'lexas Pimpleback

Q -Populations - - - - Rivers Mi O 20 County Boundaries~ Lakes I II := Interstates El Cities KmO 20

Figure 5. Map showing locations of known Texas pimpleback populations.

False Spike (Howells 2010, p. 4), but those T. Simpson in 1895 from the Guadalupe specimens have now been attributed to River in Victoria County, Texas (Dall The false spike is native to the Brazos, Colorado, and Guadalupe basins in Sphenonaias taumilapana Conrad 1855 1896, pp. 5–6). The species has been central Texas (Howells 2010, p. 4; (no common name; Randklev et al. assigned as Quincuncina mitchelli by Randklev et al. 2017c, p. 12). It was 2017c, p. 12; Graf and Cummings 2007, Turgeon et al. (1988, p. 33) and was thought to have historically occurred in p. 309). recognized as such by Howells et al. the Rio Grande based on the presence of The false spike was originally (1996, p. 127), and it was referenced as fossil and subfossil shells there described as Unio mitchelli by Charles Quadrula mitchelli by Haag (2012, p.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.029 47930 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

71). Finally, it was recognized as 6). No information on age at maturity et al. 2011, p. 17). Dudding et al. (2019, Fusconaia mitchelli, its current currently exists for false spike (Howells pp. 16–17) cautioned that the patchy nomenclature, by Pfeiffer et al. (2016, p. 2010d, p. 3). In part because of their distribution of false spike could be 289). False spike is considered a valid long lifespan and episodic recruitment related to host fish relationships; that is, taxon by the scientific community strategy, populations may be slow to because their host fish have a small (Williams et al. 2017, pp. 35, 39). recover from disturbance. home range, limited dispersal ability, The false spike is a medium-sized False spike occur in larger creeks and and are sensitive to human impacts, freshwater mussel (to 5.2 in (132 mm)) rivers with sand, gravel, or cobble distribution of false spike could be with a yellow-green to brown or black substrates, and in areas with slow to limited by access to, and movement of, elongate shell, sometimes with greenish moderate flows. The species is not host fish. rays. For a detailed description see known from impoundments, nor from Howells et al. 1996 (pp. 127–128) and Currently, the false spike occurs in deep waters (Howells 2014, p. 85). Howells 2014 (p. 85). four populations: In the Little River and Based on closely related species, false False spike was once considered some tributaries (Brazos River basin), spike likely brood eggs and larvae from common wherever it was found; the lower San Saba and Llano Rivers early spring to late summer and host however, beginning in the early 1970s, (Colorado River basin), and in the lower fish are expected to be minnows (family the species began to be regarded as rare Guadalupe River (Guadalupe River Cyprinidae) (Pfeiffer et al. 2016, p. 287). throughout its range, based on Basin) (table 7; figure 6). For more Confirmed host fish for false spike collection information (Strecker 1931, information on these populations, see include blacktail shiner (Cyprinella pp. 18–19; Randklev et al. 2017c, p. 13). the SSA report. False spike is presumed venusta) and red shiner (C. lutrensis; It was considered to be extinct until to have been extirpated from the Dudding et al. 2019, p. 16). 2011, when the discovery of seven live remainder of its historical range Related species in the genus false spike in the Guadalupe River, near throughout the Brazos, Colorado, and Fusconaia from the southeast United Gonzales, Texas, was the first report of Guadalupe Basins of central Texas States are reach a maximum age of 15– living individuals in nearly four (reviewed in Randklev et al. 2017c, pp. 51 years (Haag and Rypel 2010, pp. 4– decades (Howells 2010d, p. 4; Randklev 12–13).

TABLE 7—CURRENT FALSE SPIKE POPULATIONS

Recent Occupied collection Population Streams included Counties reach length years (mi (km)) (number collected)

Little River and tributaries ...... Little River ...... Milam and Williamson Co., TX ...... 41 (66) 2015 (29) Brushy Creek, San Gabriel River .. Lower San Saba River ...... San Saba River ...... San Saba Co., TX ...... 42 (67) 2012 (3) Llano River ...... Llano River ...... Mason Co., TX ...... <1 (∼1) 2017 (1) Lower Guadalupe River ...... Guadalupe River ...... Gonzales, DeWitt, and Victoria 102 (164) 2014–2015 Co., TX. (652)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47931

Current Known Populations of False Spike

- Populations - - - - Rivers Mi O 10 County Boundaries m lakes L__J n =-= Interstates G Cities KmO 10

Figure 6. Map showing locations of known false spike populations.

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened throughout all or a significant portion of Regulatory and Analytical Framework species.’’ The Act defines an its range.’’ The Act requires that we endangered species as a species that is determine whether any species is an Regulatory Framework ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout all ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) or a significant portion of its range,’’ and species’’ because of any of the following and its implementing regulations (50 a threatened species as a species that is factors: CFR part 424) set forth the procedures ‘‘likely to become an endangered for determining whether a species is an species within the foreseeable future

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.030 47932 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(A) The present or threatened species.’’ Our implementing regulations (for example, droughts, large pollution destruction, modification, or at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a events), and representation supports the curtailment of its habitat or range; framework for evaluating the foreseeable ability of the species to adapt over time (B) Overutilization for commercial, future on a case-by-case basis. The term to long-term changes in the environment recreational, scientific, or educational foreseeable future extends only so far (for example, climate changes). In purposes; into the future as the Services can general, the more resilient and (C) Disease or predation; reasonably determine that both the redundant a species is and the more (D) The inadequacy of existing future threats and the species’ responses representation it has, the more likely it regulatory mechanisms; or to those threats are likely. In other is to sustain populations over time, even (E) Other natural or manmade factors words, the foreseeable future is the under changing environmental affecting its continued existence. period of time in which we can make conditions. Using these principles, we These factors represent broad reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not identified the species’ ecological categories of natural or human-caused mean ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to requirements for survival and actions or conditions that could have an provide a reasonable degree of reproduction at the individual, effect on a species’ continued existence. confidence in the prediction. Thus, a population, and species levels, and In evaluating these actions and prediction is reliable if it is reasonable described the beneficial and risk factors conditions, we look for those that may to depend on it when making decisions. influencing the species’ viability. have a negative effect on individuals of It is not always possible or necessary The SSA process can be categorized the species, as well as other actions or to define foreseeable future as a into three sequential stages. During the conditions that may ameliorate any particular number of years. Analysis of first stage, we evaluated individual negative effects or may have positive the foreseeable future uses the best species’ life-history needs. The next effects (e.g. conservation measures). scientific and commercial data available stage involved an assessment of the We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in and should consider the timeframes historical and current condition of the general to actions or conditions that are applicable to the relevant threats and to species’ demographics and habitat known to or are reasonably likely to the species’ likely responses to those characteristics, including an negatively affect individuals of a threats in view of its life-history explanation of how the species arrived species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes characteristics. Data that are typically at its current condition. The final stage actions or conditions that have a direct relevant to assessing the species’ of the SSA involved making predictions impact on individuals (direct impacts), biological response include species- about the species’ responses to positive as well as those that affect individuals specific factors such as lifespan, and negative environmental and through alteration of their habitat or reproductive rates or productivity, anthropogenic influences. This process required resources (stressors). The term certain behaviors, and other used the best available information to ‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either demographic factors. characterize viability as the ability of a together or separately—the source of the species to sustain populations in the Analytical Framework action or condition or the action or wild over time. We use this information condition itself. The SSA report documents the results to inform our regulatory decision. However, the mere identification of of our comprehensive biological status any threat(s) does not necessarily mean review for the Guadalupe fatmucket, Summary of Biological Status and that the species meets the statutory Texas fatmucket, Texas fawnsfoot, Threats definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or Guadalupe orb, Texas pimpleback, and In this discussion, we review the a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining false spike, including an assessment of biological condition of the species and whether a species meets either the potential stressors to each species. their resources, and the threats that definition, we must evaluate all The SSA report does not represent a influence the species’ current and future identified threats by considering the decision by the Service on whether the conditions, in order to assess the expected response by the species, and species should be proposed for listing as species’ overall viability and the risks to the effects of the threats—in light of endangered or threatened species under that viability. those actions and conditions that will the Act. The SSA report provides the Using various timeframes and the ameliorate the threats—on an scientific basis that informs our current and projected future resiliency, individual, population, and species regulatory decision, which involves the redundancy, and representation, we level. We evaluate each threat and its further application of standards within describe the species’ levels of viability expected effects on the species, then the Act and its implementing over time. For the Central Texas mussels analyze the cumulative effect of all of regulations and policies. The following to maintain viability, their populations the threats on the species as a whole. is a summary of the key results and or some portion thereof must be We also consider the cumulative effect conclusions from the SSA report; the resilient. A number of factors influence of the threats in light of those actions full SSA report can be found at Docket the resiliency of Central Texas mussel and conditions that will have positive No. FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061 on http:// populations, including occupied stream effects on the species, such as any www.regulations.gov. length, abundance, and recruitment. existing regulatory mechanisms or To assess the viability of the six While some of the six species have life- conservation efforts. The Secretary Central Texas mussels, we used the history adaptations that help them determines whether the species meets three conservation biology principles of tolerate dewatering and other stressors the definition of an ‘‘endangered resiliency, redundancy, and to some extent, each of these stressors species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, diminishes the resiliency of populations after conducting this cumulative pp. 306–310). Briefly, resiliency to some degree and especially in analysis and describing the expected supports the ability of the species to combination. Elements of the species’ effect on the species now and in the withstand environmental and habitat that determine whether Central foreseeable future. demographic stochasticity (for example, Texas mussel populations can grow to The Act does not define the term wet or dry, warm or cold years), maximize habitat occupancy influence ‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in redundancy supports the ability of the those factors, thereby increasing the the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened species to withstand catastrophic events resiliency of populations. These

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47933

resiliency factors and habitat elements time, etc.), we used the number of rule, we will discuss only those factors are discussed in detail in the SSA report individuals captured as an index over in detail that could meaningfully impact and summarized here. time, presuming relatively similar levels the status of the species. Those risks of effort. While we cannot precisely that are not known to have effects on Species Needs determine population abundance at the Central Texas mussel populations, such Occupied Stream Length: Most sites using these numbers, we are able as disease, are not discussed here but freshwater mussels, including the to determine if the species is dominant are evaluated in the SSA report. Many Central Texas mussel species, are found at the site or rare and examine this over of the threats and risk factors are the in aggregations, called mussel beds, that time if those data are available. same or similar for each of the six vary in size from about 50 to >5,000 Reproduction: Resilient Central Texas species. Where the effects are expected square meters (m2), separated by stream mussel populations must also be to be similar, we present one discussion reaches in which mussels are absent or reproducing and recruiting young that applies to all six species. Where the rare (Vaughn 2012, p. 2). We define a individuals into the population. effects may be unique or different to one mussel population at a larger scale than Population size and abundance reflects species, we will address that a single mussel bed; it is the collection previous influences on the population specifically. The primary risk factors of mussel beds within a stream reach and habitat, while reproduction and (i.e., threats) affecting the status of the between which infested host fish may recruitment reflect population trends Central Texas mussels are: (1) Increased travel, allowing for ebbs and flows in that may be stable, increasing, or fine sediment (Factor A from the Act), mussel bed density and abundance over decreasing over time. For example, a (2) changes in water quality (Factor A), time throughout the entirety of the large, dense mussel population that (3) altered hydrology in the form of population’s occupied reach. Therefore, contains mostly old individuals is not inundation (Factor A), (4) altered resilient mussel populations must likely to remain large and dense into the hydrology in the form of loss of flow occupy stream reaches long enough future, as there are few young and scour of substrate (Factor A), (5) such that stochastic events that affect individuals to sustain the population predation and collection (Factor C), and individual mussel beds do not eliminate over time (i.e., death rates exceed birth (6) barriers to fish movement (Factor E). the entire population. Repopulation by rates and subsequent recruitment of These factors are all exacerbated by the infested fish from other mussel beds reproductive adults resulting in negative ongoing and expected effects of climate within the reach can allow the population growth). Conversely, a change. Finally, we also reviewed the population to recover from these events. population that is less dense but has conservation efforts being undertaken We consider populations extending many young and/or gravid individuals for the species. more than 50 miles (80 kilometers (km)) may likely grow to a higher density in to be highly resilient to stochastic the future (i.e., birth rates and Increased Fine Sediment events because a single event is unlikely subsequent recruitment of reproductive Juvenile and adult Central Texas to affect the entire population. adults exceeds death rates resulting in mussels inhabit microsites that have Populations occupying reaches between positive population growth). Detection abundant interstitial spaces, or small 20 and 49 river miles (32–79 km) have rates of very young juvenile mussels openings in an otherwise closed matrix some resiliency to stochastic events, and during routine abundance and of substrate, created by gravel, cobble, populations occupying reaches less than distribution surveys are extremely low boulders, bedrock crevices, tree roots, 20 miles (32 km) have little resiliency. due to sampling bias because sampling and other vegetation. Inhabited Note that, by definition, an extirpated or for these species involves tactile interstitial spaces have some amount of functionally extirpated population searches and mussels <35 mm are very fine sediment (i.e., clay and silt) occupies a stream length of difficult to detect (Strayer and Smith necessary to provide appropriate approximately (or approaching) zero 2003, pp. 47–48). shelter. However, excessive amounts of miles (0 km). Evidence of reproduction is fine sediments can reduce the number Abundance: Mussel abundance in a demonstrated by repeated captures of of appropriate microsites in an given stream reach is a product of the small-sized individuals (juveniles and otherwise suitable mussel bed by filling number of mussel beds and the density subadults near the low end of the in these interstitial spaces and can of mussels within those beds. For detectable range size ∼35 mm; Randklev smother mussels in place. All six populations of Central Texas mussel et al. 2013, p. 9) over time and by species of Central Texas mussels species to be healthy (i.e., resilient), observing gravid (with eggs in the generally require stable substrates, and there must be many mussel beds of marsupium, gills, or gill pouches) loose silt deposits do not generally sufficient density such that local females during the reproductively active provide for substrate stability that can stochastic events do not necessarily time of year. While small-sized mussels support mussels. Interstitial spaces eliminate the bed(s), allowing the and gravid females can be difficult to provide essential habitat for juvenile mussel bed and the overall local detect, it is important that surveyors mussels. Juvenile freshwater mussels population within a stream reach to attempt to detect them as reproduction burrow into interstitial substrates, recover from any single event. Mussel and subsequent recruitment are making them particularly susceptible to abundance is indicated by the number important demographic parameters that degradation of this habitat feature. of individuals found during a sampling affect growth rates in mussel When clogged with sand or silt, event; mussel surveys rarely represent a populations (Berg et al. 2008, pp. 396, interstitial flow may become reduced complete census of the population. 398–399; Matter et al. 2013, pp. 122– (Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 100), thus Instead, density is estimated by the 123, 134–135). reducing juvenile habitat availability number found during a survey event and quality. While adult mussels can be using various statistical techniques. Risk Factors for the Central Texas physically buried by excessive Because we do not have population Mussels sediment, ‘‘the main impacts of excess estimates for most populations of We reviewed the potential risk factors sedimentation on unionids (freshwater Central Texas mussels, nor are the (i.e., threats, stressors) that could be mussels) are often sublethal’’ and techniques directly comparable (i.e., affecting the six Central Texas mussels include interference with feeding same area size searched, similar search now and in the future. In this proposed mediated by valve closure (Brim Box

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47934 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

and Mossa 1999, p. 101). Many land use effects of development are long lasting waters that are polluted or otherwise activities can result in excessive and can result in hydrological impaired by contaminants. Freshwater erosion, sediment production, and alterations as increased impervious mussels are not generally found for channel instability, including, but not cover increases runoff and resulting many miles downstream of municipal limited to: logging, crop farming, shear stress causes streambank wastewater treatment plants (Gillis et al. ranching, mining, and urbanization instability and additional 2017, p. 460; Goudreau et al. 1993, p. (Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 102). sedimentation. 211; Horne and McIntosh 1979, p. 119). Under a natural flow regime, a All populations of Central Texas For example, transplanted common stream’s sediment load is in equilibrium mussels face the risk of fine sediment freshwater mussels (including such that as sediments are naturally accumulation to varying degrees. threeridge (Amblema plicata) and the moved downstream from one microsite Multiple populations of the six Central nonnative Asian clam (Corbicula to another, the amount of sediment in Texas mussel species are experiencing fluminea) showed reduced growth and the substrate is relatively stable, given increased sedimentation, including in survival below a wastewater treatment that different reaches within a river or particular the Clear Fork Brazos River plant (WWTP) outfall relative to sites stream may be aggrading (gaining) or (Texas fawnsfoot), middle and lower located upstream of the WWTP in degrading (losing) sediment (Poff et al. Brazos River (false spike and Texas Wilbarger Creek (a tributary to the 1997, pp. 770–772). Current and past fawnsfoot), and lower Colorado River Colorado River in Travis County, human activities result in enhanced (Texas pimpleback, Texas fawnsfoot). In Texas); water chemistry was altered by sedimentation in river systems, and the future, we expect sediment the wastewater flows at downstream legacy sediment, resulting from past deposition to continue to increase sites, with elevated constituents in the land disturbance and reservoir across the range of all six species due to water column that included copper, construction, continues to persist and low water levels and decreasing potassium, magnesium, and zinc influence river processes and sediment frequency of cleansing flows at all (Duncan and Nobles 2012, p. 8; Nobles dynamics (Wohl 2015, p. 31) and these populations and for longer periods due and Zhang 2015, p. 11). Contaminants legacy effects can degrade mussel to climate change and additional human released during hazardous spills are also habitats. Fine sediments collect on the development in the watershed. of concern. Although spills are streambed and in crevices during low Changes in Water Quality relatively short-term localized events, flow events, and much of the sediment depending on the types of substances is washed downstream during high flow Freshwater mussels and their host and volume released, water resources events (also known as cleansing flows) fish require water in sufficient quantity nearby can be severely impacted and and deposited elsewhere. However, and quality on a consistent basis to degraded for years following an increased frequency of low flow events complete their life cycles. Urban growth incident. (from groundwater extraction, instream and other anthropogenic activities Ammonia is of particular concern surface flow diversions, and drought) across Texas are placing increased below wastewater treatment plants combined with a decrease in cleansing demands on limited freshwater because freshwater mussels are flows (from reservoir management and resources that, in turn, can have particularly sensitive to increased drought) causes sediment to deleterious effects on water quality. ammonia levels (Augspurger et al. 2003, accumulate. Sediments deposited by Water quality can be degraded through p. 2569). Elevated concentrations of un- large-scale flooding or other disturbance contamination or alteration of water ionized ammonia (NH3) in the may persist for several years until chemistry. Chemical contaminants are interstitial spaces of benthic habitats adequate cleansing flows can ubiquitous throughout the environment (>0.2 parts per billion) have been redistribute that sediment downstream. and are a major reason for the current implicated in the reproductive failure of When water velocity decreases, which declining status of freshwater mussel other freshwater mussel populations can occur from reduced streamflow or species nationwide (Augspurger et al. (Strayer and Malcom 2012, pp. 1787– inundation, water loses its ability to 2007, p. 2025). Immature mussels (i.e., 1788), and sublethal effects (valve carry sediment in suspension, and juveniles and glochidia) are especially closures) have recently been described sediment falls to the substrate, sensitive to water quality degradation as total ammonia nitrogen approaches eventually smothering mussels not and contaminants (Cope et al. 2008, 2.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L = ppm; adapted to soft substrates (Watters 2000, p. 456, Wang et al. 2017, pp. 791–792; Bonner et al. 2018, p. 186). Immature p. 263). Sediment accumulation can be Wang et al. 2018, p. 3041). mussels (i.e., juveniles and glochidia) exacerbated when there is a Chemicals enter the environment are especially sensitive to water quality simultaneous increase in the sources of through both point and nonpoint source degradation and contaminants, fine sediments in a watershed. discharges, including hazardous spills, including ammonia (Wang et al. 2007, In the range of the Central Texas industrial wastewater, municipal p. 2055). For smooth pimpleback mussels, these sources include effluents, and agricultural runoff. These (Cyclonaias houstonensis, a species streambank erosion from development, sources contribute organic compounds, native to central Texas but not included agricultural activities, livestock and trace metals, pesticides, and a wide in this listing), the revised EPA wildlife grazing and browsing, in- variety of newly emerging contaminants ammonia benchmarks are sufficient to channel disturbances, roads, and (e.g., pharmaceuticals) that comprise protect from short term effects of crossings, among others (Poff et al. some 85,000 chemicals in commerce ammonia on the species’ physiological 1997, p. 773). In areas with ongoing today that are released to the aquatic processes (Bonner et al. 2018, p. 151). development, runoff can transport environment (Environmental Protection However, the long-term effects of substantial amounts of sediment from Agency (EPA) 2018, p. 1). The extent to chronic exposure (i.e., years or decades) ground disturbance related to which environmental contaminants to freshwater mussels has yet to be construction activities with inadequate adversely affect aquatic biota can vary experimentally investigated. or absent sedimentation controls. While depending on many variables such as Municipal wastewater contains both these construction impacts can be concentration, volume, and timing of ionized and un-ionized ammonia, and transient (lasting only during the the release. Species diversity and wastewater discharge permits issued by construction phase), the long-term abundance consistently ranks lower in Texas Commission on Environmental

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47935

Quality (TCEQ) do not always impose and survival of freshwater mussels than 11 °Celsius (C) or 52 °F (F)) stunts limits on ammonia, particularly for (Blakeslee et al. 2013, p. 2853). Bonner mussel growth and delays or hinders smaller volume dischargers. Therefore, et al. (2018, pp. 155–156) suggest that spawning. The Central Texas mussels at a minimum, concentrations of the behavioral response of valve closure do not tolerate inundation under large ammonia are likely to be elevated in the to high salinity concentrations (>2 ppt) reservoirs. Further, deep-water immediate mixing zone of some WWTP is the likely mechanism for reduced reservoirs with bottom release (like outfalls. To give some insight into the metabolic rates, reduced feeding, and Canyon Reservoir) can affect water potential scope of WWTP related reduced reproductive success based on temperatures several miles downriver. impacts, approximately 480 discharge reported sublethal effects of salinity >2 The water temperature remains below permits are issued for the Brazos River ppt for Texas pimpleback. 21.1 °C for the first 3.9 miles (6.3 km) watershed alone from its headwaters Water quality and quantity are of the 13.8-mile (22.2-km) Canyon above Possum Kingdom Lake down to interdependent, so reductions in surface Reservoir tailrace (Texas Parks and the Gulf of Mexico (TCEQ 2018c, flow from drought, instream diversion, Wildlife Department (TPWD) 2007c, p. entire). In addition, some industrial and groundwater extraction serve to ii), cold enough to support a permits, such as animal processing concentrate contaminants by reducing recreational non-native rainbow and facilities, have ammonia limits in the flows that would otherwise dilute point brown trout fishery. range of 3 to 4 mg/L or higher, which and non-point source pollution. For The construction of dams, inundation exceeds levels that inhibited growth in example, salinity inherently poses a of reservoirs, and management of water juvenile fatmucket (Lampsilis greater risk to aquatic biota under low releases have significant effects on the siliquoidea) and rainbow mussel flow conditions as salinity natural hydrology of a river or stream. (Villosa iris) (Wang et al. 2007, entire). concentrations and water temperatures For example, dams trap sediment in Similar to the Brazos River, WWTP increase. Drought conditions can place reservoirs, and managed releases outfalls are numerous throughout the additional stressors on stream systems typically do not conform to the natural ranges of the Central Texas mussels. beyond reduced flow by exacerbating flow regime (i.e., higher baseflows, and contaminant-related effects to aquatic peak flows of reduced intensity but An additional type of water quality biota, including Central Texas mussels. longer duration). Rivers transport not degradation that affects the Central Not only can temperature be a only water but also sediment, which is Texas mussels is alteration of water biological, physical, and chemical transported mostly as suspended load quality parameters such as dissolved stressor, the toxicity of many pollutants (held by the water column), and most oxygen, temperature, and salinity levels. to aquatic organisms increases at higher sediment transport occurs during floods Dissolved oxygen levels may be reduced temperatures (e.g., ammonia, mercury). as sediment transport increases as a from increased nutrient inputs or other We foresee threats to water quality power function (greater than linear) of sources of organic matter that increase increasing into the future as demand flow (Kondolf 1997, p. 533). It follows the biochemical oxygen demand in the and competition for limited water that increased severity of flooding water column as microorganisms resources grows. would result in greater sediment decompose waste. Organic waste can transport, with important effects on Altered Hydrology—Inundation originate from storm water or irrigation substrate stability and benthic habitats runoff or wastewater effluent, and Central Texas mussels are adapted to for freshwater mussels and other juvenile mussels seem to be particularly flowing water (lotic habitats) rather than organisms dependent on stable benthic sensitive to low dissolved oxygen (with standing water (lentic habitats) and habitats. Further, water released by sublethal effects evident at 2 ppm and require free-flowing water to survive. dams is usually clear and does not carry lethal effects evident at 1.3 ppm; Sparks Low flow events (including stream a sediment load and is considered and Strayer 1998, pp. 132–133). drying) and inundation can eliminate ‘‘hungry water because the excess ° Increased water temperature (over 30 C habitat appropriate for Central Texas energy is typically expended on erosion ° and approaching 40 C) from climate mussels, and while these species can of the channel bed and banks . . . change and from low flows during survive these events for a short resulting in incision (downcutting of the drought can exacerbate low dissolved duration, populations that experience bed) and coarsening of the bed material oxygen levels in addition to other prolonged drying events or repeated until a new equilibrium is reached’’ drought-related effects on both juvenile drying events will not persist over time. (Kondolf 1997, p. 535). Conversely, and adult mussels (Sparks and Strayer Inundation has primarily occurred depending on how dam releases are 1998, pp. 132–133). Finally, high upstream of dams, both large (such as conducted, reduced flood peaks can salinity concentrations are an additional the Highland Lakes on the Colorado lead to accumulations of fine sediment concern in certain watersheds, where River and other major flood control and in the river bed (i.e., loss of flushing dissolved salts can be particularly water supply reservoirs) and small (low flows, Kondolf 1997, pp. 535, 548). limiting to Central Texas mussels. water crossings and diversion dams Operation of flood-control, water- Upper portions of the Brazos and typical of the tributaries and occurring supply, and recreation reservoirs results Colorado Rivers, originating from the usually on privately owned lands in altered hydrologic regimes, including Texas High Plains, contain saline water, throughout Central Texas). Inundation an attenuation of both high- and low- sourced from both natural geological causes an increase in sediment flow events. Flood-control dams store formations, and from oil and gas deposition, eliminating the crevices that floodwaters and then release them in a development. Salinity in river water is many Central Texas mussel species controlled manner; this extended diluted by surface flow and as surface inhabit. Inundation also includes the release of flood waters can result in flow decreases salt concentrations effects of reservoir releases where significant scour and loss of substrates increase, resulting in adverse effects to frequent variation in surface water that provide mussel habitat. Along with freshwater mussels. Even low levels of elevation acts to make habitats this change in the flow of water, salinity (2–4 parts per thousand (ppt)) unsuitable for Central Texas mussels. In sediment dynamics are affected as have been demonstrated to have large reservoirs, deep water is very cold sediment is trapped above and scoured substantial negative effects on and often devoid of oxygen and below major impoundments. These reproductive success, metabolic rates, necessary nutrients. Cold water (less changes in water and sediment transport

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47936 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

have negatively affected freshwater in combination with hydrological appear to have higher baseflows due to mussels and their habitats. alterations, threatens population water supply operations in the upper There are numerous dams throughout persistence. basin that deliver to downstream users the range of Central Texas mussels. Droughts that have occurred in the (USGS 2008b, pp. 754, 766, 776; BRA There are now 27 major reservoirs in the recent past have led to extremely low 2018e, p. 6). Lake Limestone releases Brazos River basin (16 have >50,000 flows in several Central Texas rivers. also appear to be contributing to higher acre-feet of storage) (Brazos River and Many of these rivers have some base flows in the Lower Brazos (BRA Associated Bay Estuary System Basin resiliency to drought because they are 2018e, p. 6). Flows have declined in the and Bay Expert Science Team (BBEST) spring-fed (Colorado River tributaries, upper Guadalupe River (USGS 2008b, 2012, p. 33); 31 major reservoirs in the Guadalupe River), are very large (lower pp. 992, 994, 1000, 1018) but appear Colorado River basin, including the Brazos and Colorado Rivers), or have relatively unchanged at Comfort and Highland Lakes (Texas Water significant return flows (Trinity River), Spring Branch and in the San Marcos Development Board (TWDB) 2018d, p. but drought in combination with River (USGS 2008b, pp. 1004, 1006, 1); 9 major reservoirs on the Guadalupe increased groundwater pumping may 1022), and in the lower Guadalupe River River (BBEST 2011b, p. 2.2); and 31 lead to lower river flows of longer (USGS 2008b, pp. 1036, 1040). In the major reservoirs in the Trinity River duration than have been recorded in the lower sections of the Colorado River, basin (BBEST 2009, p. 10). These past. Reservoir releases can be managed lower flows and reduced high flow reservoirs, subsequent inundation, and to some extent during drought events are more common now decades resulting fragmentation of mussel conditions to prevent complete after major reservoirs were constructed populations has been the primary driver dewatering below many major (USGS 2008b, pp. 964, 966). In the of the current distribution of the Central reservoirs. During the months of July Trinity River, low flows are higher Texas mussels. Additional reservoirs are and August 2018, the Clear Fork Brazos, (elevated baseflows) than they were in planned for the future, including the Concho, San Saba, Llano, Pedernales, the past (USGS 2008b, pp. 370, 398, Cedar Ridge Reservoir, proposed by the and upper Colorado and upper 400, 430) because of substantial return City of Abilene on the Clear Fork of the Guadalupe Rivers all had very low flows flows from Dallas area wastewater Brazos River near the town of Lueders, (U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2019). treatment plants. Texas (83 FR 16061), and more than one Streamflow in the Colorado River Many of the tributary streams (i.e., reservoir is proposed to be built off the above the Highland Lakes and Concho, San Saba, Llano, and main channel of the Lower Colorado downstream of the confluence with Pedernales Rivers) historically received River in Wharton and Colorado Concho River has been declining since significant groundwater inputs from Counties, Texas (Lower Colorado River the 1960s as evidenced by annual daily multiple springs associated with the Authority (LCRA) 2018c, p. 1). The mean streamflow (USGS 2008b, pp. 812, Edwards and other aquifers. As spring Allens Creek Reservoir is proposed for 814, 848, 870, 878, 880), and overall flows decline due to drought or construction on Allens Creek near the river discharge for each of the rivers can groundwater lowering from pumping, City of Wallis, to provide water supply be expected to continue to decline due habitat for Central Texas mussels in the and storage for the City of Houston to increased drought as a result of tributary streams is reduced and could (Brazos River Authority (BRA) 2018b, p. climate change, absent significant return eventually cease to exist (Randklev et al. 1). Water that is planned to be pumped flows. There are a few exceptions 2018, pp. 13–14). While Central Texas from the Brazos River during high flows including the Llano River at Llano mussels may survive short periods of will be stored and released back into the (USGS 2008b, p. 892), Pedernales River low flow, as low flows persist, mussels river to meet downstream needs during at Fredericksburg (USGS 2008b, p. 896), face oxygen deprivation, increased periods of low flow. Onion Creek near Driftwood, and Onion water temperature, increased predation Creek at Highway 183 (flows appear to risk, and ultimately stranding, all Altered Hydrology—Flow Loss and become more erratic, characteristic of a reducing survivorship, reproduction, Scour developing watershed; USGS 2008b, pp. and recruitment in the population. Extreme water levels—both low flows 930, 946). In the San Saba River, Low-flow events lead to increased risk and high flows—threaten population continuing or increasing surface and of desiccation (physical stranding and persistence of the Central Texas alluvial aquifer groundwater drying) and exposure to elevated water mussels. The effects of population withdrawals in combination with temperature and other water quality losses associated with excessively low drought is likely to result in reduced degradations, such as contaminants, as flows are compounded by population streamflow, affecting mussels in the well as to predation. For example, losses associated with excessively high future (Randklev et al. 2017c, pp. 10– sections of the San Saba River, flows. Whereas persistent low flow 11). downstream of Menard, Texas, during times of drought results in Flows have declined due to drought experienced very low flows during the drying of mussel habitats and in the Brazos River in recent years summer of 2015, which led to desiccation of exposed mussels, rapid upstream of Lake Whitney (USGS dewatering of occupied habitats as increases in flows associated with large- 2008b, pp. 578, 600, 626, 638; BRA evidenced by observations of recent scale rain events and subsequent 2018e, p. 6), although baseflows are dead shell material of Texas pimpleback flooding results in scour of the maintained somewhat due to releases and Texas fatmucket (TPWD 2015, pp. streambed and physical displacement of from Lake Granbury and other reservoirs 2–3; described in detail by Randklev et mussels and appropriate substrates. in the upper basin (USGS 2008b, p. 644; al. 2018, entire). Several USGS stream Appropriately-sized substrates are BRA 2018e, p. 6). In the middle Brazos, gauges reported very low flows during moved during scouring high flow events U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) the 2017–2018 water year, including: and mussels are transported dams have reduced the magnitude of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, Elm downstream to inappropriate sites or are floods on the mainstem of the Brazos Creek, Concho River at Paint Rock, San buried by inappropriately sized River downstream of Lake Whitney Saba River, Colorado River at San Saba, materials. The Central Texas mussels (USGS 2008b, pp. 652, 676 766, 776; Llano River, Pedernales River, and are experiencing a repeating cycle of BRA 2018e, p. 6), while flows in the upper Guadalupe River (USGS 2018a, alternating droughts and flooding that, lower Brazos and Navasota Rivers entire). Service, TPWD, and Texas

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47937

Department of Transportation (TxDOT) 8, 2018), and extreme high flows leading However, during periods of low flow, biologists noted in 2017 that at one site to severe flooding, which resulted in terrestrial predators and wading birds on the Brazos River near Highbank, substantial scour of streambed and have increased access to portions of the Texas, the presence of 42 dead to fresh riparian area habitats (278,000 cfs on river that are otherwise too deep under dead (with tissue intact) Texas October 16, 2018) (Llano River normal flow conditions. High levels of fawnsfoot that likely died as a result of Watershed Alliance (LRWA) 2019, predation during drought have been recent drought or scouring events entire). Prolonged drought followed by observed on the Llano and San Saba (Tidwell 2017, entire). severe flooding can result in failure and Rivers. As drought and low flow are High flow events lead to increased collapse of river banks and subsequent predicted to occur more often and for risk of physical removal, transport, and sedimentation, as demonstrated by longer periods due to the effects of burial (entrainment) of mussels as slumping and undercutting on the lower future climate change, the Hill Country unstable substrates are transported Guadalupe River near Cuero, Texas, in tributaries (of the Colorado River) in downstream by floodwaters and later 2015 (Giardino and Rowley 2016, pp. particular are expected to experience redeposited in locations that may not be 70–72), which is occupied by the false additional predation pressure into the suitable. A site in the lower Colorado spike and Guadalupe orb. The usual future, and this may become especially River near Altair, Texas, suffered drought/flood cycle in Central Texas problematic in the Llano and San Saba significant changes in both mussel can be characterized by long periods of Rivers. Predation is expected to be less community structure and bathymetry time absent of rain interrupted by short of a problem for the lower portions of (measurement of water depths) during periods of heavy rain, resulting in often the mainstem river populations because extensive flooding (and resulting high severe flooding. These same patterns led the rivers are significantly larger than flows) in August 2017, as a result of to the development of flood control and the tributary streams and Central Texas Hurricane Harvey (Bonner et al. 2018, p. storage reservoirs throughout Texas in mussels are less likely to be found by 266). This site previously held the the twentieth century. It follows that, predators in exposed or very shallow highest mussel abundance (Bonner et al. given the extreme and variable climate habitats. 2018, pp. 242–243) and represented of Central Texas, mussels must have Certain mussel beds within some high-quality habitat within the Colorado life-history strategies and other populations, due to ease of access, are River basin, prior to the flooding events. adaptations that allow them to persist vulnerable to overcollection and Mussel abundance significantly by withstanding severe conditions and vandalism. These areas, primarily on decreased by nearly two orders of repopulating during more favorable the Llano and San Saba Rivers, have magnitude (Bonner et al. 2018, p. 266). conditions. However, it is also likely well-known and well-documented This location had two of the Central that there is a limit to how the mussels mussel beds that have been sampled Texas mussel species (Texas fawnsfoot might respond to increasing variability, repeatedly over the past few years by and Texas pimpleback) present during frequency, and severity of extreme multiple researchers and others for a initial surveys in 2017 (Bonner et al. weather events, combined with habitat variety of projects. Given the additional 2018, p. 242). Widespread flooding was fragmentation and population isolation. stressors aforementioned in this section, reported in the Colorado and Guadalupe Sediment deposition may arise from these populations are being put at River basins of Central Texas in October human activities, as well. Sand and additional risk due to over-collection 2018. gravel can be mined from rivers or from and over-harvest for scientific needs. The distribution of mussel beds and adjacent alluvial deposits, and instream Barriers to Fish Movement their habitats is affected by large floods gravels often require less processing and returning at least once during the are thus more attractive from a business Central Texas mussels historically typical life span of an individual mussel perspective (Kondolf 1997, p. 541). colonized new areas through movement (generally from 3 to 30 years). The Instream mining directly affects river of infested host fish, as newly presence of flow refuges mediates the habitats, and can indirectly affect river metamorphosed juveniles would excyst effects of these floods, as shear stress is habitats through channel incision, bed from host fish in new locations. Today, relatively low in flow refuges and where coarsening, and lateral channel the remaining Central Texas mussel sediments are relatively stable, and instability (Kondolf 1997, p. 541). populations are significantly isolated individual mussels ‘‘must either tolerate Excavation of pits in or near to the due to habitat fragmentation by major high-frequency disturbances or be channel can create a nickpoint, which reservoirs such that recolonization of eliminated, and can colonize areas that can contribute to erosion (and areas previously extirpated is extremely are infrequently disturbed between mobilization of substrate) associated unlikely, if not impossible, due to events’’ (Strayer 1999, pp. 468–469). with head cutting (Kondolf 1997, p. existing dams creating permanent Shear stress and relative substrate 541). Off-channel mining of floodplain barriers to host fish movement. There is stability are limiting to mussel pits can become involved during floods, currently no opportunity for interaction abundance and species richness such that the pits become hydrologically among any of the extant Central Texas (Randklev et al. 2017a, p. 7), and riffle connected and thus can affect sediment mussel populations, as they are isolated habitats may be more resilient to high dynamics in the stream (Kondolf 1997, from one another by major reservoirs. flow events than littoral (bank) habitats. p. 545). The overall distribution of mussels is, The Central Texas mussels have in part, a function of host fish dispersal historically been, and currently remain, Predation and Collection (Smith 1985, p. 105). There is limited exposed to extreme hydrological Predation on freshwater mussels is a potential for immigration and conditions, including severe drought natural phenomenon. Raccoons, emigration between populations other leading to dewatering, and heavy rains muskrats, snapping turtles, wading than through the movement of infected leading to damaging scour events with birds, and fish are known to prey upon host fish between mussel populations. movement of mussels and substrate (i.e., Central Texas mussels. Under natural Small populations are more affected by ‘‘flash flooding’’). For example, in 2018, conditions, the level of predation this limited immigration potential over the span of 69 days, the Llano occurring within Central Texas mussel because they are susceptible to genetic River near Llano, Texas, experienced populations is not likely to pose a drift, resulting from random loss of extreme low flows (0.08 cfs on August significant risk to any given population. genetic diversity, and inbreeding

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47938 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

depression. At the species level, isolated having fewer species of freshwater of silt and debris to Lake Travis, so populations that are eliminated due to mussels. As such, it is likely that the much so that the City of Austin’s ability stochastic events cannot be recolonized Central Texas mussels may be to treat raw water was affected and the naturally due to barriers to host fish particularly vulnerable to future climate City issued a boil water notice and call movement, leading to reduced overall changes in combination with current for water conservation (City of Austin redundancy and representation. and future stressors (Burlakova et al. 2018c, p. 3) Many of the Central Texas mussels’ 2011a, pp. 156, 161, 163; Burlakova et In the analysis of the future condition known or assumed primary host fish al. 2011b, pp. 395, 403). of the Central Texas mussels, we species are known to be common, While projected changes to rainfall in considered climate change to be an widespread species in the Central Texas Texas are small (U.S. Global Change exacerbating factor, contributing to the river basins. We know that populations Research Program (USGCRP) 2017, p. increase of fine sediments, changes in of mussels and their host fish have 217), higher temperatures caused by water quality, loss of flowing water, and become fragmented and isolated over anthropogenic factors lead to increased predation. Due to the effects of ongoing time following the construction of major soil water deficits because of higher climate change (represented by dams and reservoirs throughout Central rates of evapotranspiration. This is representative concentration pathway Texas. We do not currently have likely to result in increasing drought (RCP) 4.5), we expect the frequency and information demonstrating that the severity in future climate scenarios just duration of cleansing flows to decrease, distribution of host fish is a factor as ‘‘extreme precipitation, one of the leading to the increase in fine sediments currently limiting Central Texas mussels controlling factors in flood statistics, is at all populations. Many populations distribution. However, a recent study observed to have generally increased will experience increased frequency of suggested that the currently restricted and is projected to continue to do so low flows. More extreme climate change distribution of false spike, Guadalupe across the United States in a warming projections (RCP 8.5 and beyond) lead orb, and other related species could be atmosphere’’ (USGCRP 2017, p. 231). to further increases in fine sediment related to declining abundance of their Even if precipitation and groundwater within the populations. Similarly, as host fish, particularly those fish having recharge remain at current levels, lower water levels concentrate small home ranges and specialized increased groundwater pumping and contaminants and cause unsuitable habitat affinities (Dudding et al. 2019, resultant aquifer shortages due to temperature and dissolved oxygen entire). Further research into the increased temperatures are nearly levels, we expect water quality to relationships between each of the certain (Loaiciga et al. 2000, p. 193; decline to some degree in the future. Central Texas mussel species and their Mace and Wade 2008, pp. 662, 664–665; The SSA report includes a detailed host fish is needed to more fully Taylor et al. 2013, p. 325). Higher analysis of the species’ responses to examine the possible role of declining temperatures are also expected to lead both RCP 4.5 and 8.5. host fish abundance in declining mussel to increased evaporative losses from populations. reservoirs, which could negatively affect Conservation Actions and Regulatory downstream releases and flows Effects of Climate Change Mechanisms (Friedrich et al. 2018, p. 167). Effects of Climate change has been documented climate change, such as air temperature Since 2011, when three of the Central to have already taken place, and increases and an increase in drought Texas mussel species became continued greenhouse gas emissions at frequency and intensity, have been candidates for listing under the or above current rates will cause further shown to be occurring throughout the Endangered Species Act, many agencies, warming (Intergovernmental Panel on range of Central Texas mussels non-governmental organizations, and Climate Change (IPCC) 2013, pp. 11–12). (USGCRP 2017, p. 188; Andreadis and other interested parties have been Warming in Texas is expected to be Lettenmaier 2006, p. 3), and these working to develop voluntary greatest in the summer (Maloney et al. effects are expected to exacerbate agreements with private landowners to 2014, p. 2236). The number of extremely several of the stressors discussed above, restore or enhance habitats for fish and hot days (high temperatures exceeding such as water temperature and flow loss wildlife in the region, including in the 95 °F) is expected to double by around (Wuebbles et al. 2013, p. 16). watersheds where Central Texas 2050 (Kinniburgh et al. 2015, p. 83). A recent review of future climate mussels occur. These agreements Western Texas, including portions of projections for Texas concludes that provide voluntary conservation the ranges of the Central Texas mussels, both droughts and floods could become including upland habitat enhancements is an area expected to show greater more common in Central Texas and that will, if executed properly, reduce responsiveness to the effects of climate projects that years like 2011 (the threats to the species while improving change (Diffenbaugh et al. 2008, p. 3). warmest on record) could be in-stream physical habitat and water Changes in stream temperatures are commonplace by the year 2100 (Mullens quality, as well as adjacent riparian and expected to reflect changes in air and McPherson 2017, pp. 3, 6). This upland habitats. Additionally, as many temperature, at a rate of approximately trend toward more frequent drought is as three river authorities are developing 0.6–0.8 °C increase in stream water attributed to increases in hot (or have already developed) temperature for every 1 °C increase in temperatures, and the number of days at conservation plans that may lead to air temperature (Morrill et al. 2005, pp. or above 100 °F are projected to candidate conservation agreements with 1–2, 15) and with implications for ‘‘increase in both consecutive events assurances to benefit one or more temperature-dependent water quality and the total number of days’’ (Mullens species of candidate mussels (including parameters such as dissolved oxygen and McPherson 2017, pp. 14–15). the Central Texas mussels) in their and ammonia toxicity. The Central Similarly, floods are projected to basins. Because these plans and Texas mussels exist at or near a climate become more common and severe agreements are not yet fully drafted and and habitat gradient in North America, because of increases in the magnitude of implemented, we are not considering with the eastern United States having extreme precipitation (Mullens and the conservation actions in our more rainfall and higher freshwater McPherson 2017, p. 20). Recent evaluation of the status of the Central mussel diversity, and the western ‘‘historic’’ flooding of the Llano River Texas mussels; however, we will United States receiving less rainfall and resulted in the transport of high levels evaluate any new information on these

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47939

actions prior to making our final listing percent, and unhealthy populations except for, and due to a change in the determination for these species. having the lowest probability of underlying geology, a reach that loses Some publicly and privately owned persistence (between 10 and 60 flow to the aquifer (called a losing lands in the watersheds occupied by percent). Functionally extirpated reach) near the Menard/Mason County Central Texas mussels are protected populations are not expected to persist line (LBG-Guyton 2002, p. 3). It is in with conservation easements or are over 20 years or are already extirpated. this losing reach where drought effects otherwise managed to support are especially noticeable, as some flows Guadalupe Fatmucket populations of native fish, wildlife, and may percolate downward to the aquifer. plant populations. The Natural Overall, there is one known remaining Much of the middle San Saba River Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), population of Guadalupe fatmucket, in below Menard is reported to have gone along with the Service and State and the Guadalupe River. Historically, dry for 10 of the last 16 years by local partners, are working with private Guadalupe fatmucket likely occurred landowners downstream of Menard landowners to develop and implement through the Guadalupe River basin, but (Carollo Engineers 2015, p. 2). comprehensive conservation plans to it currently only occurs in the upper Regardless of the cause, low flows in the address soil, water, and wildlife Guadalupe River in an unhealthy San Saba River have resulted in resource concerns in the lower Colorado population due to low abundance and significant stream drying, and stranded River basin through a Working Lands for little evidence of reproduction and Central Texas mussels have been Wildlife project (NRCS 2019a, entire). recruitment. Very few individuals have identified following dewatering as The Service has been hosting annual been found in recent years, and the recently as 2015 near and below the mussel research and coordination upper Guadalupe River in this reach losing reach (TPWD 2015, p. 3). During meetings to help manage and monitor already experiences very low water the 2011–2013 drought, stream flows in scientific collection of mussel levels. These low water events are the San Saba River were critically low, populations and encourage expected to continue into the future, such that several water rights in collaboration among researchers and and the population will be unlikely to Schleicher, Menard, and McCulloch other conservation partners since 2018 rebound from any degraded habitat Counties were suspended by the Texas (USFWS 2018, p. 1, USFWS 2019a, p. conditions. Commission on Environmental Quality 1). Additionally, work is under way to Texas Fatmucket (TCEQ). These very low flow events are evaluate methods of captive propagation expected to continue into the future and for the Central Texas mussel species at Overall, there are five known put the upper/middle San Saba River the Service’s hatchery and research remaining populations of Texas population of Texas fatmucket at risk of facilities (San Marcos Aquatic Research fatmucket, all limited to the headwater extirpation. Even if the locations of Center, Inks Dam National Fish reaches of the Colorado River and its Texas fatmucket do not become dry, Hatchery, and Uvalde National Fish tributaries (see figure 2, above). water quality degradation and increased Hatchery), including efforts to collect Historically, most Texas fatmucket sedimentation associated with low gravid females from the wild to infest populations were likely connected by flows is expected. host fish (Bonner et al. 2018, pp. 8, 9, fish migration throughout the Colorado Llano River: The Llano River 11). River basin, but due to impoundments population of Texas fatmucket is and low water conditions in the Species Condition currently moderately healthy, although Colorado River and tributaries they are there has been limited evidence that the Here we discuss the current condition currently isolated from one another, and population is successfully reproducing, of each known population, taking into repopulation of extirpated locations is and collection of the species is frequent account the risks to those populations unlikely to occur without human at this location. We expect flows to that are currently occurring, as well as assistance. Two of the current continue to decline and the frequency of management actions that are currently populations are moderately healthy, two extreme flow events to increase, leading occurring to address those risks. We are unhealthy, and one is functionally to increased sedimentation and consider climate change to be currently extirpated. decreased water quality, and scour, and occurring, resulting in changes to the Lower Elm Creek: The Elm Creek the population is expected to decline as timing and amount of rainfall affecting population of Texas fatmucket is a result. streamflow, increased stream extremely small and isolated. This Pedernales River: The population of temperatures, and increased population will continue to be Texas fatmucket in the Pedernales River accumulation of fine sediments. In the threatened by excessive sedimentation is very small and isolated. The SSA report, for each species and and deterioration of substrate, altered Pedernales River is a flashy system, population, we developed and assigned hydrology associated with which experiences extreme high flow condition categories for three anthropogenic activities and the effects events, especially in the lower reaches population and three habitat factors that of climate change, and water quality in the vicinity of Pedernales Falls State are important for viability of each degradation. The poor habitat Park and below. Occasional, intense species. The condition scores for each conditions and only a single individual thunderstorms can dramatically factor were then used to determine an found at this site more than a decade increase streamflow and mobilize large overall condition of each population: ago indicate a population that is amounts of silt and organic debris healthy, moderately healthy, unhealthy, unlikely to persist and may already be (LCRA 2017, p. 82). The continued or functionally extirpated. These overall extirpated. increasing frequency of high flow events conditions translate to our presumed Upper/Middle San Saba River: The combined with the very low abundances probability of persistence of each population of Texas fatmucket in the in the river result in a population that population, with healthy populations upper/middle San Saba River is is likely to be extirpated and currently having the highest probability of currently moderately healthy. Most of is unhealthy. persistence over 20 years (greater than the flows in the Upper San Saba River Onion Creek: Only a single live 90 percent), moderately healthy (in Menard County, Texas) are from individual of Texas fatmucket has been populations having a probability of Edwards Formation springs, where it found in Onion Creek since 2010, and persistence that falls between 60 and 90 gains streamflow from groundwater we consider this population to be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47940 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

functionally extirpated with little Brazos River is very small and isolated. flowing at reduced amounts that reduce chance of persistence. The upper This population likely experienced available habitat. Despite increasing reaches of Onion Creek frequently go extensive mortality associated with demands for municipal water, we dry, and several privately owned low- prolonged dewatering during the 2011– expect that the lower Colorado River head in-channel dams currently exist 2013 drought, combined with ambient will continue to provide water along upper and lower Onion Creek, water quality degradation associated associated with priority downstream which further provide barriers to fish with naturally occurring elevated agricultural and industrial water rights. passage and mussel dispersal, salinity levels from the upper reaches of Similar to the lower Brazos River preventing recolonization after low the river. This population is likely population, the Lower Colorado River is water events. Onion Creek is in close functionally extirpated, although more vulnerable to reduced flows and proximity to the City of Austin, and survey effort is needed to reach a associated habitat degradation, because continued development in the definitive conclusion. Further, the the Texas fawnsfoot occurs in bank watershed is expected to continue to proposed Cedar Ridge Reservoir, if habitats that are likely to become degrade habitat conditions. constructed, will likely result in exposed to desiccation, predation, and significant hydrologic alterations, all of increased water temperatures as river Texas Fawnsfoot which would not be expected to elevations decline while the river still There are seven remaining improve the overall condition of this flows in its main channel. Over time, we populations of Texas fawnsfoot, in the population of Texas fawnsfoot. expect flows in the lower Colorado Trinity, Brazos, and Colorado River Upper Brazos River: The population River to be reduced, negatively affecting basins. Historically, Texas fawnsfoot of Texas fawnsfoot in the Upper Brazos substrate quality and water quality occurred throughout each basin with River is characterized by low (through increased sediment load and populations connected by fish migration abundances and lack of reproduction, water temperature) such that within each basin, but due to and reduced flows associated with reproduction and abundance are impoundments and low water continued drought and upstream dam negatively affected, resulting in overall conditions, they are currently isolated operations. Further, water quality unhealthy population conditions. from one another, and repopulation of degradation associated with naturally extirpated locations is unlikely to occur occurring salinity is expected to Guadalupe Orb without human assistance. Four Texas continue. This population is at risk of There are two remaining populations fawnsfoot populations are moderately extirpation due to its small population of the Guadalupe orb, all in the healthy, and three are unhealthy. size and continued poor habitat Guadalupe River basin. Historically, East Fork Trinity River: The Texas conditions. Guadalupe orb likely occurred fawnsfoot population in the East Fork Middle/Lower Brazos River: The throughout the basin with populations Trinity River occupies a small stream population of Texas fawnsfoot in the connected by fish migration, but due to reach (12 mi (19 km)), making it middle and lower Brazos River occupies impoundments and low water especially vulnerable to a single a fairly long reach of river (346 mi (557 conditions, they are currently isolated stochastic event such as a spill or flood km)) and exhibits evidence of from one another, and repopulation of and changes to water quality. Further, reproduction. The lack of major extirpated locations is unlikely to occur no evidence of reproduction exists for impoundments and diversions in the without human assistance. Both of the this population. The population is Brazos River below Waco, Texas, Guadalupe orb populations are expected to decline as a result of the benefits this population through moderately healthy. lack of reproduction. This population is maintenance of a relatively natural Upper Guadalupe River: The small and isolated from the middle and hydrological regime. Even so, Texas Guadalupe orb population in the upper lower Trinity River population by fawnsfoot surveys have yet to yield the Guadalupe River occurs over unsuitable habitat affected primarily by species in numbers that would indicate approximately 95 river miles (153 river altered hydrology as flows from the a healthy population, and future habitat km), and water quantity and quality are Dallas-Fort Worth metro area are too degradation from reduced flows, in moderate condition. However, the flashy to provide suitable habitat for increased temperatures, and decreased population occurs in low numbers, and Texas fawnsfoot. Therefore, this water quality will likely reduce the there appears to be a lack of population is unhealthy. resiliency of this population. reproduction; this population is Middle Trinity River: Texas fawnsfoot Lower San Saba: Texas fawnsfoot in unhealthy and is expected to become in the Trinity River have experienced the lower San Saba River are found in functionally extirpated in the near improved water quality over the past 30 low abundance with little evidence of future. This stream reach is expected to years due to advancements in reproductive success and subsequent be sensitive to potential changes in wastewater treatment technology and recruitment of new individuals to the groundwater inputs to stream flow and facilities, and streamflows have been population. Habitat factors are currently thus is vulnerable to ongoing and future subsidized by return flows originating unhealthy overall, due primarily to hydrological alterations that reduce in part from other basins, although degraded substrate conditions caused, flows during critical conditions, water quality degradation and in part, by reductions in flowing water resulting in substrate quality sedimentation are still of concern. over time due to a combination of degradations as well as water quality Additionally, the middle Trinity River increased water withdrawals and degradation. is a relatively long and unobstructed drought. We expect this population to San Marcos/Lower Guadalupe Rivers: reach of river. While habitat may become functionally extirpated due to In the San Marcos and Lower decline, we expect the population of lack of water and degradation of Guadalupe River, the Guadalupe orb Texas fawnsfoot to persist in the middle substrate. population currently occupies a Trinity River, as we expect that flows Lower Colorado River: The Texas relatively long stream length, is will remain within a normal range of fawnsfoot population in the lower observed in relatively high abundances, environmental variation in this reach. Colorado River is expected to remain and exhibits evidence of reproduction. Clear Fork Brazos River: Texas extant under current conditions, as this Significant spring complexes contribute fawnsfoot in the Clear Fork of the reach is expected to remain wetted but substantially to baseflow during dry

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47941

periods in this system and are expected the upper and lower San Saba River concern that is mediated somewhat by to continue to contribute to baseflows populations, along with differences in the likelihood that enhanced return for the next 50 years due to conservation substrate, this population is isolated and flows associated with the development measures implemented by the Edwards no longer connected to the lower San and use of alternative water supplies Aquifer Habitat Conservation Plan Saba River population. will bolster base flows somewhat. The partners, bolstering the resiliency of this Llano River: The population of Texas small size of the population combined population. However, this population is pimpleback in the Llano River occupies with continued habitat degradation put subject to extreme high flow events that a very short stream length, which is this population at high risk of scour and mobilize the substrate, and negatively affected by substrate extirpation. water quality degradation and degradation during periods of low Lower San Saba River: The lower San sedimentation are threats, putting it at flows. This population, due to ease of Saba River population is currently small risk of decline. access to the location, is especially and isolated and therefore has low vulnerable to the threat of resiliency. The population has low Texas Pimpleback overcollection and vandalism. The abundance, and a lack of reproduction There are five remaining Texas small population size and frequency of and subsequent recruitment, and we pimpleback populations, all in the low water levels, and flooding with expect it to become functionally Colorado River basin. Historically, scour, cause this population to be extirpated in the next 10 years. Future Texas pimpleback likely occurred unhealthy. degradation of habitat factors is throughout the basin with populations Lower Colorado River: Currently, the expected as flows continue to be connected by fish migration, but due to population of Texas pimpleback in the diminished, most notably by altered impoundments and low water lower Colorado River is relatively precipitation patterns (that result in conditions, they are currently abundant over a long stream length. dewatering droughts and scouring fragmented and isolated from one However, because the species is a riffle floods) combined with enhanced another and repopulation of extirpated specialist, the Texas pimpleback is evaporative demands and anthropogenic locations is unlikely to occur without especially sensitive to hydrological withdrawals to support existing and human assistance. Three of the alterations leading to both extreme future demands for municipal and remaining Texas pimpleback drying (dewatering) during low flow agricultural water. populations are unhealthy and are not events, and to extreme high flow events Llano River: The Llano River reproducing, and two of the populations leading to scouring of substrate and population is currently very small and are moderately healthy. movement of mature individuals to sites isolated and therefore has low CONCHO RIVER: The Texas pimpleback that may or may not be appropriate (as resiliency. The population occupies an population in the Concho River is evidenced by the August 2017 scouring extremely small area, and degradation of limited by very low levels of flowing flood event that substantially degraded habitat is expected to continue as flows water (including periods of almost the quality of the Altair Riffle in the continue to decline due to altered complete dewatering), poor water lower Colorado River, a formerly robust precipitation patterns (dewatering quality, and poor substrate quality mussel bed). We expect this population droughts and scouring floods) combined associated with excessive to be at risk of extirpation due to these with enhanced evaporative demands sedimentation. The drought of 2011– extreme flow events. and anthropogenic withdrawals to 2013 resulted in extremely low flows in support existing and future demands for False Spike this river, and only one live adult has municipal and agricultural water. been found since that time. This Overall, there are four known Further, this population is well known population may currently be remaining populations of false spike and easy to access and therefore has functionally extirpated. (see figure 6, above), comprising less experienced high collection pressure in Middle Colorado/Lower San Saba than 10 percent of the species’ known recent years, and the population has not Rivers: The population of Texas historical range. Historically, most false shown recent evidence of reproduction. pimpleback in the middle Colorado and spike populations were likely connected Therefore, we expect the population to lower San Saba River is the largest by fish migration throughout each of the become extirpated. known. This population has relatively Brazos, Colorado, and Guadalupe river Lower Guadalupe River: The lower high abundance but little evidence of basins, but due to impoundments they Guadalupe River population of false reproduction, so we expect this are currently fragmented and isolated spike is the largest population of the population to decline as old individuals from one another and repopulation of species and the most resilient. This die and very few young individuals are extirpated locations is unlikely to occur population has fairly high abundance recruited into the reproducing without human assistance. Based on our over a long reach, and flow protections population. The combination of reduced analysis as described in the SSA Report, afforded by the Edwards Aquifer Habitat flows, degraded water quality, and one population is moderately healthy, Conservation Plan have contributed substrate degradation will reduce the and three are unhealthy. substantially to the resiliency of this resiliency of this population and may Little River and tributaries: The Little population by sustaining base flows cause it to become extirpated. River population is considered to have above critical levels. However, despite Upper San Saba River: Similar to low resiliency currently due to the small these base flow protections, this other populations of Texas pimpleback, size of the population. Development in population remains vulnerable to the population in the Upper San Saba the watershed has reduced water quality changes in water quality, sedimentation, River is currently unhealthy and does and substrate conditions currently, and and extreme high flow events, such as not appear to be reproducing. habitat factors are expected to continue from hurricanes or other strong storms, Regardless of the high risk of low water to decline because of alterations to flows which scour and deplete mussel beds levels, the very small population size and water quality associated primarily (Strayer 1999, pp. 468–469). Overall, and lack of reproduction will likely with increasing development in the this population is moderately healthy. result in the extirpation of this watershed as the Austin-Round Rock We note that, by using the SSA population. Because of the losing reach (Texas) metropolitan area continues to framework to guide our analysis of the near Hext, Texas, that serves to separate expand. Low water levels remain a scientific information documented in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47942 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

the SSA report, we have not only primary threats that caused these interact to diminish instream habitats, analyzed individual effects on the declines and pose a meaningful risk to and substrate-mobilizing and mussel- species, but we have also analyzed their the viability of the species. These scouring flood events have become more potential cumulative effects. We threats are primarily related to habitat extreme and perhaps more frequent. incorporate the cumulative effects into changes (Factor A from the Act): The Additionally, while host fish may still our SSA analysis when we characterize accumulation of fine sediments, altered be adequately represented in the current and future condition of the hydrology, and impairment of water contemporary fish assemblages, access species. Our assessment of the current quality, all of which are exacerbated by to fish hosts can be reduced during and future conditions encompasses and the effects of climate change. Predation critical reproductive times by barriers incorporates the threats individually and collection (Factor C) are also such as the many low-water crossings and cumulatively. Our current and affecting those populations already and low-head dams that now exist and future condition assessment is iterative experiencing low stream flow, and fragment the landscape. Diminished because it accumulates and evaluates barriers to fish movement (Factor E) access to host fish leads to reduced the effects of all the factors that may be limit dispersal and prevent reproductive success just as barriers to influencing the species, including recolonization after stochastic events. fish passage impede the movement of threats and conservation efforts. Because of historic and ongoing fish, and thus compromise the ability of Because the SSA framework considers habitat destruction and fragmentation, mussels to disperse and colonize new not just the presence of the factors, but remaining Central Texas mussel habitats following a disturbance to what degree they collectively populations are now fragmented and (Schwalb et al. 2013, p. 447). influence risk to the entire species, our isolated from one another, interrupting Populations of each of the six Central assessment integrates the cumulative the once functional metapopulation Texas mussels face risks from declining effects of the factors and replaces a dynamic that historically made mussel water quantity in both large and small standalone cumulative effects analysis. populations robust and very resilient to river segments. Low flows lead to change. The existing fragmented and dewatering of habitats and desiccation Determination of Status isolated mussel populations are largely of individuals, elevated water Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) in a state of chronic degradation due to temperatures, and other quality and its implementing regulations (50 a number of historical and ongoing degradations, as well as increased CFR part 424) set forth the procedures stressors affecting flows, water quality, exposure to predation. Future higher air for determining whether a species meets sedimentation, and substrate quality. temperatures, higher rates of the definition of ‘‘endangered species’’ Given the high risk of catastrophic evaporation and transpiration, and or ‘‘threatened species.’’ The Act defines events including droughts and floods, changing precipitation patterns are an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species both of which are exacerbated by expected in central Texas (Jiang and that is ‘‘in danger of extinction climate change, many Central Texas Yang 2012, pp. 234–239, 242). Future throughout all or a significant portion of mussel populations are at a high risk of climate changes are expected to lead to its range,’’ and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as extirpation. human responses, such as increased a species that is ‘‘likely to become an Beginning around the turn of the groundwater pumping and surface water endangered species within the twentieth century until 1970, over 100 diversions, associated with increasing foreseeable future throughout all or a major dams had been constructed, demands for and decreasing availability significant portion of its range.’’ The Act creating reservoirs across Texas, of freshwater resources in the State requires that we determine whether a including several reservoirs in the (reviewed in Banner et al. 2010, entire). species meets the definition of Brazos and Trinity basins, the chain of Finally, direct mortality due to ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened Highland Lakes on the Lower Colorado predation and collection further limits species’’ because of any of the following River, the Guadalupe Valley population sizes of those populations factors: (A) The present or threatened Hydroelectric Project, and the Canyon already experiencing the stressors destruction, modification, or Reservoir on the Guadalupe River discussed above. curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) (Dowell 1964, pp. 3–8). The inundation These threats, alone or in Overutilization for commercial, and subsequent altered hydrology and combination, are expected to cause the recreational, scientific, or educational sediment dynamics associated with extirpation of additional mussel purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) operation of these flood-control, populations, further reducing the The inadequacy of existing regulatory hydropower, and municipal water overall redundancy and representation mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or supply reservoirs have resulted in of each of the six species of Central manmade factors affecting its continued irreversible changes to the natural flow Texas mussels. Historically, each existence. regime of these rivers. These changes species, with a large range of have re-shaped and fragmented these interconnected populations (i.e., having Status Throughout All of Its Range aquatic ecosystems and fish and metapopulation dynamics), would have After evaluating threats to the six invertebrate communities, including been resilient to stochastic events such Central Texas mussel species and populations of the six species of Central as drought, excessive sedimentation, assessing the cumulative effect of the Texas mussels, which all depend on and scouring floods because even if threats under the section 4(a)(1) factors, natural river flows. some locations were extirpated by such we found that all six species of Central Water quality has benefited from events, they could be recolonized over Texas mussels have declined dramatically improved wastewater time by dispersal from nearby survivors significantly in overall distribution and treatment technology in recent years, and facilitated by movements by abundance. At present, most of the such that fish populations have ‘‘affiliate species’’ of host fish (Douda et known populations exist in very low rebounded but not completely recovered al. 2012, p. 536). This connectivity abundances and show limited evidence (Perkin and Bonner 2016, p. 97). across potential habitats would have of recruitment. Furthermore, existing However, water quality degradation made for highly resilient species overall, available habitats are reduced in quality continues to affect mussels and their as evidenced by the long and successful and quantity, relative to historical habitats, especially as low flow evolutionary history of freshwater conditions. Our analysis revealed five conditions and excessive sedimentation mussels as a taxonomic group, and in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47943

North America in particular. However, extinction. Our analysis of the species’ healthy. Loss of populations at high risk under present circumstances, current and future conditions shows of extirpation leads to low levels of restoration of that connectivity on a that the Texas fatmucket is in danger of redundancy and representation, and regional scale is not feasible. As a extinction throughout all of its range results in overall low viability. The consequence of these current due to the severity and immediacy of Guadalupe orb currently faces a high conditions, the viability of the six threats currently impacting the species. risk of extinction. Our analysis of the species of Central Texas mussels now species’ current and future conditions, Texas Fawnsfoot primarily depends on maintaining and as well as the conservation efforts improving the remaining isolated Seven populations of Texas fawnsfoot discussed above, show that the populations and potentially restoring remain. Four populations are Guadalupe orb is in danger of extinction new populations where feasible. moderately healthy, and three are throughout all of its range due to the unhealthy or are functionally extirpated. severity and immediacy of threats Guadalupe Fatmucket Currently, two of the moderately currently impacting the species. The Guadalupe fatmucket has only healthy populations are not subject to one remaining population, and very few flow declines similar to the remaining Texas Pimpleback individuals have been detected and populations of this species, due to Of the five remaining Texas reported in recent years. The upper increased flow returns in the Trinity pimpleback populations, three are Guadalupe River in this reach already River from wastewater treatment unhealthy and are not reproducing, and experiences very low water levels, facilities and a lack of impoundments two are moderately healthy. The putting this population at high risk of on the mainstem of the lower Brazos populations that are not reproducing are extirpation. The species has very low River. In the future, however, as extreme considered functionally extirpated, and viability, with a single population at flow events become more frequent as the two moderately healthy populations high risk of extirpation, and no rainfall patterns change, and increased are expected to continue to decline. The additional representation or urbanization results in reduced population in the middle Colorado and redundancy. Our analysis of the species’ groundwater levels, we expect even lower San Saba Rivers has very little current and future conditions, as well as these populations to be at an increased evidence of reproduction and is the conservation efforts discussed risk of extirpation. Within 25 to 50 therefore likely to decline due to a lack above, show that the Guadalupe years, even under the best conditions of young individuals joining the fatmucket is in danger of extinction and with additional conservation efforts population as the population ages. The throughout all of its range due to the undertaken, given the ongoing effects of lower Colorado River population has severity and immediacy of threats climate change and human activities on very recently experienced an extreme currently impacting the species. altered hydrology and habitat high flow event (i.e., associated with degradation, we expect only one Hurricane Harvey flooding in August Texas Fatmucket population to be in healthy condition, and September of 2017) that vastly Of the five remaining fragmented and one population to remain in moderately changed the substrate and mussel isolated populations of Texas fatmucket, healthy condition, four populations to composition of much of its length, two are small in abundance and be in unhealthy condition, and one putting this population at high risk of occupied stream length and have low to population to become functionally extirpation. The Texas pimpleback has no resiliency (unhealthy), and one extirpated. Given the likelihood of no healthy populations, and all population is functionally extirpated. increased climate and anthropogenic populations are expected to continue to The other two current populations are effects in the foreseeable future, as many decline. Loss of populations at high risk moderately healthy. The upper/middle as five populations are expected to of extirpation leads to low levels of San Saba and Llano River populations become functionally extirpated, leaving redundancy and representation. Overall, are larger, with increased abundance no more than three unhealthy these low levels of resiliency, and occupied stream length, but these populations remaining after 50 years. In redundancy, and representation result populations are vulnerable to stream the future, we anticipate that the Texas in the Texas pimpleback having low drying and overcollection. These very fawnsfoot will have reduced viability, viability, and the species currently faces low flow events are expected to with no highly resilient populations and a high risk of extinction. Our analysis of continue into the future, and both of limited representation and redundancy. the species’ current and future these populations of Texas fatmucket Thus, after assessing the best available conditions, as well as the conservation are at risk of extirpation. Even if the information, we determine that the efforts discussed above, show that the locations of Texas fatmucket do not Texas fawnsfoot is not currently in Texas pimpleback is in danger of become dry, water quality degradation danger of extinction but is likely to extinction throughout all of its range and increased sedimentation associated become in danger of extinction within due to the severity and immediacy of with low flows is expected. the foreseeable future throughout all of threats currently impacting the species. Additionally, the Llano River its range. population does not appear to be False Spike successfully reproducing, further Guadalupe Orb Of the four remaining fragmented and increasing the species’ risk of Only two fragmented and isolated isolated populations of false spike, three extirpation at this location. The Texas populations of Guadalupe orb remain, are small in abundance and occupied fatmucket has no populations that are and one of these populations is stream length, having low to no currently considered healthy. Loss of functionally extirpated. The San resiliency. The remaining lower populations at high risk of extirpation Marcos/Lower Guadalupe River Guadalupe River population is larger, leads to low levels of redundancy and population is more resilient but is at with increased abundance and occupied representation. Overall, these low levels risk of catastrophic events, such as stream length; however, the risk of of resiliency, redundancy, and hurricane flooding, that can scour and extreme high flow events in this reach representation result in the Texas reduce the abundance and distribution is high. Therefore, the false spike has no fatmucket having low viability, and the of this population. The Guadalupe orb populations that are currently species currently faces a high risk of has no populations that are considered considered healthy (i.e., highly

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47944 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

resilient). Loss of populations at high frequency of drought and extremely Significant Portion of its Range Policy risk of extirpation leads to low levels of high flow events, decreased water that provided the Services do not redundancy (few populations will quality, and decreased substrate undertake an analysis of significant persist to withstand catastrophic events) suitability. We considered whether the portions of a species’ range if the and representation (little to no Texas fawnsfoot is presently in danger species warrants listing as threatened ecological or genetic diversity will of extinction and determined that throughout all of its range. persist to respond to changing endangered status is not appropriate. Status Throughout a Significant Portion environmental conditions). The threats The current conditions as assessed in of Its Range: Texas Fawnsfoot identified above are occurring now and the SSA report show two of the are expected to continue into the future. populations in two of the representative Under the Act and our implementing Overall, these low levels of resiliency, units are not currently subject to regulations, a species may warrant redundancy, and representation result declining flows or extreme flow events. listing if it is in danger of extinction or in the false spike having low viability, While threats are currently acting on the likely to become so within the and the species currently faces a high species and many of those threats are foreseeable future throughout all or a risk of extinction. Our analysis of the expected to continue into the future, we significant portion of its range. The species’ current and future conditions did not find that the species is currently court in Center for Biological Diversity demonstrate that the false spike is in in danger of extinction throughout all of v. Everson, 2020 WL 437289 (D.D.C. Jan. danger of extinction throughout all of its its range. According to our assessment 28, 2020) (Center for Biological range due to the severity and immediacy of plausible future scenarios in the SSA Diversity), vacated the aspect of the of threats currently impacting the report, the species is likely to become an 2014 Significant Portion of its Range species. endangered species in the foreseeable Policy that provided that the Services future of 25 years throughout all of its do not undertake an analysis of Summary of Status Throughout All of range. Twenty-five years encompasses significant portions of a species’ range if Its Range: Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas about 5 generations of the Texas the species warrants listing as Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas fawnsfoot; additionally, models of threatened throughout all of its range. Pimpleback, and False Spike human demand for water (Texas Water Therefore, we proceed to evaluating Our analysis of the species’ current Development Board 2017, p. 30) and whether the species is endangered in a and future conditions, as well as the climate change (e.g., Kinniburgh et al. significant portion of its range—that is, conservation efforts discussed above, 2015, p. 83) project decreased water whether there is any portion of the show that the Guadalupe fatmucket, availability over 25 and 50 years, species’ range for which both (1) the Texas fatmucket, Guadalupe orb, Texas respectively. As a result, we expect portion is significant; and, (2) the pimpleback, and false spike are in increased incidences of low flows species is in danger of extinction in that danger of extinction throughout all their followed by scour events as well as portion. Depending on the case, it might ranges due to the severity and persistent decreased water quality to be be more efficient for us to address the immediacy of threats currently occurring in 25 years. Thus, after ‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’ impacting their populations. The risk of assessing the best available information, question first. We can choose to address extinction is high because the remaining we determine that the Texas fawnsfoot either question first. Regardless of fragmented populations have a high risk is not currently in danger of extinction which question we address first, if we of extirpation, are isolated, and have but is likely to become in danger of reach a negative answer with respect to limited potential for recolonization. We extinction within the foreseeable future the first question that we address, we do find that a threatened species status is throughout all of its range. not need to evaluate the other question not appropriate for Guadalupe for that portion of the species’ range. fatmucket, Texas fatmucket, Guadalupe Status Throughout a Significant Portion Following the court’s holding in orb, Texas pimpleback, and false spike of Its Range: Guadalupe Fatmucket, Center for Biological Diversity, we now because of their currently contracted Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, consider whether there are any ranges, because all populations are Texas Pimpleback, and False Spike significant portions of the species’ range fragmented and isolated from one Under the Act and our implementing where the species is in danger of another, because the threats are regulations, a species may warrant extinction now (i.e., endangered). In occurring across the entire range of listing if it is in danger of extinction or undertaking this analysis for the Texas these species, and because the threats likely to become so in the foreseeable fawnsfoot, we choose to address the are ongoing currently and are expected future throughout all or a significant status question first—we consider to continue or worsen into the future. portion of its range. We have information pertaining to the geographic Because these species are already in determined that the Guadalupe distribution of both the species and the danger of extinction throughout their fatmucket, Texas fatmucket, Guadalupe threats that the species faces to identify ranges, a threatened status is not orb, Texas pimpleback, and false spike any portions of the range where the appropriate. are in danger of extinction throughout species is endangered. all of their ranges, and accordingly did We considered whether any of the Summary of Status Throughout All of not undertake an analysis of whether threats acting on the species are Its Range: Texas Fawnsfoot there are any significant portions of geographically concentrated in any After evaluating threats to the species these species’ ranges. Because the portion of the range at a biologically and assessing the cumulative effect of Guadalupe fatmucket, Texas fatmucket, meaningful scale. We examined the the threats under the section 4(a)(1) Guadalupe orb, Texas pimpleback, and following threats throughout the range factors, we find that that Texas false spike warrant listing as endangered of the species: The accumulation of fine fawnsfoot populations will continue to throughout all of their ranges, our sediments, altered hydrology, and decline over the next 25 years so that determination is consistent with the impairment of water quality (Factor A); this species is likely to become in decision in Center for Biological predation and collection (Factor C); and danger of extinction throughout all or a Diversity v. Everson, 2020 WL 437289 barriers to fish movement (Factor E). significant portion of its range within (D.D.C. Jan. 28, 2020), in which the We identified a portion of the range the foreseeable future due to increased court vacated the aspect of the 2014 of Texas fawnsfoot, the upper Brazos

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47945

River (including the populations in the unique observable environmental usage definition of endangered species. Upper Brazos River and Clear Fork or behavioral characteristics attributable Therefore, we propose to list the Brazos River), that is experiencing a to just this area’s populations. The Guadalupe fatmucket, Texas fatmucket, concentration of the following threats: Upper Brazos River is not essential to Guadalupe orb, Texas pimpleback, and Altered hydrology and impaired water any specific life-history function of the false spike as endangered species in quality. Although these threats are not Texas fawnsfoot that is not found accordance with sections 3(6) and unique to this area, they are acting at a elsewhere in the range. Further, the 4(a)(1) of the Act. greater intensity here (e.g., populations habitat in the Upper Brazos River does Determination of Status: Texas higher in the watershed and that receive not contain higher quality or higher Fawnsfoot less rainfall are more vulnerable to value than the remainder of the species’ stream drying because there is a smaller range. The Upper Brazos River Our review of the best available volume of water in the river), either populations have a small number of scientific and commercial information individually or in combination, than individuals compared to most of the indicates that the Texas fawnsfoot meets elsewhere in the range. In addition, the other populations throughout the range the definition of a threatened species. small sizes of each population, coupled of Texas fawnsfoot (see Table 4, above). Therefore, we propose to list the Texas with the current condition information The Clear Fork Brazos River population fawnsfoot as a threatened species in in the SSA report suggesting the two may already be extirpated, and the accordance with sections 3(20) and populations in this area are unhealthy, Upper Brazos River population had 23 4(a)(1) of the Act. leads us to find that this portion individuals found in 2017. These Available Conservation Measures provides substantial information populations do not interact with other indicating the populations occurring populations of the species. Conservation measures provided to here may be in danger of extinction Overall, we found no substantial species listed as endangered or now. information that would indicate the threatened species under the Act We then proceeded to the significance Upper Brazos River may be significant. include recognition, recovery actions, question, asking whether there is While this area provides some requirements for Federal protection, and substantial information indicating that contribution to the species’ overall prohibitions against certain practices. this portion of the range (i.e., the Upper ability to withstand catastrophic or Recognition through listing results in Brazos River and Clear Fork Brazos stochastic events (redundancy and public awareness, and conservation by River) may be significant. As an initial resiliency, respectively), the species has Federal, State, tribal, and local agencies, note, the Service’s most recent a larger population that occupies a private organizations, and individuals. definition of ‘‘significant’’ within larger area downstream in the Brazos The Act encourages cooperation with agency policy guidance has been River. The best scientific and the States and other countries and calls invalidated by court order (see Desert commercial information available for recovery actions to be carried out for Survivors v. Dep’t of the Interior, No. indicates that the Upper Brazos River listed species. The protection required 16–cv–01165 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2018)). population’s contribution is very by Federal agencies and the prohibitions In undertaking this analysis for the limited in scope due to the small against certain activities are discussed, Texas fawnsfoot, we considered population sizes and isolation from in part, below. whether the Upper Brazos River portion other populations. Therefore, because The primary purpose of the Act is the of the species’ range may be significant we could not answer both the status and conservation of endangered and based on its biological importance to the significance questions in the affirmative, threatened species and the ecosystems overall viability of the Texas fawnsfoot. we conclude that the Upper Brazos upon which they depend. The ultimate Therefore, for the purposes of this River portion of the range does not goal of such conservation efforts is the analysis, when considering whether this warrant further consideration as a recovery of these listed species, so that portion may be biologically significant, significant portion of the range. they no longer need the protective we considered whether the portion may We did not identify any portions of measures of the Act. Section 4(f) of the (1) occur in a unique habitat or the Texas fawnsfoot’s range where: (1) Act calls for the Service to develop and ecoregion for the species, (2) contain The portion is significant; and, (2) the implement recovery plans for the high quality or high value habitat species is in danger of extinction in that conservation of endangered and relative to the remaining portions of the portion. Therefore, we conclude that the threatened species. The recovery range, for the species’ continued Texas fawnsfoot is likely to become in planning process involves the viability in light of the existing threats, danger of extinction within the identification of actions that are or (3) contain habitat that is essential to foreseeable future throughout all of its necessary to halt or reverse species’ a specific life-history function for the range. This is consistent with the courts’ decline by addressing the threats to species and that is not found in the holdings in Desert Survivors v. survival and recovery. The goal of this other portions (for example, the Department of the Interior, No. 16-cv– process is to restore listed species to a principal breeding ground for the 01165–JCS, 2018 WL 4053447 (N.D. Cal. point where they are secure, self- species). Aug. 24, 2018), and Center for Biological sustaining, and functioning components We evaluated the available Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, of their ecosystems. information about the portion of the 959 (D. Ariz. 2017). Recovery planning consists of range of Texas fawnsfoot that occupies preparing draft and final recovery plans, the upper Brazos River in this context, Determination of Status: Guadalupe beginning with the development of a assessing its biological significance in Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, recovery outline and making it available terms of these three habitat criteria, and Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, and to the public within 30 days of a final determined the information did not False Spike listing determination. The recovery substantially indicate it may be Our review of the best available outline guides the immediate significant. Texas fawnsfoot in these scientific and commercial information implementation of urgent recovery populations exhibit similar habitat and indicates that the Guadalupe fatmucket, actions and describes the process to be host fish use to Texas fawnsfoot in the Texas fatmucket, Guadalupe orb, Texas used to develop a recovery plan. remainder of its range; thus, there is no pimpleback, and false spike meet the Revisions of the plan may be done to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47946 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

address continuing or new threats to the Section 7(a) of the Act requires following purposes: For scientific species, as new substantive information Federal agencies to evaluate their purposes, to enhance the propagation or becomes available. The recovery plan actions with respect to any species that survival of the species, and for also identifies recovery criteria for is proposed or listed as an endangered incidental take in connection with review of when a species may be ready or threatened species and with respect otherwise lawful activities. There are for reclassification from endangered to to its critical habitat, if any is also certain statutory exemptions from threatened (‘‘downlisting’’) or removal designated. Regulations implementing the prohibitions, which are found in from protected status (‘‘delisting’’), and this interagency cooperation provision sections 9 and 10 of the Act. methods for monitoring recovery of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part It is our policy, as published in the progress. Recovery plans also establish 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR a framework for agencies to coordinate Federal agencies to confer with the 34272), to identify to the maximum their recovery efforts and provide Service on any action that is likely to extent practicable at the time a species estimates of the cost of implementing jeopardize the continued existence of a is listed, those activities that would or recovery tasks. Recovery teams species proposed for listing or result in would not constitute a violation of destruction or adverse modification of (composed of species experts, Federal section 9 of the Act. The intent of this proposed critical habitat. If a species is and State agencies, nongovernmental policy is to increase public awareness of listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of organizations, and stakeholders) are the effect of a proposed listing on the Act requires Federal agencies to often established to develop recovery proposed and ongoing activities within ensure that activities they authorize, plans. When completed, the recovery the range of the species proposed for fund, or carry out are not likely to outline, draft recovery plan, and the listing. The discussion below regarding jeopardize the continued existence of final recovery plan will be available on protective regulations under section 4(d) the species or destroy or adversely our website (http://www.fws.gov/ of the Act for the Texas fawnsfoot modify its critical habitat. If a Federal endangered). complies with our policy. Implementation of recovery actions action may affect a listed species or its generally requires the participation of a critical habitat, the responsible Federal Based on the best available broad range of partners, including other agency must enter into consultation information, the following actions are Federal agencies, States, Tribes, with the Service. unlikely to result in a violation of nongovernmental organizations, Federal agency actions within the section 9, if these activities are carried businesses, and private landowners. species’ habitat that may require out in accordance with existing Examples of recovery actions include conference or consultation or both as regulations and permit requirements; habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of described in the preceding paragraph this list is not comprehensive: native vegetation), research, captive include management and any other (1) Normal agricultural and landscape-altering activities on Federal propagation and reintroduction, and silvicultural practices, including lands administered by the National Park outreach and education. The recovery of herbicide and pesticide use, which are Service. many listed species cannot be carried out in accordance with any The Act and its implementing existing regulations, permit and label accomplished solely on Federal lands regulations set forth a series of general requirements, and best management because their range may occur primarily prohibitions and exceptions that apply practices; and, or solely on non-Federal lands. To to endangered wildlife. The prohibitions achieve recovery of these species of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at (2) Normal residential landscape requires cooperative conservation efforts 50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for any activities. on private, State, and tribal lands. person subject to the jurisdiction of the Based on the best available If these species are listed, funding for United States to take (which includes information, the following activities recovery actions will be available from harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, may potentially result in a violation of a variety of sources, including Federal wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or section 9 of the Act if they are not budgets, State programs, and cost-share to attempt any of these) endangered authorized in accordance with grants for non-Federal landowners, the wildlife within the United States or on applicable law; this list is not academic community, and the high seas. In addition, it is unlawful comprehensive: nongovernmental organizations. In to import; export; deliver, receive, carry, (1) Unauthorized handling or addition, pursuant to section 6 of the transport, or ship in interstate or foreign Act, the State of Texas would be eligible commerce in the course of commercial collecting of the species; for Federal funds to implement activity; or sell or offer for sale in (2) Modification of the channel or management actions that promote the interstate or foreign commerce any water flow of any stream in which the protection or recovery of the Central species listed as an endangered species. Central Texas mussels are known to Texas mussels. Information on our grant It is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, occur; programs that are available to aid carry, transport, or ship any such (3) Livestock grazing that results in species recovery can be found at: http:// wildlife that has been taken illegally. direct or indirect destruction of stream www.fws.gov/grants. Certain exceptions apply to employees habitat; and Although the Central Texas mussels of the Service, the National Marine are only proposed for listing under the Fisheries Service, other Federal land (4) Discharge of chemicals or fill Act at this time, please let us know if management agencies, and State material into any waters in which the you are interested in participating in conservation agencies. Central Texas mussels are known to recovery efforts for these species. We may issue permits to carry out occur. Additionally, we invite you to submit otherwise prohibited activities Questions regarding whether specific any new information on this species involving endangered wildlife under activities would constitute a violation of whenever it becomes available and any certain circumstances. Regulations section 9 of the Act should be directed information you may have for recovery governing permits are codified at 50 to the Austin Ecological Services Field planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION INFORMATION CONTACT). wildlife, a permit may be issued for the CONTACT).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47947

II. Proposed Rule Issued Under Section of such species’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412, wastewater treatment facility outflows. 4(d) of the Act 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973). Regulating these activities will help Exercising its authority under section Background preserve the species’ remaining 4(d), the Service has developed a populations, slow their rate of decline, Section 4(d) of the Act contains two proposed rule that is designed to and decrease synergistic, negative sentences. The first sentence states that address the Texas fawnsfoot’s specific effects from other stressors. the ‘‘Secretary shall issue such threats and conservation needs. Under the Act, ‘‘take’’ means to regulations as he deems necessary and Although the statute does not require harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, advisable to provide for the the Service to make a ‘‘necessary and wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or conservation’’ of species listed as advisable’’ finding with respect to the to attempt to engage in any such threatened. The U.S. Supreme Court has adoption of specific prohibitions under conduct. Some of these provisions have noted that statutory language like section 9, we find that this rule as a been further defined in regulation at 50 ‘‘necessary and advisable’’ demonstrates whole satisfies the requirement in CFR 17.3. Take can result knowingly or a large degree of deference to the agency section 4(d) of the Act to issue otherwise, by direct and indirect (see Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592 regulations deemed necessary and impacts, intentionally or incidentally. (1988)). Conservation is defined in the advisable to provide for the Regulating incidental and intentional Act to mean ‘‘the use of all methods and conservation of the Texas fawnsfoot. As take will help preserve the species’ procedures which are necessary to bring discussed in the Summary of Biological remaining populations, slow their rate any endangered species or threatened Status and Threats section, the Service of decline, and decrease synergistic, species to the point at which the has concluded that the Texas fawnsfoot negative effects from other stressors. measures provided pursuant to [the Act] is likely to become in danger of We have identified some exceptions are no longer necessary.’’ Additionally, extinction within the foreseeable future to the prohibition on incidental and the second sentence of section 4(d) of primarily due to habitat changes such as intentional take. Those exceptions the Act states that the Secretary ‘‘may by the accumulation of fine sediments, include the following activities: (1) Channel restoration projects that regulation prohibit with respect to any altered hydrology, and impairment of create natural, physically stable threatened species any act prohibited water quality, predation and collection, (streambanks and substrate remaining under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish and barriers to fish movement. The relatively unchanging over time), or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case provisions of this proposed 4(d) rule ecologically functioning streams or of plants.’’ Thus, the combination of the would promote conservation of the stream and wetland systems (containing two sentences of section 4(d) provides Texas fawnsfoot by encouraging riparian an assemblage of fish, mussels, other the Secretary with wide latitude of landscape conservation while also invertebrates, and plants) that are discretion to select and promulgate meeting the conservation needs of Texas reconnected with their groundwater appropriate regulations tailored to the fawnsfoot. By streamlining those aquifers. These projects can be specific conservation needs of the projects that follow best management practices and improve instream habitat accomplished using a variety of threatened species. The second sentence methods, but the desired outcome is a grants particularly broad discretion to (such as streambank stabilization, instream channel restoration, and natural channel with low shear stress the Service when adopting the (force of water moving against the prohibitions under section 9. upland restoration that improves instream habitat), conservation is more channel); bank heights that enable The courts have recognized the extent likely to occur for Texas fawnsfoot, reconnection to the floodplain; a of the Secretary’s discretion under this improving the condition of populations reconnection of surface and standard to develop rules that are in those reaches. The provisions of this groundwater systems, resulting in appropriate for the conservation of a proposed rule are one of many tools that perennial flows in the channel; riffles species. For example, courts have the Service would use to promote the and pools composed of existing soil, upheld rules developed under section conservation of the Texas fawnsfoot. rock, and wood instead of large 4(d) as a valid exercise of agency This proposed 4(d) rule would apply imported materials; low compaction of authority where they prohibited take of only if and when the Service makes soils within adjacent riparian areas; and threatened wildlife, or include a limited final the listing of the Texas fawnsfoot inclusion of riparian wetlands and taking prohibition (see Alsea Valley as a threatened species. woodland buffers. This exception to the Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 U.S. proposed 4(d) rule for incidental take Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. 2007); Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule would promote conservation of Texas Washington Environmental Council v. This proposed 4(d) rule would fawnsfoot by creating stable stream National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 provide for the conservation of the channels that are less likely to scour U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 (W.D. Wash. Texas fawnsfoot by prohibiting the during high flow events, thereby 2002)). Courts have also upheld 4(d) following activities, except as otherwise increasing population resiliency. rules that do not address all of the authorized or permitted: Take, (2) Bioengineering methods such as threats a species faces (see State of possession, and import/export of streambank stabilization using live Louisiana v. Verity, 853 F.2d 322 (5th unlawfully taken specimens. stakes (live, vegetative cuttings inserted Cir. 1988)). As noted in the legislative As discussed in the Summary of or tamped into the ground in a manner history when the Act was initially Biological Status and Threats (above), that allows the stake to take root and enacted, ‘‘once an animal is on the habitat loss, predation and collection, grow), live fascines (live branch threatened list, the Secretary has an and barriers to fish movement are cuttings, usually willows, bound almost infinite number of options affecting the status of the Texas together into long, cigar-shaped available to him with regard to the fawnsfoot. A range of activities have the bundles), or brush layering (cuttings or permitted activities for those species. He potential to impact the Texas fawnsfoot, branches of easily rooted tree species may, for example, permit taking, but not including: Instream construction, water layered between successive lifts of soil importation of such species, or he may withdrawals, flow releases from fill). These methods would not include choose to forbid both taking and upstream dams, riparian vegetation the sole use of quarried rock (rip-rap) or importation but allow the transportation removal, improper handling, and the use of rock baskets or gabion

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47948 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

structures. In addition, to reduce exemption only applies for 5 years from species between Federal agencies and streambank erosion and sedimentation the date of successful completion of the the Service. We ask the public, into the stream, work using these course. This provision of the 4(d) rule particularly State agencies and other bioengineering methods would be for intentional take would promote interested stakeholders that may be performed at base flow or low water conservation of Texas fawnsfoot by affected by the proposed 4(d) rule, to conditions and when significant rainfall ensuring surveyors are proficient at provide comments and suggestions is not predicted. Further, streambank identification of freshwater mussels and regarding additional guidance and stabilization projects must keep all would add to the knowledge and methods that the Service could provide equipment out of the stream channels understanding of the distribution of or use, respectively, to streamline the and water. Similar to channel Texas fawnsfoot populations. implementation of this proposed 4(d) restoration projects, this exception to We may issue permits to carry out rule (see Information Requested, above). the proposed 4(d) rule for incidental otherwise prohibited activities, take would promote conservation of including those described above, III. Proposed Critical Habitat Texas fawnsfoot by creating stable involving threatened wildlife under Designation stream channels that are less likely to certain circumstances. Regulations Background governing permits are codified at 50 scour during high flow events, thereby Critical habitat is defined in section 3 CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened increasing population resiliency. of the Act as: (3) Soil and water conservation wildlife, a permit may be issued for the (1) The specific areas within the practices and riparian and adjacent following purposes: Scientific purposes, geographical area occupied by the upland habitat management activities to enhance propagation or survival, for species, at the time it is listed in that restore instream habitats for the economic hardship, for zoological accordance with the Act, on which are species, restore adjacent riparian exhibition, for educational purposes, for found those physical or biological habitats that enhance stream habitats for incidental taking, or for special the species, stabilize degraded and purposes consistent with the purposes features (a) Essential to the conservation of the eroding stream banks to limit of the Act. There are also certain sedimentation and scour of the species’ statutory exemptions from the species, and habitats, and restore or enhance nearby prohibitions, which are found in (b) Which may require special upland habitats to limit sedimentation sections 9 and 10 of the Act. management considerations or of the species’ habitats and comply with The Service recognizes the special protection; and conservation practice standards and and unique relationship with our State (2) Specific areas outside the specifications and technical guidelines natural resource agency partners in geographical area occupied by the developed by the Natural Resources contributing to conservation of listed species at the time it is listed, upon a Conservation Service (NRCS) and species. State agencies often possess determination that such areas are available in the Field Office Technical scientific data and valuable expertise on essential for the conservation of the Guide (FOTG). Soil and water the status and distribution of species. conservation practices and aquatic endangered, threatened, and candidate Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 species habitat restoration projects species of wildlife and plants. State define the geographical area occupied associated with NRCS conservation agencies, because of their authorities by the species as an area that may plans are designed to improve water and their close working relationships generally be delineated around species’ quality and enhance fish and aquatic with local governments and occurrences, as determined by the species habitats. This exception to the landowners, are in a unique position to Secretary (i.e., range). Such areas may proposed 4(d) rule for incidental take assist the Services in implementing all include those areas used throughout all would promote conservation of Texas aspects of the Act. In this regard, section or part of the species’ life cycle, even if fawnsfoot by creating stable stream 6 of the Act provides that the Services not used on a regular basis (e.g., channels and reducing sediment inputs shall cooperate to the maximum extent migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, to the stream, thereby increasing practicable with the States in carrying and habitats used periodically, but not population resiliency. out programs authorized by the Act. solely by vagrant individuals). (4) Presence or abundance surveys for Therefore, any qualified employee or Additionally, our regulations at 50 CFR Texas fawnfoot conducted by agent of a State conservation agency that 424.02 define the word ‘‘habitat’’ as individuals who successfully complete is a party to a cooperative agreement follows: ‘‘for the purposes of designating and show proficiency by passing the with the Service in accordance with critical habitat only, habitat is the end-of-course test with a score equal to section 6(c) of the Act, who is abiotic and biotic setting that currently or greater than 90 percent, with 100 designated by his or her agency for such or periodically contains the resources percent accuracy in identification of purposes, will be able to conduct and conditions necessary to support one mussel species listed under the activities designed to conserve Texas or more life processes of a species.’’ Endangered Species Act, in an approved fawnsfoot that may result in otherwise Conservation, as defined under freshwater mussel identification and prohibited take without additional section 3 of the Act, means to use and sampling course (specific to the species authorization. the use of all methods and procedures and basins in which the Texas Nothing in this proposed 4(d) rule that are necessary to bring an fawnsfoot is known to occur), such as would change in any way the recovery endangered or threatened species to the that administered by the Service, State planning provisions of section 4(f) of the point at which the measures provided wildlife agency, or qualified university Act, the consultation requirements pursuant to the Act are no longer experts. Those individuals exercising under section 7 of the Act, or the ability necessary. Such methods and this exemption should provide reports of the Service to enter into partnerships procedures include, but are not limited to the Service annually on number, for the management and protection of to, all activities associated with specific location (e.g. GPS coordinates), the Texas fawnsfoot. However, scientific resources management such as and date of encounter. This exemption interagency cooperation may be further research, census, law enforcement, does not apply if lethal take or streamlined through planned habitat acquisition and maintenance, collection is anticipated. This programmatic consultations for the propagation, live trapping, and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47949

transplantation, and, in the characteristics that support ephemeral journals; conservation plans developed extraordinary case where population or dynamic habitat conditions. Features by States and counties; scientific status pressures within a given ecosystem may also be expressed in terms relating surveys and studies; biological cannot be otherwise relieved, may to principles of conservation biology, assessments; other unpublished include regulated taking. such as patch size, distribution materials; or experts’ opinions or Critical habitat receives protection distances, and connectivity. personal knowledge. under section 7 of the Act through the Under the second prong of the Act’s As the regulatory definition of requirement that Federal agencies definition of critical habitat, we can ‘‘habitat’’ reflects (50 CFR 424.02), ensure, in consultation with the Service, designate critical habitat in areas habitat is dynamic, and species may that any action they authorize, fund, or outside the geographical area occupied move from one area to another over carry out is not likely to result in the by the species at the time it is listed, time. We recognize that critical habitat destruction or adverse modification of upon a determination that such areas designated at a particular point in time critical habitat. The designation of are essential for the conservation of the may not include all of the habitat areas critical habitat does not affect land species. The implementing regulations that we may later determine are ownership or establish a refuge, at 50 CFR 424.12(b)(2) further delineate necessary for the recovery of the wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other unoccupied critical habitat by setting species. For these reasons, a critical conservation area. Designation also does out three specific parameters: (1) When habitat designation does not signal that not allow the government or public to designating critical habitat, the habitat outside the designated area is access private lands, nor does Secretary will first evaluate areas unimportant or may not be needed for designation require implementation of occupied by the species; (2) the recovery of the species. Areas that are restoration, recovery, or enhancement Secretary will only consider unoccupied important to the conservation of the measures by non-Federal landowners. areas to be essential where a critical species, both inside and outside the Where a landowner requests Federal habitat designation limited to critical habitat designation, will agency funding or authorization for an geographical areas occupied by the continue to be subject to: (1) action that may affect a listed species or species would be inadequate to ensure Conservation actions implemented critical habitat, the Federal agency the conservation of the species; and (3) under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) would be required to consult with the for an unoccupied area to be considered regulatory protections afforded by the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. essential, the Secretary must determine requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act However, even if the Service were to that there is a reasonable certainty both for Federal agencies to ensure their conclude that the proposed activity that the area will contribute to the actions are not likely to jeopardize the would result in destruction or adverse conservation of the species and that the continued existence of any endangered modification of the critical habitat, the area contains one or more of those or threatened species; and (3) section 9 Federal action agency and the physical or biological features essential of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any landowner are not required to abandon to the conservation of the species. individual of the species, including the proposed activity, or to restore or Section 4 of the Act requires that we taking caused by actions that affect recover the species; instead, they must designate critical habitat on the basis of habitat. Federally funded or permitted implement ‘‘reasonable and prudent the best scientific data available. projects affecting listed species outside alternatives’’ to avoid destruction or Further, our Policy on Information their designated critical habitat areas adverse modification of critical habitat. Standards under the Endangered may still result in jeopardy findings in Under the first prong of the Act’s Species Act (published in the Federal some cases. These protections and definition of critical habitat, areas Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), conservation tools will continue to within the geographical area occupied the Information Quality Act (section 515 contribute to recovery of these species. by the species at the time it was listed of the Treasury and General Similarly, critical habitat designations are included in a critical habitat Government Appropriations Act for made on the basis of the best available designation if they contain physical or Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. information at the time of designation biological features (1) which are 5658)), and our associated Information will not control the direction and essential to the conservation of the Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, substance of future recovery plans, species and (2) which may require establish procedures, and provide habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or special management considerations or guidance to ensure that our decisions other species conservation planning protection. For these areas, critical are based on the best scientific data efforts if new information available at habitat designations identify, to the available. They require our biologists, to the time of these planning efforts calls extent known using the best scientific the extent consistent with the Act and for a different outcome. and commercial data available, those with the use of the best scientific data physical or biological features that are available, to use primary and original Prudency Determinations essential to the conservation of the sources of information as the basis for Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as species (such as space, food, cover, and recommendations to designate critical amended, and implementing regulations protected habitat). In identifying those habitat. (50 CFR 424.12), require that the physical or biological features that occur When we are determining which areas Secretary shall designate critical habitat in specific occupied areas, we focus on should be designated as critical habitat, at the time the species is determined to the specific features that are essential to our primary source of information is be an endangered or threatened species support the life-history needs of the generally the information from the SSA to the maximum extent prudent and species, including but not limited to, report and information developed determinable. Our regulations (50 CFR water characteristics, soil type, during the listing process for the 424.12(a)(1)) state that the Secretary geological features, prey, vegetation, species. Additional information sources may, but is not required to, determine symbiotic species, or other features. A may include any generalized that a designation would not be prudent feature may be a single habitat conservation strategy, criteria, or outline in the following circumstances: characteristic, or a more-complex that may have been developed for the (i) The species is threatened by taking combination of habitat characteristics. species; the recovery plan for the or other human activity and Features may include habitat species; articles in peer-reviewed identification of critical habitat can be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47950 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

expected to increase the degree of such When critical habitat is not essential to support the life history of threat to the species; determinable, the Act allows the Service the species. (ii) The present or threatened an additional year to publish a critical In considering whether features are destruction, modification, or habitat designation (16 U.S.C. essential to the conservation of the curtailment of a species’ habitat or range 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). species, the Service may consider an is not a threat to the species, or threats We reviewed the available appropriate quality, quantity, and to the species’ habitat stem solely from information pertaining to the biological spatial and temporal arrangement of causes that cannot be addressed through needs of the species and habitat habitat characteristics in the context of management actions resulting from characteristics where these species are the life-history needs, condition, and consultations under section 7(a)(2) of located. This and other information status of the species. These the Act; represent the best scientific data characteristics include, but are not (iii) Areas within the jurisdiction of available and led us to conclude that the limited to, space for individual and the United States provide no more than designation of critical habitat is population growth and for normal negligible conservation value, if any, for determinable for the Central Texas behavior; food, water, air, light, a species occurring primarily outside mussels. minerals, or other nutritional or the jurisdiction of the United States; Physical or Biological Features physiological requirements; cover or (iv) No areas meet the definition of Essential to the Conservation of the shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, critical habitat; or Species or rearing (or development) of offspring; (v) The Secretary otherwise and habitats that are protected from In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) determines that designation of critical disturbance. habitat would not be prudent based on of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR We derive the specific physical or the best scientific data available. 424.12(b), in determining which areas As discussed in the proposed listing we will designate as critical habitat from biological features (PBFs) essential for rule, above, while collection at certain within the geographical area occupied Central Texas mussels from studies of locations has been identified as a threat by the species at the time of listing, we these species’ habitat, ecology, and life to certain populations of Texas consider the physical or biological history. The life histories of the six pimpleback, Texas fatmucket, and false features that are essential to the Central Texas mussel species are very spike in the Llano River, the location of conservation of the species and that may similar—mussels need flowing water, these populations is well known and the require special management suitable substrate, suitable water identification and mapping of critical considerations or protection. The quality, flow refuges, and appropriate habitat is not expected to increase the regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define host fish—and so we will discuss their degree of this threat. In our SSA report ‘‘physical or biological features essential common habitat needs and then and proposed listing rule for the Central to the conservation of the species’’ as describe species-specific needs Texas mussels, we determined that the the features that occur in specific areas thereafter. present or threatened destruction, and that are essential to support the life- Space for Individual and Population modification, or curtailment of habitat history needs of the species, including Growth and for Normal Behavior or range is a threat to the Central Texas but not limited to, water characteristics, mussels and that those threats in some soil type, geological features, sites, prey, Most freshwater mussels, including way can be addressed by section 7(a)(2) vegetation, symbiotic species, or other the Central Texas mussels, are found in consultation measures. The species features. A feature may be a single aggregations, called mussel beds, that occurs wholly in the jurisdiction of the habitat characteristic, or a more vary in size from about 50 to greater 2 United States, and we are able to complex combination of habitat than 5,000 square meters (m ), separated identify areas that meet the definition of characteristics. Features may include by stream reaches in which mussels are critical habitat. Therefore, because none habitat characteristics that support absent or rare (Vaughn 2012, p. 983). of the circumstances enumerated in our ephemeral or dynamic habitat Freshwater mussel larvae (called regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1) have conditions. Features may also be glochidia) are parasites that must attach been met and because there are no other expressed in terms relating to principles to a host fish. A population incorporates circumstances the Secretary has of conservation biology, such as patch more than one mussel bed; it is the identified for which this designation of size, distribution distances, and collection of mussel beds within a critical habitat would be not prudent, connectivity. stream reach between which infested we have determined that the For example, physical features host fish may travel, allowing for ebbs designation of critical habitat is prudent essential to the conservation of the and flows in mussel bed density and for the Central Texas mussels. species might include gravel of a abundance over time throughout the particular size required for spawning, population’s occupied reach. Therefore, Critical Habitat Determinability alkali soil for seed germination, resilient mussel populations must Having determined that designation is protective cover for migration, or occupy stream reaches long enough so prudent, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act susceptibility to flooding or fire that that stochastic events that affect we must find whether critical habitat for maintains necessary early-successional individual mussel beds do not eliminate the Central Texas mussels is habitat characteristics. Biological the entire population. Repopulation by determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR features might include prey species, infested host fish from other mussel 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is forage grasses, specific kinds or ages of beds within the reach can allow the not determinable when one or both of trees for roosting or nesting, symbiotic population to recover from these events. the following situations exist: fungi, or a particular level of nonnative Longer stream reaches are more likely to (i) Data sufficient to perform required species consistent with conservation support populations of Central Texas analyses are lacking, or needs of the listed species. The features mussels into the future than shorter (ii) The biological needs of the species may also be combinations of habitat stream reaches. Therefore, we determine are not sufficiently well known to characteristics and may encompass the that long stream reaches, over 50 miles identify any area that meets the relationship between characteristics or (80.5 km), are an important component definition of ‘‘critical habitat.’’ the necessary amount of a characteristic of a riverine system with habitat to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47951

support all life stages of Central Texas behavioral changes to all mussel life information can be found in the SSA mussels. stages. Even wastewater discharges with report available on http:// All six species of Central Texas low ammonia levels have been shown to www.regulations.gov under Docket No. mussels need flowing water for survival. negatively affect mussel populations. FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. We have They are not found in lakes, reservoirs, Finally, water temperature plays a determined that the following PBFs are or in pools without flow, or in areas that critical role in the life history of essential to the conservation of the are regularly dewatered. River reaches freshwater mussels. High water Central Texas mussels: with continuous flow support all life temperatures can cause valve closure, (1) Suitable substrates and connected stages of Central Texas mussels, while reduced reproductive output, and death. instream habitats, characterized by those with little or no flow do not. Flow The Central Texas mussels differ in geomorphically stable stream channels rates needed by each species will vary their optimal temperature ranges, with and banks (i.e., channels that maintain depending on the species and the river some species much more tolerant of lateral dimensions, longitudinal size, location, and substrate type. high temperatures than others. profiles, and sinuosity patterns over Additionally, each species of Central Laboratory studies investigating the time without an aggrading or degrading Texas mussel has specific substrate effects of thermal stress on glochidia bed elevation) with habitats that support needs, including gravel/cobble and adults has indicated thermal stress a diversity of freshwater mussel and (Guadalupe orb, Texas pimpleback, and may occur at 29 °C (84.2) °F) (Bonner et native fish (such as stable riffle-run-pool false spike), gravel/sand/silt (Texas al. 2018; Khan et al. 2019, entire)). habitats that provide flow refuges fawnsfoot), and bedrock crevices/ Based on the above information, we consisting of silt-free gravel and coarse vegetated runs (Guadalupe fatmucket determine that stream reaches with the sand substrates). and Texas fatmucket). Except for following water quality parameters are (2) Adequate flows, or a hydrologic habitats for Texas fawnsfoot, these suitable for the Guadalupe fatmucket, flow regime (which includes the locations must be relatively free of fine Texas fatmucket, Texas fawnsfoot, severity, frequency, duration, and sediments such that the mussels are not Guadalupe orb, Texas pimpleback, and seasonality of discharge over time), smothered. false spike: necessary to maintain benthic habitats • where the species are found and to Physiological Requirements: Water Low salinity (less than 2 ppt); • maintain connectivity of streams with Quality Requirements Low total ammonia (less than 0.77 mg/L total ammonia nitrogen); the floodplain, allowing the exchange of Freshwater mussels, as a group, are • Low levels of contaminants; nutrients and sediment for maintenance sensitive to changes in water quality • Dissolved oxygen levels greater of the mussels’ and fish hosts’ habitat, parameters such as dissolved oxygen, than 2 mg/L; food availability, spawning habitat for salinity, ammonia, and pollutants. • Water temperatures below 29 °C native fishes, and the ability for newly Habitats with appropriate levels of these (84.2 °F). transformed juveniles to settle and parameters are considered suitable, become established in their habitats. while those habitats with levels outside Sites for Development of Offspring (3) Water and sediment quality of the appropriate ranges are considered As discussed above, freshwater (including, but not limited to, dissolved less suitable. We have used information mussel larvae are parasites that must oxygen, conductivity, hardness, for these six Central Texas mussel attach to a host fish to develop into turbidity, temperature, pH, ammonia, species, where available, and data from juvenile mussels. The Central Texas heavy metals, and chemical other species when species-specific mussels use a variety of host fish, many constituents) necessary to sustain information is not available. Juvenile of which are widely distributed natural physiological processes for freshwater mussels are particularly throughout their ranges. The presence of normal behavior, growth, and viability susceptible to low dissolved oxygen these fish species, either singly or in of all life stages. levels. Juveniles will reduce feeding combination, supports the life-history (4) The presence and abundance of behavior when dissolved oxygen is needs of the Central Texas mussels: fish hosts necessary for recruitment of between 2–4 milligrams per liter (mg/L), • False spike: Blacktail shiner the Central Texas mussels. and mortality has been shown to occur (Cyprinella venusta) and red shiner (C. Special Management Considerations or at dissolved oxygen levels below 1.3 lutrensis); Protection mg/L. Increased salinity levels may also • Texas fawnsfoot: Freshwater drum be stressful to freshwater mussels, and (Aplodinotus grunniens); When designating critical habitat, we additionally, Central Texas mussels • Texas pimpleback and Guadalupe assess whether the specific areas within show signs of stress at salinity levels of orb: Channel catfish (Ictalurus the geographical area occupied by the 2 ppt or higher (Bonner et al. 2018; pp. punctatus), flathead catfish (Pylodictus species at the time of listing contain 155–156). olivaris), and tadpole madtom (Noturus features which are essential to the The release of pollutants into streams gyrinus); conservation of the species and which from point and nonpoint sources have • Texas fatmucket and Guadalupe may require special management immediate impacts on water quality fatmucket: Green sunfish (Lepomis considerations or protection. The conditions and may make environments cyanellus), bluegill (L. macrochirus), features essential to the conservation of unsuitable for habitation by mussels. largemouth bass (Micropterus the Central Texas mussels may require Early life stages of freshwater mussels salmoides), and Guadalupe bass (M. special management considerations or are some of the most sensitive treculii). protections to reduce the following organisms of all species to ammonia and threats: Increased fine sediment, copper (Naimo 1995, pp. 351–352; Summary of Essential Physical or changes in water quality impairment, Augsperger et al. 2007, p. 2025). Biological Features altered hydrology from both inundation Additionally, sublethal effects of In summary, we derive the specific and flow loss/scour, predation and contaminants over time can result in PBFs essential to the conservation of collection, and barriers to fish reduced feeding efficiency, reduced Central Texas mussels from studies of movement. growth, decreased reproduction, these species’ habitat, ecology, and life Management activities that could changes in enzyme activity, and history as described above. Additional ameliorate these threats include, but are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47952 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

not limited to: Use of best management to ensure that catastrophic events, such habitat changes than juveniles, changes practices (BMPs) designed to reduce as the effects of hurricanes (which can in population sizes usually occur over sedimentation, erosion, and bank side lead to flooding that causes excessive decades rather than years. As a result, destruction; protection of riparian sedimentation, nutrients, and debris to areas where individuals were collected corridors and leaving sufficient canopy disrupt stream ecology, etc.) and within the last 20 years are expected to cover along banks; exclusion of drought, cannot simultaneously affect remain occupied now. Additionally, any livestock and nuisance wildlife (feral all known populations. Rangewide areas that were surveyed around 20 hogs, exotic ungulates); moderation of recovery considerations, such as years ago and do not have subsequent surface and ground water withdrawals maintaining existing genetic diversity surveys were reviewed for any large- to maintain natural flow regimes; and striving for representation of all scale habitat changes (i.e., major flood increased use of stormwater major portions of the species’ current or scour event, drought) to confirm that management and reduction of ranges, were considered in formulating general habitat characteristics remained stormwater flows into the systems; use this proposed critical habitat. The constant over this time. None of the of highest water quality standards for unoccupied areas included in this relatively few areas without more recent wastewater and other return flows, and designation all contain at least one PBF, survey information had experienced reduction of other watershed and fall within the regulatory definition of changes to general habitat floodplain disturbances that release ‘‘habitat’’ (50 CFR 424.02), and are characteristics. Therefore, data from sediments, pollutants, or nutrients into reasonably certain to contribute to the around 2000 would be considered a the water. conservation of the species, as discussed strong indicator a species remains In summary, we find that the in the below unit descriptions. extant at a site if general habitat occupied areas we are proposing to Sources of data for this proposed characteristics have remained constant designate as critical habitat contain the critical habitat include multiple over that time. PBFs that are essential to the databases maintained by universities For occupied areas proposed as conservation of the species and that may and State agencies, scientific and agency critical habitat, we delineated critical require special management reports, and numerous survey reports on habitat unit boundaries using the considerations or protection. Special streams throughout the species’ ranges following criterion: Evaluate habitat management considerations or (see SSA report). suitability of stream segments within protection may be required of the the geographic area occupied at the time Areas Occupied at the Time of Listing Federal action agency to eliminate, or to of listing, and retain those segments that reduce to negligible levels, the threats The proposed critical habitat contain some or all of the PBFs to affecting the PBFs of each unit. designations do not include all streams support life-history functions essential known to have been occupied by the for conservation of the species. Criteria Used To Identify Critical species historically; instead, they focus As a final step, we evaluated those Habitat on streams occupied at the time of occupied stream segments retained As required by section 4(b)(2) of the listing that have retained the necessary through the above analysis and refined Act, we use the best scientific data PBFs that will allow for the the starting and ending points by available to designate critical habitat. In maintenance and expansion of existing evaluating the presence or absence of accordance with the Act and our populations. A stream reach may not appropriate PBFs. We selected upstream implementing regulations at 50 CFR have all of the PBFs to be included as and downstream cutoff points to 424.12(b), we review available proposed critical habitat; in such reference existing easily recognizable information pertaining to the habitat reaches, our goal is to recover the geopolitical features including requirements of the species and identify species by restoring the missing PBFs. confluences, highway crossings, and specific areas within the geographical We defined ‘‘occupied’’ units as stream county lines. Using these features as end area occupied by the species at the time channels with observations of one or points allows the public to clearly of listing and any specific areas outside more live individuals. Specific habitat understand the boundaries of critical the geographical area occupied by the areas were delineated based on reports habitat. Unless otherwise specified, any species to be considered for designation of live individuals and recently dead stream beds located directly beneath as critical habitat. shells. We include ‘‘recent dead shell bridge crossings or other landmark We are proposing to designate critical material’’ to delineate the boundaries of features used to describe critical habitat habitat in areas within the geographical a unit because recently dead shell spatially, such as stream confluences, area that was occupied by the species at material at a site indicates the species is are considered to be wholly included the time of listing. We also are present in that area. Recently dead within the critical habitat unit. Critical proposing to designate specific areas shells have tissue remaining on the habitat stream segments were then outside the geographical area occupied shells or have retained a shiny nacre, mapped using ArcMap version 10 (ESRI, by the species at the time of listing indicating the animal died within days Inc.), a Geographic Information Systems because we have determined that a or weeks of finding the shell. It is highly program. designation limited to occupied areas unlikely that a dead individual We consider the following streams to would be inadequate to ensure the represents the last remaining individual be occupied by the Guadalupe conservation of the species. The current of the population, and recently dead fatmucket at the time of proposed distributions of all six of the Central shells are an accepted indicator of listing: Guadalupe River, North Fork Texas mussels are much reduced from species’ presence (e.g., Howells 1996; Guadalupe River, and Johnson Creek their historical distributions. We Randklev et al. 2012). We are relying on (see Unit Descriptions, below). anticipate that recovery will require evidence of occupancy from data We consider the following streams to continued protection of existing collected in 2000 to the present. This is be occupied by the Texas fatmucket at populations and habitat, as well as because freshwater mussels may be the time of proposed listing: Bluff Creek, ensuring that there are adequate difficult to detect and some sites are not Elm Creek, San Saba River, Cherokee numbers of mussels in stable visited multiple times. Additionally, Creek, North Llano River, South Llano populations that occur over a wide these species live at least 15—20 years. River, Llano River, James River, geographic area. This strategy will help Because adults are less sensitive to Threadgill Creek, Beaver Creek,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47953

Pedernales River, Live Oak Creek, and remain. Four populations have PBFs, and would allow for expansion of Onion Creek (see Unit Descriptions, moderate resiliency, and three are existing populations necessary to below). unhealthy or are functionally extirpated. improve population resiliency, extend We consider the following streams to The populations with moderate physiographic representation, and be occupied by the Texas fawnsfoot at resiliency are all in the mainstem of reduce the risk of extinction for the the time of proposed listing: Clear Fork large rivers, subject to decreased water species. The establishment of additional of the Brazos River, Upper Brazos River, quality as urbanization increases. moderately healthy to healthy Lower Brazos River, Navasota River, Increasing the size of populations in the populations across the range of these Little River, Lower San Saba River, upper portions of the watersheds will species would sufficiently reduce their Upper Colorado River, Lower Colorado increase the redundancy and risk of extinction. Improving the River, East Fork of the Trinity River, and representation of the Texas fawnsfoot in resiliency of populations in the Middle Trinity River (see Unit areas that are not subject to similar currently occupied streams, and into Descriptions, below). water quality declines. Finally, of the identified unoccupied areas, will We consider the following streams to five remaining Texas pimpleback increase species viability to the point be occupied by the Guadalupe orb at the populations, three are unhealthy and are that the protections of the Act are no time of proposed listing: Upper not reproducing, and two have moderate longer necessary. The unoccupied Guadalupe River, South Fork Guadalupe resiliency. This species needs expanded reaches we are proposing for critical River, Lower Guadalupe River, and San populations across its range to increase habitat designation are Elm Creek and Marcos River (see Unit Descriptions, the populations’ resiliency and the Onion Creek for the Texas fatmucket; below). species’ redundancy and representation. the Clear Fork Brazos River for the We consider the following streams to In the SSA report, we defined 50 Texas fawnsfoot; and the Llano River be occupied by the Texas pimpleback at miles (80 km) as a stream length long and Concho River for the Texas the time of proposed listing: Concho enough to sustain a highly resilient pimpleback. River, Upper Colorado River, Lower San population of the Central Texas mussels Saba River, Upper San Saba River, Llano because a single event is unlikely to General Information on the Maps of the River, and Lower Colorado River (see affect the entire population, and the Proposed Critical Habitat Designations Unit Descriptions, below). affected section may be repopulated by When determining proposed critical We consider the following streams to mussel beds up- or downstream. Where habitat boundaries, we made every be occupied by false spike at the time available, we identified areas outside effort to avoid including developed of proposed listing: Little River, San the geographical area currently areas such as lands covered by Gabriel River, Brushy Creek, San Saba occupied by Texas fatmucket, Texas buildings, pavement, and other River, Llano River, San Marcos River, pimpleback, and Texas fawnsfoot as structures because such lands lack and Guadalupe River (see Unit critical habitat in order to increase the physical or biological features necessary Descriptions, below). occupied stream length of existing small for the Central Texas mussels. The scale of the maps we prepared under the Areas Outside the Geographic Area populations. Not all small (less than 50 parameters for publication within the Occupied at the Time of Listing miles) occupied stream reaches may have adjacent unoccupied reaches that Code of Federal Regulations may not We are not proposing to designate any are reasonably certain to contribute to reflect the exclusion of such developed areas outside the geographical area the conservation of the species, and lands. Any such lands inadvertently left currently occupied by the false spike, while these smaller reaches will inside critical habitat boundaries shown Guadalupe orb, and Guadalupe inherently have a higher risk of on the maps of this proposed rule have fatmucket because we did not find any extirpation, these smaller areas been excluded by text in the proposed unoccupied areas that contained the contribute to the conservation of the rule and are not proposed for necessary PBFs and were essential for species through maintaining designation as critical habitat. the conservation of the species. redundancy and representation. Special Therefore, if the critical habitat is However, each species needs the management within smaller occupied finalized as proposed, a Federal action establishment and protection of units can reduce the risk of extirpation. involving these lands would not trigger additional resilient populations across We are proposing to designate some section 7 consultation under the Act their historical ranges to reduce their areas outside the geographical area with respect to critical habitat and the risk of extinction. While the species currently occupied by Texas fatmucket, requirement of no adverse modification need these areas, we do not currently Texas pimpleback, and Texas fawnsfoot unless the specific action would affect have adequate information to identify we found to be essential for the the physical or biological features in the where these populations could be conservation of each species. The adjacent critical habitat. located at this time. proposed unoccupied subunits are We propose to designate as critical We have determined that a essential to the conservation of the habitat lands that we have determined designation limited to the occupied species because each provides for the are occupied at the time of listing (i.e., units would be inadequate to ensure the growth and expansion of the species currently occupied) and that contain conservation of the Texas fatmucket, within portions of their historical one or more of the physical or biological Texas fawnsfoot, and Texas pimpleback. ranges. The longer the reach occupied features that are essential to support Of the five remaining fragmented and by a species, the more likely it is that life-history processes of the species. We isolated populations of Texas fatmucket, the population can withstand stochastic have determined that occupied areas are two are small in abundance and events such as extreme flooding, inadequate to ensure the conservation of occupied stream length and have low to dewatering, or water contamination. the species. Therefore, we have also no resiliency (i.e., are unhealthy), and Therefore, the unoccupied subunits are identified, and propose for designation one population is functionally each essential for the conservation of as critical habitat, unoccupied areas that extirpated. The other two current the species. These proposed areas are are essential for the conservation of the populations have moderate resiliency located immediately adjacent to species. and remain at risk of extirpation. For currently occupied stream reaches, The proposed critical habitat Texas fawnsfoot, seven populations include one or more of the necessary designations are defined by the map or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47954 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

maps, as modified by any accompanying fatmucket, Texas pimpleback, outside of the very small historical regulatory text, presented at the end of Guadalupe orb, and Texas fawnsfoot. range. In contrast, Texas fawnsfoot was this document under Proposed All but five of the subunits are currently historically widespread in three basins; Regulation Promulgation. We include occupied by one or more of the species, therefore, to maintain the adaptive more detailed information on the and each of the 50 subunits contains the capacity of this species, we are boundaries of the proposed critical physical and biological features proposing to designate a larger area for habitat designations in the discussion of essential to the conservation of each Texas fawnsfoot. Texas surface water is individual units below. We will make species. These proposed critical habitat owned by the State, as are the beds of the coordinates or plot points or both on areas, described below, constitute our navigable streams; thus the actual which each map is based available to current best assessment of areas that critical habitat units (occupied waters the public on http:// meet the definition of critical habitat for and streambeds up to the ordinary high- www.regulations.gov under Docket No. the six Central Texas mussel species. water mark) are owned by the State of FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. Each species historically occurred in a Texas (Texas Water Code Section Proposed Critical Habitat Designation different subset of watersheds in Central 11.021, 11.0235). Adjacent riparian In total, we are proposing to designate Texas; therefore, there are large areas are in most cases, privately approximately 1,944 river mi (3,129 differences in the amount of critical owned, and are what is reported in the river km), accounting for overlapping habitat proposed for each species. For discussion that follows. In many cases, units, in 27 units (total of 50 subunits; example, the Guadalupe fatmucket only activities on adjacent private land Table 8) as critical habitat for one or occurred in the upper reaches of the would not trigger section 7 consultation more Central Texas mussel species: The Guadalupe River basin. As such, we under the Act if those activities do not false spike, Texas fatmucket, Guadalupe have not proposed to designate areas affect instream habitat.

TABLE 8—OVERALL PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE CENTRAL TEXAS MUSSELS [Note: Stream lengths will not sum due to overlapping units.]

Proposed critical Species Basin/unit name Occupied habitat river mi (km)

Guadalupe fatmucket ...... Guadalupe River: ...... Yes. GUFM–1a: North Fork Guadalupe River ...... 7.5 (12.1) GUFM–1b: Johnson Creek ...... 10.4 (16.7) GUFM–1c: Guadalupe River ...... 36.2 (58.3)

Total: 54.1 (87.1)

Texas fatmucket ...... Colorado River: ...... Yes. TXFM–1a: Bluff Creek ...... 11.8 (19.0) TXFM–1b: Lower Elm Creek ...... 12.5 (20.2) TXFM–2: San Saba River ...... 93.4 (150.3) TXFM–3: Cherokee Creek ...... 18.1 (29.2) TXFM–4a: North Llano River ...... 31.2 (50.1) TXFM–4b: South Llano River ...... 22.9 (36.8) TXFM–4c: Llano River ...... 90.4 (145.6) TXFM–4d: James River ...... 18.6 (30.1) TXFM–4e: Threadgill Creek ...... 8.3 (13.4) TXFM–4f: Beaver Creek ...... 12.9 (20.8) TXFM–5a: Pedernales River ...... 80.1 (128.9) TXFM–5b: Live Oak Creek ...... 2.6 (4.2) TXFM–6a: Lower Onion Creek ...... 5.2 (8.3)

Total: 408.2 (656.8) Colorado River: ...... No. TXFM–1c: Upper Elm Creek ...... 9.1 (14.7) TXFM–6b: Upper Onion Creek ...... 18.9 (30.4)

Total: 28 (45.1)

Texas fawnsfoot ...... Brazos River: ...... Yes. TXFF–1a: Upper Clear Fork Brazos River ...... 27.9 (44.9) TXFF–2: Upper Brazos River ...... 79.9 (128.6) TXFF–3a: Lower Brazos River ...... 348.0 (560.0) TXFF–3b: Navasota River ...... 39.3 (63.2) Colorado River: TXFF–4: Little River ...... 35.6 (57.3) TXFF–5a: San Saba River ...... 50.4 (81.1) TXFF–5b: Upper Colorado River ...... 10.5 (16.9) TXFF–6: Lower Colorado River ...... 124.4 (200.2) Trinity River: TXFF–7: East Fork Trinity River ...... 15.6 (25.1) TXFF–8: Trinity River ...... 157.0 (252.7)

Total: 888.6 (1,430.1)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47955

TABLE 8—OVERALL PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE CENTRAL TEXAS MUSSELS—Continued [Note: Stream lengths will not sum due to overlapping units.]

Proposed critical Species Basin/unit name Occupied habitat river mi (km)

Brazos River: ...... No. TXFF–1b: Lower Clear Fork Brazos River ...... 28.6 (46.0)

Guadalupe orb ...... Guadalupe River: ...... Yes. GORB–1a: South Fork Guadalupe River ...... 5.1 (8.3) GORB–1b: Upper Guadalupe River ...... 99.4 (159.9) GORB–2a: San Marcos River ...... 65.3 (105.1) GORB–2b: Lower Guadalupe River ...... 124.7 (200.7)

294.5 (474.0)

Texas pimpleback ...... Colorado River: ...... Yes. TXPB–1a: Bluff Creek ...... 11.8 (19.0) TXPB–1b: Lower Elm Creek ...... 12.5 (20.2) TXPB–2a: Lower Concho River ...... 35.6 (57.2) TXPB–3a: Upper Colorado River ...... 153.8 (247.6) TXPB–3b: Lower San Saba River ...... 50.4 (81.1) TXPB–4: Upper San Saba River ...... 52.8 (85.0) TXPB–5a: Upper Llano River ...... 38.3 (61.6) TXPB–6: Lower Colorado River ...... 111.3 (179.1)

Total: 466.5 (750.8) Colorado River: ...... No. TXPB–2b: Upper Concho River ...... 16.0 (25.7) TXPB–5b: Lower Llano River ...... 12.2 (19.7)

Total: 28.2 (45.4)

False spike ...... Brazos River: ...... Yes. FASP–1a: Little River ...... 35.6 (57.3) FASP–1b: San Gabriel River ...... 31.4 (50.5) FASP–1c: Brushy Creek ...... 14.0 (22.5) Colorado River: FASP–2: San Saba River ...... 50.4 (81.1) FASP–3: Llano River ...... 50.5 (81.3) Guadalupe River: FASP–4a: San Marcos River ...... 21.6 (34.8) FASP–4b: Guadalupe River ...... 124.7 (200.7)

Total: 328.2 (528.2)

Guadalupe Fatmucket below constitute our current best ownership, and approximate length of assessment of areas that meet the the proposed designated areas for the We are proposing to designate definition of critical habitat for Texas fatmucket. We present a brief approximately 54.1 river mi (87.1 river Guadalupe fatmucket. The unit we description of the proposed unit, and km) in a single unit (three subunits) as propose as critical habitat is GUFM–1: reasons why it meets the definition of critical habitat for Guadalupe fatmucket. Guadalupe River Unit. Table 9 shows critical habitat for Guadalupe fatmucket, The critical habitat areas we describe the occupancy of the unit, the riparian below.

TABLE 9—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE GUADALUPE FATMUCKET [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding.]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

GUFM–1: Guadalupe River ...... GUFM–1a: North Fork Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 7.5 (12.1) GUFM–1b: Johnson Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 10.4 (16.7) GUFM–1c: Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 36.2 (58.3)

Total ...... 54.1 (87.1)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47956 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Guadalupe River Basin riparian area is privately owned. The all of the PBFs essential to the subunit is occupied by the Guadalupe conservation of the species. The Unit GUFM–1: Guadalupe River fatmucket. This site contains the Guadalupe River subunit is Subunit GUFM–1a: North Fork majority of the PBFs essential to the experiencing some urbanization and is Guadalupe River. The North Fork conservation of the species. Certain influenced by drought, low flows, and Guadalupe River subunit consists of 7.5 PBFs, such as sufficient water flow, flooding (leading to scour), and is being river mi (12.1 river km) in Kerr County, dissolved oxygen levels, and water affected by ongoing agricultural Texas. The adjacent riparian areas of the temperature, may be missing or activities and development resulting in subunit are privately owned. The entire degraded during times of drought. The excessive sedimentation, water quality subunit is currently occupied by the Johnson Creek subunit is in a mostly degradation, ground water withdrawals species. The North Fork Guadalupe rural but urbanizing setting, is and surface water diversions, and River subunit extends from the FM 1340 influenced by drought, low flows, and wastewater inputs. Therefore, special bridge crossing (just upstream of the flooding (leading to scour), and is being management is necessary to reduce Bear Creek Boy Scout camp) affected by ongoing agricultural sedimentation, improve water quality, downstream to the confluence with the activities and development resulting in maintain adequate flows, and improve Guadalupe River. This subunit contains excessive sedimentation, water quality habitat connectivity. This subunit is all of the PBFs essential to the degradation, and groundwater also occupied by Guadalupe orb. conservation of the Guadalupe withdrawals and surface water fatmucket. The North Fork Guadalupe diversions. Therefore, special Texas Fatmucket River subunit is in a mostly rural management is necessary to reduce setting; is influenced by drought, low sedimentation, improve water quality, We are proposing to designate flows, and flooding (leading to scour); maintain adequate flows, and improve approximately 436.0 river mi (701.7 km) and is being affected by ongoing habitat connectivity. in 6 units (15 subunits) as critical agricultural activities and development Subunit GUFM–1c: Guadalupe River. habitat for Texas fatmucket. The critical resulting in excessive sedimentation, This unit consists of approximately 36.2 habitat areas we describe below water quality degradation, and ground river mi (58.3 river km) in Kerr and constitute our current best assessment of water withdrawals and surface water Kendall Counties, Texas. The areas that meet the definition of critical diversions. Therefore, special Guadalupe River Subunit extends from habitat for Texas fatmucket. The six management is necessary to reduce the confluence of the North and South areas we propose as critical habitat are: sedimentation, improve water quality, Fork Guadalupe Rivers downstream to TXFM–1: Elm Creek Unit; TXFM–2: San maintain adequate flows, and improve the Interstate Highway 10 bridge Saba River Unit; TXFM–3: Cherokee habitat connectivity. Special crossing near Comfort, Texas. The Creek Unit; TXFM–4: Llano River Unit; management may be necessary to ensure adjacent riparian areas of this subunit TXFM–5: Pedernales River Unit; and adequate instream flow and water are privately owned. The subunit is TXFM–6: Onion Creek Unit. Table 10 quality. occupied by the Guadalupe fatmucket. shows the occupancy of the units, the Subunit GUFM–1b: Johnson Creek. This portion of the Guadalupe River riparian ownership, and approximate The Johnson Creek subunit consists of basin is largely agricultural with several length of the proposed designated areas 10.4 river mi (16.7 river km) within Kerr municipalities and multiple low-head for the Texas fatmucket. We present County, Texas. The Johnson Creek dams originally built for a variety of brief descriptions of all proposed units, subunit begins at the Byas Springs Road purposes and now largely used for and reasons why they meet the crossing downstream to the confluence recreation (kayaking, fishing, camping, definition of critical habitat for Texas with the Guadalupe River. The adjacent swimming, etc.). This subunit provides fatmucket, below.

TABLE 10—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR TEXAS FATMUCKET [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding.]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

TXFM–1: Elm Creek ...... TXFM–1a: Bluff Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 11.8 (19.0) TXFM–1b: Lower Elm Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 12.5 (20.2) TXFM–1c: Upper Elm Creek ...... Private ...... Unoccupied 9.1 (14.7) TXFM–2: San Saba River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 93.4 (150.3) TXFM–3: Cherokee Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 18.1 (29.2) TXFM–4: Llano River ...... TXFM–4a: North Llano River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 31.2 (50.1) TXFM–4b: South Llano River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 22.9 (36.8) TXFM–4c: Llano River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 90.4 (145.6) TXFM–4d: James River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 18.6 (30.1) TXFM–4e: Threadgill Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 8.3 (13.4) TXFM–4f: Beaver Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 12.9 (20.8) TXFM–5: Pedernales River ...... TXFM–5a: Pedernales River ...... Private, Fed- Occupied .... 80.1 (128.9) eral. TXFM–5b: Live Oak Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 2.6 (4.2) TXFM–6: Onion Creek ...... TXFM–6a: Lower Onion Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 5.2 (8.3) TXFM–6b: Upper Onion Creek ...... Private ...... Unoccupied 18.9 (30.4)

Total ...... 436.0 (701.7)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47957

Colorado River Basin Subunit TXFM–1c: Upper Elm Creek. during times of drought punctuated by Because we have determined occupied high flows are either scouring the Unit TXFM–1: Elm Creek areas are not adequate for the stream habitat, or depositing stream Subunit TXFM–1a: Bluff Creek. This conservation of the species, we sediments downstream. Because occupied critical habitat subunit evaluated whether any unoccupied mussels are sedentary organisms, consists of 11.8 river mi (19.0 km) of areas are essential for the conservation transportation of individuals during Bluff Creek, a tributary to Elm Creek, in of Texas fatmucket and identified this flooding events is often lethal. Runnels County, Texas. The subunit area as essential for the conservation of The Texas fatmucket uses predatory extends from the County Road 153 the species. This subunit consists of 9.1 fish (e.g., bass and sunfishes) for its host bridge crossing, near the town of river mi (14.7 km) from the County Road infestation period of its lifecycle. These Winters, Texas, downstream to the 153 crossing, near the town of Winters, host fishes (PBF 3) are presumed to be confluence of Bluff and Elm creeks. The Texas, downstream to the confluence of common throughout the state of Texas riparian area of this subunit is privately Bluff and Elm creeks. The riparian area and within the Upper Elm Creek owned. This subunit is currently surrounding this subunit is privately subunit. While ongoing research may be occupied by Texas fatmucket. The Bluff owned. The entire Elm Creek watershed necessary to confirm current abundance Creek subunit is in a rural setting, is is dominated by agriculture and remains of host fishes are at suitable levels, we influenced by drought, low flows, and rural. Upper Elm Creek is not currently currently believe they are adequate. elevated chlorides, and is being affected occupied by Texas fatmucket, but it is This subunit is not included in Texas by ongoing agricultural activities and essential for the conservation of the Commission on Environmental Quality development resulting in excessive species because it provides for the classified stream segments; therefore, sedimentation, water quality growth and expansion of the Texas we have no specific water quality degradation, and ground water fatmucket within a portion of its information. During times of normal withdrawals and surface water historical range on Elm Creek; the flow this subunit likely supports diversions. Therefore, special occupied segment of Elm Creek is too healthy water quality parameters (PBF management is necessary to reduce small to ensure conservation of the 4) for Texas fatmucket, but water quality sedimentation, improve water quality, Texas fatmucket over the long term. is likely compromised during low flows, when water temperatures rise and maintain adequate flows, and improve This unit is important to the dissolved oxygen drops. The Upper Elm habitat connectivity. This subunit is conservation of Texas fatmucket Creek subunit will require additional also occupied by Texas pimpleback. because it is the furthest upstream population; its loss would shrink the management practices to ensure Subunit TXFM–1b: Lower Elm Creek. overall range of Texas fatmucket to the sufficient water quality standards are This subunit consists of 12.5 river mi lower, larger tributaries of the Colorado being met and maintained for Texas (20.2 km) of Elm Creek beginning at the River. Additionally, this population of fatmucket. confluence of Bluff Creek and Texas fatmucket is substantially far from Because this reach of Elm Creek continuing downstream to Elm Creek’s the other population of the species, such periodically contains the flowing water confluence with the Colorado River in that if a catastrophic event such as conditions and host fish species used by Runnels County, Texas. The riparian drought or extreme flooding were to Texas fatmucket, it qualifies as habitat lands adjacent to this subunit are occur it is likely that this population according to our regulatory definition privately owned. The Elm Creek would be affected differently, increasing (50 CFR 424.02). watershed is relatively small and the chance of the species surviving such If the Texas fatmucket can be remains largely rural and dominated by an event. reestablished in this reach, it will agricultural practices. This stream The Upper Elm Creek subunit is in a expand the occupied reach length in regularly has extremely low or no flow rural setting, is influenced by drought, Elm Creek to a length that will be more during times of drought. Moreover, this low flows, and elevated chlorides, and resilient to the stressors that the species stream has elevated chloride is being affected by ongoing agricultural is facing. The longer the reach occupied concentrations and sedimentation activities. Although it is considered by a species, the more likely it is that resulting in reduced habitat quality and unoccupied, portions of this subunit the population can withstand stochastic availability, and decreased water contain some or all of the physical or events such as extreme flooding, quality. Lower Elm Creek is occupied by biological features essential for the dewatering, or water contamination. In Texas fatmucket and contains some of conservation of the species. As the SSA report, we identified 50 miles the PBFs essential to the conservation of previously mentioned, flow rates in this (80.5 km) as a reach long enough for a the species such as presence of host subunit are typically not within the population to be able to withstand fish; others are in degraded condition range required by the Texas fatmucket stochastic events, and the addition of and would benefit from management (PBF 1). This subunit is often this 10.9-mile reach, as well as the actions such as improving water quality characterized by small, isolated pools adjacent tributary of Bluff Creek, would and substrate. The Lower Elm Creek separated by short riffles over bedrock expand the existing Texas fatmucket subunit is influenced by drought, low during low flow and when dam releases population downstream in Lower Elm flows, and elevated chlorides, and is are minimal. During the last decade, Creek and in Bluff Creek closer to 50 being affected by ongoing agricultural lower Elm Creek has experienced both miles. The addition of multiple activities and development resulting in the lowest and highest flow rates on tributaries increases the value of the excessive sedimentation, water quality record (see SSA report for more overall critical habitat unit, providing degradation, and ground water information). This subunit will require protection for the population should a withdrawals and surface water management actions that address flow stochastic event occur in one tributary. diversions. Therefore, special rate and associated stream habitat If Texas fatmucket were to become management is necessary to reduce quality. reestablished throughout this unit, it sedimentation, improve water quality, Suitable stream habitat and would likely be a moderately to highly maintain adequate flows, and improve hydrological connectivity (PBF 2) are resilient population due to longer habitat connectivity. This unit is also unsupported throughout the entirety of stream length and would increase the occupied by Texas pimpleback. this subunit. Specifically, low flows species’ future redundancy. This unit is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47958 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

essential for the conservation of the collection. Therefore, special privately owned and largely dominated species because it will provide habitat management is necessary to reduce by rural agricultural operations. This for range expansion in portions of sedimentation, improve water quality, subunit is not heavily influenced by known historical habitat that is maintain adequate flows, improve spring inputs like some other tributaries necessary to increase viability of the habitat connectivity, and manage to the Llano River, such as the South species by increasing its resiliency, collection. Special management will be Llano River. During summertime low redundancy, and representation. necessary to ensure adequate flow and flows and extended periods of drought, We are reasonably certain that this prevent water quality degradation. This this subunit often becomes a series of unit will contribute to the conservation subunit is also occupied by Texas isolated pools separated by shallow of the species, because the need for fawnsfoot, Texas pimpleback, and false flowing riffles over bedrock. These conservation efforts is recognized and is spike. reduced flows can leave mussels being discussed by our conservation stranded and dessicated in dry beds or Unit TXFM–3: Cherokee Creek partners, and methods for restoring and isolated in shallow pools. Decreased reintroducing the species into This unit consists of 18.1 river mi flows can also result in decreased water unoccupied habitat are being developed. (29.2 km) of Cherokee Creek in San Saba quality, specifically in the form of The Texas fatmucket is listed as County, Texas. The adjacent riparian reduced dissolved oxygen and increased threatened by the State of Texas, and the lands are privately owned. The temperature. Special management may Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Cherokee Creek unit extends from the be required to address ongoing concerns has funded research, surveys, County Road 409 bridge crossing of low flows and subsequent water propagation, and reintroduction studies downstream to the confluence with the quality degradation. for this species. State and Federal Colorado River. This unit is occupied by Subunit TXFM–4b: South Llano River. partners have shown interest in the Texas fatmucket and contains all of The South Llano River subunit extends propagation and reintroduction efforts the PBFs essential to the conservation of from the Edwards and Kimble County for the Texas fatmucket. As previously the species. Even though this unit is line downstream 22.9 river mi (36.8 mentioned, efforts are underway smaller than 50 miles, which we had river km) to the confluence with the regarding a captive propagation program determined was the reach length long North Llano River in Kimble County, for Texas fatmucket at the San Marcos enough to withstand stochastic events, Texas. Riparian areas adjacent to this Aquatic Resource Center and Inks Dam this population increases the species’ subunit are privately owned. Major National Fish Hatchery. The State of redundancy, making it more likely to activities in this basin are farming, Texas, San Marcos Aquatic Resource withstand catastrophic events that may ranching, and other agricultural uses, as Center, Inks Dam National Fish eliminate one or more of the other the watershed remains largely rural. The Hatchery, and the Service’s Austin and populations. The Cherokee Creek unit is South Llano River subunit is occupied Texas Coastal Field Offices collaborate in a rural setting, is influenced by by the Texas fatmucket and contains all regularly on conservation actions. drought and low flows, and is being of the PBFs essential to the conservation Therefore, this unoccupied critical affected by ongoing agricultural of the species. The South Llano River habitat subunit is essential for the activities and development resulting in subunit is influenced by flooding conservation of the Texas fatmucket and excessive sedimentation, water quality (leading to scour), drought, and low is reasonably certain to contribute to degradation, and groundwater flows and is being affected by ongoing such conservation. withdrawals and surface water agricultural activities and development diversions. Therefore, special resulting in excessive sedimentation, Unit TXFM–2: San Saba River management is necessary to reduce water quality degradation, and This unit consists of 93.4 river mi sedimentation, improve water quality, groundwater withdrawals and surface (150.3 km) of the San Saba River in maintain adequate flows, and improve water diversions. Therefore, special Menard, Mason, McCulloch, and San habitat connectivity. Special management is necessary to reduce Saba Counties, Texas. This unit of the management may be necessary to limit sedimentation, improve water quality, San Saba River extends from the the effect of low flow and drought maintain adequate flows, and improve Schleicher and Menard County line, conditions. With this special habitat connectivity. Special near Fort McKavett, Texas, downstream management, the threats to the management will be required to address to the San Saba River confluence with population may be reduced, increasing episodic low flows during summer the Colorado River. The adjacent the resiliency of the population, and drought and associated with reduced riparian areas are privately owned. This providing additional redundancy and spring flow. basin is largely rural and is dominated representation for the species. Subunit TXFM–4c: Llano River. This by mostly agricultural activities subunit consists of 90.4 river mi (145.6 including cattle grazing and hay and Unit TXFM–4: Llano River km) in Kimble, Mason, and Llano pecan farming. This unit is affected by Subunit TXFM–4a: North Llano River. Counties, Texas. The Llano River very low flows and drought during the This subunit consists of 31.2 river mi subunit begins at the confluence of the summer, which is exacerbated by (50.1 km) in Sutton and Kimble North and South Fork Llano River and pumping. This unit contains all of the Counties, Texas. The North Llano River continues downstream to the State PBFs essential to the conservation of the subunit extends from the most upstream Highway 16 bridge crossing in Llano Texas fatmucket and is currently County Road 307 bridge crossing in County. The riparian land adjacent to occupied by the species. The San Saba Sutton County downstream for 31.2 the subunit is privately owned, and the River unit is influenced by drought, low river mi (50.1 river km) into Kimble watershed remains largely rural. The flows, underlying geology resulting in a County at the confluence with the South Llano River subunit is occupied by the losing reach and is being affected by Llano River near the city of Junction, Texas fatmucket and contains all of the ongoing agricultural activities and Texas. The North Llano River is PBFs essential to the conservation of the development resulting in excessive occupied by the Texas fatmucket and species. The Llano River subunit is in a sedimentation, water quality contains all of the PBFs essential to the rural setting; is influenced by flooding degradation, groundwater withdrawals conservation of the species. Riparian (leading to scour), drought, and low and surface water diversions, and areas adjacent to this subunit are flows; and is being affected by ongoing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47959

agricultural activities and development PBFs essential to the conservation of although 1.5 river mi (2.4 river km) resulting in excessive sedimentation, Texas fatmucket. The Beaver Creek within Lyndon B. Johnson National water quality degradation, and subunit is in a rural setting; is Historical Park owned and managed by groundwater withdrawals and surface influenced by flooding (leading to the National Park Service (NPS) in water diversions. Therefore, special scour), drought, and low flows; and is Gillespie County, Texas. The subunit is management is necessary to reduce being affected by ongoing agricultural currently occupied by the Texas sedimentation, improve water quality, activities and development resulting in fatmucket and supports all of the PBFs maintain adequate flows, and improve excessive sedimentation, water quality essential to the conservation of the habitat connectivity. Special degradation, and ground water species. The watershed of the management may be necessary to withdrawals and surface water Pedernales River is characterized by prevent low-flow conditions due to diversions. Therefore, special agricultural uses including irrigated drought and agricultural water use. This management is necessary to reduce orchards and vineyards. Excess subunit is also occupied by Texas sedimentation, improve water quality, nutrients, sediment, and pollutants pimpleback and false spike. maintain adequate flows, and improve enter the Pedernales River from Subunit TXFM–4d: James River. The habitat connectivity. wastewater, agricultural runoff, and James River subunit consists of 18.6 This subunit is connected to known urban stormwater runoff, all of which river mi (30.1 km) of the James River populations of Texas fatmucket in reduces instream water quality. The and begins at the Kimble and Mason Subunits TXFM–4c and TXFM–4e, but Pedernales River geology, like many county line and continues downstream there are no recent surveys of Beaver central Texas rivers, is predominately to the Llano River confluence. Adjacent Creek itself. There are no instream limestone outcroppings; therefore, this riparian areas are privately owned. The structures in subunits TXFM–4c and system is subject to flashy, episodic James River subunit is occupied by the TXFM–4e that would impede water flooding during rain events that Texas fatmucket and contains all of the flow; the flow regime is the same as in mobilize large amounts of sediment and PBFs essential to the conservation of the those subunits; and the host fish may wood materials. Special management species. The James River subunit is in move between the subunits freely. may be required in this subunit to a rural setting; is influenced by flooding Based on this information, it is address low water levels as a result of (leading to scour), drought, and low reasonable to conclude that the water withdrawals and drought. flows; and is being affected by ongoing populations in subunits TXFM–4c and Additionally, implementation of the agricultural activities and development TXFM–4e are unlikely to stop at the highest levels of treatment of resulting in excessive sedimentation, most up- or downstream survey wastewater practicable would improve water quality degradation, and location; therefore, we conclude that water quality in this subunit, and groundwater withdrawals and surface this subunit is occupied. maintenance of riparian habitat and water diversions. Therefore, special However, due to the lack of recent upland buffers would maintain or management is necessary to reduce surveys, we are analyzing this subunit improve substrate quality. sedimentation, improve water quality, against the second prong of the Subunit TXFM–5b: Live Oak Creek. maintain adequate flows, and improve definition of critical habitat for The Live Oak Creek subunit consists of habitat connectivity. unoccupied habitat out of an abundance 2.6 river mi (4.2 river km) in Gillespie Subunit TXFM–4e: Threadgill Creek. of caution. If subunit TXFM–4f is not, County, Texas. Riparian ownership of The Threadgill Creek subunit consists of in fact, occupied, it is essential to the lands adjacent to this subunit is private. 8.3 river mi (13.4 river km) extending conservation of the species because it The Live Oak Creek subunit originates from the Ranch Road 783 bridge provides for needed growth and at the FM 2093 bridge crossing crossing downstream to the confluence expansion of the species in this portion downstream to its confluence with the with Beaver Creek. Riparian lands of its historical range and connectivity Pedernales River. This subunit is adjacent to this subunit are privately between documented occupied reaches. currently occupied by Texas fatmucket owned. Threadgill Creek is occupied by Connecting occupied reaches increases and contains all of the PBFs essential to the Texas fatmucket and contains all of the resiliency of the occupied reaches the conservation of the species. The the PBFs essential to the conservation of by allowing for gene flow and Live Oak Creek subunit is in a mostly the species. The Threadgill Creek repopulation after stochastic events. The rural setting with some urbanization; is subunit is in a rural setting; is longer the occupied reach, the more influenced by drought, low flows, and influenced by flooding (leading to likely it is that the Texas fatmucket flooding (leading to scour); and is being scour), drought, and low flows; and is population can rebound after stochastic affected by ongoing development and being affected by ongoing agricultural events such as extreme flooding, agricultural activities resulting in activities and development resulting in dewatering, or water contamination. excessive sedimentation, water quality excessive sedimentation, water quality Therefore, subunit TXFM–4e is essential degradation, and groundwater degradation, and ground water for the conservation of the species. withdrawals and surface water withdrawals and surface water diversions. Therefore, special Unit TXFM–5: Pedernales River diversions. Therefore, special management is necessary to reduce management is necessary to reduce Subunit TXFM–5a: Pedernales River. sedimentation, improve water quality, sedimentation, improve water quality, The Pedernales River subunit consists of maintain adequate flows, and improve maintain adequate flows, and improve 80.1 river mi (128.9 river km) in habitat connectivity. Special habitat connectivity. Gillespie, Blanco, Hays, and Travis management considerations may be Subunit TXFM–4f: Beaver Creek. The Counties, Texas. The Pedernales River required to address periods of low flow, Beaver Creek Subunit consists of 12.9 subunit extends from the origination of increased sedimentation, and water river mi (20.8 river km) and begins at the Pedernales River at the confluence quality degradation. the confluence with Threadgill Creek of Bear and Wolf creeks in Gillespie and continues downstream to the County downstream to the FM 3238 Unit TXFM–6: Onion Creek confluence with the Llano River. (Hamilton Pool Road) bridge crossing in Subunit TXFM–6a: Lower Onion Adjacent riparian habitats are privately Travis County. The riparian area of this Creek. The Lower Onion Creek subunit owned. This subunit contains all of the subunit is primarily privately owned, consists of 5.2 river mi (8.3 river km) in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47960 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Travis County, Texas. This subunit fatmucket. Additionally, this population Because this reach of Onion Creek extends from the State Highway 130 of Texas fatmucket is substantially far periodically contains the flowing water bridge crossing downstream to the from the other population of the species, conditions and host fish species used by confluence with the Colorado River. such that if a catastrophic event such as Texas fatmucket, it qualifies as habitat This subunit is in close proximity to the drought or extreme flooding were to according to our regulatory definition rapidly urbanizing city of Austin, Texas, occur it is likely that this population (50 CFR 424.02). and contains substantial municipal would be affected differently, increasing If the Texas fatmucket becomes developments. The effects of such rapid the chance of the species surviving such reestablished in this reach, it will and widespread urbanization have an event. The subunit is being affected expand the occupied reach length in contributed to significantly altered by ongoing agricultural and Onion Creek to a length that will be flows in Onion Creek that have led to development activities resulting in more resilient to the stressors that the bank destabilization, increased excessive sedimentation, water quality species is facing. The longer the reach sedimentation and streambed degradation, ground water withdrawals occupied by a species, the more likely mobilization, and loss of stable and surface water diversions, and it is that the population can withstand substrate. Further, urban runoff wastewater inputs. stochastic events such as extreme pollutants are responsible for degraded Although it is considered unoccupied, flooding, dewatering, or water water quality conditions. Even though portions of this subunit contain some or contamination. The addition of this this unit is smaller than 50 miles, which all of the physical or biological features 18.9-mile reach to the 5.2-mile occupied we had determined was the reach length essential for the conservation of the section of Onion Creek would expand long enough to withstand stochastic species. Water quantity (PBF 1) is likely the existing Texas fatmucket population events, the population increases the present only during portions of the year. in Onion Creek to 25.1 miles. While this species’ redundancy, making it more This subunit is subjected to extreme reach length is still less than 50 miles, likely to withstand catastrophic events high and extreme low flows during (the stream length identified in the SSA that may eliminate one or more of the periods of flash flooding and prolonged report as a reach long enough for a other populations. Further, it is the drought. This subunit requires population to be able to withstand easternmost population of Texas management actions that address these stochastic events) the additional stream fatmucket and its loss would lessen the hydrological alterations leading to miles would substantially increase the species’ distribution considerably. The extreme high and low flow events. resiliency of this population and Lower Onion Creek subunit is occupied Suitable substrate and connected dramatically reduce the likelihood of its by Texas fatmucket. The subunit occurs instream habitats (PBF 2) are not present extirpation. If this unit were established, within private land and contains some through the majority of this reach. The it would likely be a moderately resilient of the PBFs essential to the conservation Upper Onion Creek subunit’s watershed population due to longer stream length of Texas fatmucket, including host is highly urbanized and even minor and would increase the species’ future fishes. Several PBFs, such as water precipitation events frequently result in redundancy This unit is essential for the quality, sufficient flow rates, and elevated flows, which scour, mobilize, conservation of the species because it sedimentation, are either missing in this and redeposit stream bed materials. will provide habitat for range expansion subunit or minimally acceptable for the Management actions addressing in portions of known historical habitat species. Special management is overland flows and the frequency of that is necessary to increase viability of necessary to reduce sedimentation, elevated flows in this subunit are the species by increasing its resiliency, improve water quality, maintain required. redundancy, and representation. adequate flows, and improve habitat Access to host fishes (PBF 3) is the We are reasonably certain that this connectivity. only physical or biological factor unit will contribute to the conservation Subunit TXFM–6b: Upper Onion currently supported by this subunit of the species because it is an extension Creek. Because we have determined because Texas fatmucket utilize of a currently occupied unit and it occupied areas are not adequate for the common basses and sunfishes (see the supports the host fish of the species conservation of the species, we have SSA report for more details). Future (PBF 2), as well as the appropriate evaluated whether any unoccupied management actions could focus on flowing water conditions (PBF 1) areas are essential for the conservation determining if the abundance and periodically. Additionally, the need for of Texas fatmucket and identified this distribution of host fish are sufficient to conservation efforts is recognized and is area as essential for the conservation of support a robust Texas fatmucket being discussed by our conservation the species. The Upper Onion Creek population. partners, and methods for restoring and subunit consists of 18.9 river mi (30.4 Urban runoff and resulting inflows reintroducing the species into river km) of stream habitat with private from tributary streams contributes to unoccupied habitat are being worked riparian ownership. The subunit begins elevated levels of salts and decreased on. The Texas fatmucket is listed as at the Interstate Highway 35 bridge dissolved oxygen levels in Onion Creek. threatened by the State of Texas, and the crossing and extends downstream to the While these parameters may be present Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts State Highway 130 bridge, where it is during periods of normal flows, we has funded research, surveys, adjacent to subunit TXFM–6a. The believe they are degraded overall. propagation, and reintroduction studies Upper Onion Creek subunit is in a rural Management actions that contribute to for this species. State and Federal but urbanizing setting and is influenced increased quality of key water partners have shown interest in by drought, low flows, and flooding parameters (PBF 4) would benefit this propagation and reintroduction efforts (leading to scour). Riparian lands stream subunit and allow for the for the Texas fatmucket. As previously adjacent to this subunit are privately reestablishment of Texas fatmucket. mentioned, efforts are underway owned. This subunit occurs within the Barton regarding a captive propagation program This unit is essential to the Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer for Texas fatmucket at the San Marcos conservation of Texas fatmucket recharge zone, and the continued Aquatic Resource Center and Inks Dam because it would expand the management of this aquifer may National Fish Hatchery. The State of easternmost population; its loss would indirectly benefit Texas fatmucket Texas, San Marcos Aquatic Resource diminish the distribution of Texas through water quality improvements. Center, Inks Dam National Fish

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47961

Hatchery, and the Service’s Austin and km) in eight units (11 subunits) as Unit; TXFF–6: Lower Colorado River Texas Coastal Field Offices collaborate critical habitat for Texas fawnsfoot. The Unit; TXFF–7: East Fork Trinity River regularly on conservation actions. critical habitat areas we describe below Unit; and TXFF–8: Trinity River Unit. Therefore, this unoccupied critical constitute our current best assessment of Table 11 shows the occupancy of the habitat subunit is essential for the areas that meet the definition of critical units, the riparian ownership, and conservation of the Texas fatmucket and habitat for Texas fawnsfoot. The eight approximate length of the proposed is reasonably certain to contribute to areas we propose as critical habitat are: designated areas for the Texas such conservation. TXFF–1: Clear Fork Brazos River Unit; fawnsfoot. We present brief descriptions TXFF–2: Upper Brazos River Unit; of all proposed units, and reasons why Texas Fawnsfoot TXFF–3: Lower Brazos River Unit; they meet the definition of critical We are proposing to designate TXFF–4: Little River; TXFF–5: Lower habitat for Texas fawnsfoot, below. approximately 917.2 river mi (1,476.1 San Saba and Upper Colorado River

TABLE 11—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE TEXAS FAWNSFOOT (Truncilla macrodon) [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding.]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

TXFF–1: Clear Fork Brazos River ...... TXFF–1a: Upper Clear Fork Brazos River ..... Private ...... Occupied .... 27.9 (44.9) TXFF–1b: Lower Clear Fork Brazos River ..... Private ...... Unoccupied 28.6 (46.0) TXFF–2: Upper Brazos River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 79.9 (128.6) TXFF–3: Lower Brazos River ...... TXFF–3a: Lower Brazos River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 348.0 (560.0) TXFF–3b: Navasota River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 39.3 (63.2) TXFF–4: Little River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 35.6 (57.3) TXFF–5: Lower San Saba and Upper Colo- TXFF–5a. Lower San Saba River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 50.4 (81.1) rado River. TXFF–5b. Upper Colorado River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 10.5 (16.9) TXFF–6: Lower Colorado River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 124.4 (200.2) TXFF–7: East Fork Trinity River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 15.6 (25.1) TXFF–8: Trinity River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 157.0 (252.7)

Total ...... 917.2 (1,476.1)

Brazos River Basin degradation, ground water withdrawals fawnsfoot, such as extreme flooding or and surface water diversions, and drought, it is likely that this population Unit TXFF–1: Clear Fork of the Brazos wastewater inputs. Therefore, special would not be affected in the same way, River management is necessary to reduce increasing the chance of the species Subunit TXFF–1a: Upper Clear Fork sedimentation, improve water quality, surviving such an event. The Lower of the Brazos River. The Upper Clear maintain adequate flows, and improve Clear Fork Brazos River Subunit is in a Fork of the Brazos River Subunit habitat connectivity. rural setting; is influenced by drought, consists of approximately 27.9 river mi Subunit TXFF–1b: Lower Clear Fork low flows, and chlorides; and is being (44.9 river km) in Throckmorton and of the Brazos River. Because we have affected by ongoing agricultural Shackelford Counties, Texas. The determined occupied areas are not activities and development, resulting in subunit begins at the confluence of adequate for the conservation of the excessive sedimentation, water quality Paint Creek and extends downstream to species, we have evaluated whether any degradation, ground water withdrawals the US Highway 283 bridge, near Fort unoccupied areas are essential for the and surface water diversions, and Griffin, Texas. Adjacent riparian lands conservation of Texas fawnsfoot and wastewater inputs. are privately owned. This subunit is identified this area as essential for the Although it is considered unoccupied, occupied by Texas fawnsfoot and conservation of the species. The Lower portions of this subunit contain some or contains some of the PBFs essential to Clear Fork of the Brazos River Subunit all of the physical or biological features the conservation of the species, such as consists of 28.6 river mi (46.0 river km) essential for the conservation of the appropriate fish hosts and appropriate in Shackelford and Stephens Counties, species. Flowing water at rates needed flows during portions of the year. The Texas. This subunit begins at the US by Texas fawnsfoot (PBF 1) is not Upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River Highway 283 bridge and continues adequate in this subunit throughout does not currently have sufficient flow, downstream to the US Highway 183 most of the year due to low and water quality is often inadequate for bridge in Stephens County, Texas. precipitation, surface diversions, and the Texas fawnsfoot in this subunit, Adjacent riparian lands are privately groundwater withdrawals. In the SSA largely due to ongoing low-flow owned. report, we noted that the Lower Clear conditions from summertime drought This unit is essential to the Fork of the Brazos River experienced and continued pressure on already conservation of Texas fawnsfoot because both the lowest flow rate (0 cfs) during strained water resources for municipal it would expand the most northern the 2011 drought and the highest flow and agricultural uses. population; its loss would reduce the rate (approaching 4,000 cfs) during the The Upper Clear Fork Brazos River distribution of Texas fawnsfoot to only 2015 floods. This altered hydrological subunit is in a rural setting and is mainstem, higher order streams. regime also degrades stream habitat influenced by drought, low flows, and Additionally, this population of Texas (PBF 2) by either scouring out available chlorides. The subunit is being affected fawnsfoot is geographically distant from substrate or depositing large amounts of by ongoing agricultural activities and the other populations of the species, sediment on top of otherwise suitable development, resulting in excessive such that if a catastrophic event were to areas. Appropriate substrates are found sedimentation, water quality occur within the range of Texas only in isolated reaches. Management

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47962 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

actions that allow for improvement of unoccupied habitat are being developed. and surface water diversions, and degraded habitat areas within this The Texas fawnsfoot is listed as wastewater inputs. Therefore, special subunit would allow Texas fawnsfoot threatened by the State of Texas, and the management is necessary to reduce populations to expand and increase the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts sedimentation, improve water quality, subunit’s resiliency. has funded research, surveys, maintain adequate flows, and improve Freshwater drum, the Texas propagation, and reintroduction studies habitat connectivity. Special fawnsfoot’s host fish (PBF 3), is for this species. State and Federal management may be required to expected to be present in the Lower partners have shown interest in improve the water quantity, water Clear Fork of the Brazos River. However, propagation and reintroduction efforts quality, and habitat connectivity in this it remains unclear if the abundance of for the Texas fawnsfoot. As previously unit. host fish for the Texas fawnsfoot is mentioned, efforts are underway Unit TXFF–3: Lower Brazos River currently sufficient. Thus, management regarding a captive propagation program actions may be necessary to ensure for Texas fawnsfoot at the San Marcos Subunit TXFF–3a: Lower Brazos appropriate populations of host fish are Aquatic Resource Center and Inks Dam River. The Lower Brazos River Subunit co-occurring with Texas fawnsfoot. National Fish Hatchery. The State of consists of approximately 348.0 river mi Water quality (PBF 4) may not be Texas, San Marcos Aquatic Resource (560.0 km) in McLennan, Falls, sufficient in the Lower Clear Fork of the Center, Inks Dam National Fish Robertson, Milam, Burleson, Brazos, Brazos River. Elevated chloride levels Hatchery, and the Service’s Austin, Washington, Grimes, Waller, Austin, from naturally occurring underground Arlington and Texas Coastal Field and Fort Bend Counties, Texas. This salt formations are exacerbated by Offices collaborate regularly on subunit begins at the Texas State reduced water flow. In order for Texas conservation actions for Texas Highway 6 bridge crossing, downstream fawnsfoot populations to expand and fawnsfoot. Therefore, this unoccupied of Waco, Texas, to the Fort Bend and occupy the Lower Clear Fork of the critical habitat subunit is essential for Brazoria county line. This subunit is Brazos River subunit, management the conservation of the Texas fawnsfoot occupied by Texas fawnsfoot and actions would be necessary to reduce and is reasonably certain to contribute supports all of the PBFs essential to the chloride levels. to such conservation. conservation of the Texas fawnsfoot. Because this reach of the Clear Fork Adjacent riparian lands are privately Brazos River periodically contains the Unit TXFF–2: Upper Brazos River owned and include rural agricultural flowing water conditions and host fish The Upper Brazos River Unit consists operations such as cattle grazing and species used by Texas fawnsfoot, it of approximately 79.9 river mi (128.6 row-crop agriculture. Because much of qualifies as habitat according to our km) of the Brazos River in Palo Pinto the historically forested floodplain has regulatory definition (50 CFR 424.02). and Parker Counties, Texas. The Upper been deforested, bank sloughing and If the Texas fawnsfoot can be Brazos River Unit extends from the FM sedimentation is ongoing in this reestablished in this reach, it will 4 bridge crossing in Palo Pinto County, segment. expand the occupied reach length in the Texas, downstream to the FM 1189 The Lower Brazos River Subunit is in Clear Fork Brazos River to a length that bridge in Parker County, Texas. The unit a rural setting with some urbanization; will be more resilient to the stressors is currently occupied by the species, is influenced by drought, low flows, and that the species is experiencing. The and adjacent riparian lands are privately reservoir operations; and is being longer the reach occupied by a species, owned. This unit currently supports affected by rock, sand and gravel the more likely it is that the population some of the PBFs essential to the mining, channel incision, ongoing can withstand stochastic events such as conservation of Texas fawnsfoot, such agricultural activities and development, extreme flooding, dewatering, or water as presence of appropriate fish hosts resulting in excessive sedimentation, contamination. In the SSA report, we and suitable flow conditions during water quality degradation, groundwater identified 50 miles (80.5 km) as a reach portions of the year, but becomes withdrawals and surface water long enough for a population to be able unsuitable during times of drought. The diversions, and wastewater inputs. to withstand stochastic events, and the PBFs for water quality and sufficient Therefore, special management is addition of this 28.6-mile reach to the flow are degraded in this unit, as necessary to reduce sedimentation, 27.9-mile occupied section of the Clear excessive chloride concentrations and improve water quality, maintain Fork Brazos River would expand the persistent low flows diminish habitat adequate flows, restore riparian existing Texas fawnsfoot population in quality in this unit. Elevated chloride vegetation, and improve habitat the Clear Fork Brazos River to 56.5 concentrations in this portion of Central connectivity. The Brazos River miles, achieving a length that would Texas are often a result of natural Authority (BRA) owns and manages allow for a highly resilient population to causes, such as saline water inputs from surface water rights throughout the be reestablished, increasing the species’ spring releases flowing through Brazos River basin, and, through future redundancy. This unit is essential subterranean salt deposits. However, operations of the BRA system of for the conservation of the species while the Texas fawnsfoot may be able reservoirs, the BRA is able to manage because it will provide habitat for range to tolerate some minor increases in flows in this subunit to some degree. expansion in portions of known salinity, low-flow rates in this unit Subunit TXFF–3b: Navasota River. historical habitat that is necessary to exacerbate the concentrations of The Navasota River Subunit consists of increase viability of the species by chlorides. 39.3 river mi (63.2 river km) of the increasing its resiliency, redundancy, The Upper Brazos River Unit is in a Navasota River in Brazos and Grimes and representation. rural setting with some urbanization; is Counties, Texas. This subunit extends We are reasonably certain that this influenced by drought, low flows, from the State Highway 30 bridge unit will contribute to the conservation chlorides, and reservoir operations; and downstream to the Brazos River of the species, because the need for is being affected by rock, sand and confluence. Adjacent riparian lands to conservation efforts is recognized and is gravel mining, ongoing agricultural this subunit are primarily privately being discussed by our conservation activities and development, resulting in owned. The subunit is largely rural with partners, and methods for restoring and excessive sedimentation, water quality agricultural practices dominating the reintroducing the species into degradation, ground water withdrawals surrounding landscape. This subunit is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47963

occupied by the Texas fawnsfoot and are primarily in agricultural use. The continues downstream to the Texas supports the PBFs essential to the river experiences periods of low flow State Highway 35 bridge near Bay City, conservation of the species. The due to drought and water withdrawals, Texas. Adjacent riparian habitats are Navasota River has experienced water and water withdrawals are expected to privately owned. This unit is currently quality degradation (low dissolved increase in the future. The subunit is occupied by Texas fawnsfoot, and all oxygen and elevated bacteria) from occupied by Texas fawnsfoot and PBFs essential to the conservation of the adjacent land use practices, flow contains all of the PBFs essential to the species are present in the unit. alterations associated with drought, and conservation of the species. The Lower Upstream reservoir operation and operation of the Lake Limestone San Saba River Subunit is experiencing urbanization in the Austin, Texas, reservoir. Additionally, this subunit has some urbanization and is influenced by metropolitan area contribute to altered elevated levels of nitrate and drought, low flows, and wastewater flows and degraded water quality phosphorus presumably from discharges. The watershed is being downstream. agricultural runoff. The Navasota River affected by ongoing agricultural The Lower Colorado River Unit is in Subunit is in a rural setting with some activities and development, resulting in a mostly rural setting with some urbanization; is influenced by drought, excessive sedimentation, water quality urbanization downstream from an urban low flows, and reservoir operations; and degradation, ground water withdrawals area; is influenced by reservoir is being affected by ongoing agricultural and surface water diversions, and operations, drought, low flows, flooding activities and development, resulting in wastewater inputs. Therefore, special (leading to scour), and wastewater excessive sedimentation, water quality management is necessary to reduce discharges; and is being affected by degradation, ground water withdrawals sedimentation, improve water quality, ongoing agricultural activities and and surface water diversions, and maintain adequate flows, and improve development, resulting in excessive wastewater inputs. Therefore, special habitat connectivity. This subunit is sedimentation, water quality management is necessary to reduce also occupied by Texas pimpleback and degradation, ground water withdrawals sedimentation, improve water quality, false spike. and surface water diversions, maintain adequate flows, restore Subunit TXFF–5b: Upper Colorado wastewater inputs, and rock, sand and riparian vegetation, and improve habitat River. The Upper Colorado River gravel mining. Therefore, special connectivity. Subunit consists of 10.5 river mi (16.9 management is necessary to reduce river km) of the Colorado River near its sedimentation, improve water quality, Colorado River Basin confluence with the San Saba River in maintain adequate flows, and improve Unit TXFF–4: Little River San Saba, Mills, and Lampasas habitat connectivity. This subunit is Counties, Texas. This subunit extends also occupied by the Texas pimpleback. The Little River Unit consists of 35.6 from the County Road 124 bridge and river miles (57.3 km) of the Little River continues downstream to the US Trinity River Basin in Milam County, Texas. This subunit highway 190 bridge. Activities in the begins at the Bell and Milam county line Unit TXFF–7: East Fork of the Trinity watershed are mostly agricultural. The River and continues downstream to the river experiences periodic low flows confluence of the Little and San Gabriel from drought and upstream water This unit consists of approximately rivers. The lands adjacent to the critical withdrawals. The average daily flow 15.6 river mi (25.1 km) of the East Fork habitat unit are privately owned. The rate of the upper Colorado River in this of the Trinity River in Kaufman County, unit is currently occupied by the species segment has been declining since the Texas. The East Fork of the Trinity River and supports all of the PBFs essential to early 1920s. This subunit is currently Unit extends from the Dallas and the conservation of the species. The occupied, and adjacent riparian lands Kaufman county line downstream to the Little River subunit is in a mostly rural are privately owned. All PBFs essential Trinity River confluence. This unit is setting, is influenced by ongoing to the conservation of Texas fawnsfoot currently occupied, and adjacent development in the upper reaches are present in this subunit, with the riparian lands are privately owned. associated with the Austin-Round Rock exception of appropriate flows Even though this unit is smaller than 50 metropolitan area, and is being affected throughout the year. miles, which we had determined was by ongoing agricultural activities and The Upper Colorado River Subunit is the reach length long enough to development resulting in excessive influenced by reservoir operations and withstand stochastic events, the sedimentation, water quality chlorides and is being affected by population increases the species’ degradation, and groundwater ongoing agricultural activities and redundancy, making it more likely to withdrawals and surface water development, resulting in excessive withstand catastrophic events that may diversions. Therefore, special sedimentation, water quality eliminate one or more of the other management is necessary to reduce degradation, ground water withdrawals populations. sedimentation, improve water quality, and surface water diversions, and Some of the PBFs essential to the maintain adequate flows, and improve wastewater inputs. Therefore, special conservation of Texas fawnsfoot are habitat connectivity. The Little River management is necessary to reduce present, such as host fishes and Unit is also occupied by false spike. sedimentation, improve water quality, appropriate substrate. The East Fork maintain adequate flows, and improve Trinity River Unit is in an urban setting; Unit TXFF–5: Lower San Saba River and habitat connectivity. This subunit is is influenced by drought, low flows, Upper Colorado River also occupied by the Texas pimpleback. wastewater discharges, and flooding Subunit TXFF–5a: Lower San Saba (leading to scour); and is being affected River. The Lower San Saba River Unit TXFF–6: Lower Colorado River by ongoing development activities, Subunit consists of approximately 50.4 The Lower Colorado River Unit resulting in excessive sedimentation, river mi (81.1 river km) in San Saba consists of approximately 124.4 river mi water quality degradation, ground water County, Texas. This subunit begins at (200.2 river km) of the Colorado River withdrawals and surface water the Brady Creek confluence and extends in Colorado, Wharton, and Matagorda diversions, and wastewater inputs. to the Colorado River confluence. Counties, Texas. This unit begins at the Therefore, special management is Adjacent riparian lands are owned and Fayette and Colorado county line and necessary to reduce sedimentation,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47964 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

improve water quality, maintain the basin and daily high mean discharge riparian vegetation, and improve habitat adequate flows, and improve habitat approaching 80,000 cubic feet per connectivity. connectivity, which would reduce the second. Runoff and wastewater effluent Guadalupe Orb threats to the population, increasing the release in the Dallas-Fort Worth resiliency of the population. metropolitan area result in daily pulses We are proposing to designate approximately 294.5 river mi (474.0 Unit TXFF–8: Middle Trinity River of high and low flow moving through the Trinity basin. river km) in two units (four subunits) as The Middle Trinity River Unit critical habitat for Guadalupe orb. The consists of approximately 157.0 river mi The Middle Trinity River Unit is in a critical habitat areas we describe below (252.7 km) of the Trinity River in rural setting with some urbanization; is constitute our current best assessment of Navarro, Henderson, Freestone, influenced by drought, low flows, areas that meet the definition of critical Anderson, Leon, Houston, and Madison wastewater discharges, reservoir habitat for Guadalupe orb. The two Counties, Texas. This unit extends from operations, and flooding (leading to areas we propose as critical habitat are: the State Highway 31 bridge, west of scour); and is being affected by channel GORB–1: Upper Guadalupe River Unit Trinidad, Texas, to the State Highway incision, ongoing agricultural activities and GORB–2: Lower Guadalupe River 21 bridge in Madison County. This unit and development, resulting in excessive Unit. Table 12 shows the occupancy of is occupied, and adjacent riparian lands sedimentation, water quality the units, the riparian ownership, and are privately owned. This unit provides degradation, ground water withdrawals approximate length of the proposed all of the PBFs essential to the and surface water diversions, and designated areas for the Guadalupe orb. conservation of Texas fawnsfoot, wastewater inputs. Therefore, special We present brief descriptions of all although flows in this portion of the management is necessary to reduce proposed units, and reasons why they Trinity River are elevated above natural sedimentation, improve water quality, meet the definition of critical habitat for levels due to altered hydrology within maintain adequate flows, restore Guadalupe orb, below.

TABLE 12—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE GUADALUPE ORB [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding.]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

GORB–1: Upper Guadalupe River ...... GORB–1a: South Fork Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 5.1 (8.3) GORB–1b: Upper Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 99.4 (159.9) GORB–2: Lower Guadalupe River ...... GORB–2a: San Marcos River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 65.3 (105.1) GORB–2b: Lower Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 124.7 (200.7)

Total ...... 294.5 (474.0)

Guadalupe River Basin influenced by drought, low flows, and temperature and low dissolved oxygen). flooding (leading to scour); and is being Extreme high flows removed needed Unit GORB–1: Upper Guadalupe River affected by ongoing agricultural gravel and cobble, while low flows Subunit GORB–1a: South Fork activities and development, resulting in caused suspended sediment to settle Guadalupe River. The South Fork excessive sedimentation, water quality out, reducing substrate quality for the Guadalupe River Subunit consists of 5.1 degradation, and ground water Guadalupe orb. river mi (8.3 river km) of the South Fork withdrawals and surface water The Upper Guadalupe River subunit Guadalupe River in Kerr County, Texas. diversions. Therefore, special is in a mostly rural setting with some This subunit extends from Griffin Road management is necessary to reduce urbanization; is influenced by drought, crossing just downstream of the Texas sedimentation, improve water quality, low flows, and flooding (leading to Highway 39 crossing in Kerr County, to maintain adequate flows, and improve scour); and is being affected by ongoing its confluence with the North Fork habitat connectivity. agricultural activities and development, Guadalupe River. This subunit is Subunit GORB–1b: Upper Guadalupe resulting in excessive sedimentation, occupied by the Guadalupe orb, and the River. The Upper Guadalupe River water quality degradation, ground water riparian area is privately owned. This Subunit consists of 99.4 river mi (159.9 withdrawals and surface water subunit is mostly rural and agricultural, river km) of the Guadalupe River in diversions, and wastewater inputs. with organized recreational camps. Kerr, Kendall, and Comal Counties, Therefore, special management is These camps often operate very low Texas. This subunit extends from the necessary to reduce sedimentation, dams that form small impoundments confluence of the North and South improve water quality, maintain along the subunit. The South Fork Forks of the Guadalupe River adequate flows, and improve habitat Guadalupe River Subunit contains all of downstream to the US Highway 311 connectivity. This subunit is also the PBFs essential to the conservation of bridge in Comal County, Texas. The occupied by Guadalupe fatmucket. the species. This subunit, combined Upper Guadalupe River is occupied by Unit GORB–2: Lower Guadalupe River with the Upper Guadalupe River the Guadalupe orb, and adjacent subunit, results in a highly resilient riparian areas are privately owned. The Subunit GORB–2a: San Marcos River. population with presence in several subunit contains the PBFs essential to The San Marcos River Subunit consists tributaries, protecting the population the conservation of the Guadalupe orb. of approximately 65.3 river miles (105.1 from a single stochastic event In recent years, the Guadalupe orb in river km) in Caldwell, Guadalupe, and eliminating the entire population. this reach have experienced some of the Gonzales Counties, Texas. The subunit The South Fork Guadalupe River highest and lowest flows on record, as extends from the FM 1977 bridge Subunit is in a mostly rural setting; is well as water quality degradation (high crossing in Caldwell County to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47965

Guadalupe River confluence. The Subunit consists of approximately 124.7 management is necessary to reduce subunit is currently occupied by the river mi (200.7 river km) in Gonzales, sedimentation, improve water quality, Guadalupe orb, and adjacent riparian DeWitt, and Victoria Counties, Texas. maintain adequate flows, and improve areas are privately owned. The San This subunit extends from the San habitat connectivity. This subunit is Marcos River drains the City of San Marcos River confluence downstream to also occupied by the false spike. Marcos, including the campus of Texas the US Highway 59 bridge crossing near State University, leading to impacts of Victoria, Texas. The Lower Guadalupe Texas Pimpleback urban runoff, waste water inputs, and River Subunit is currently occupied by We are proposing to designate altered hydrology. The large San Marcos the Guadalupe orb, and adjacent springs complex, the second largest in riparian areas are privately owned. This approximately 494.7 river mi (796.1 km) Texas, contributes significantly to the subunit contains all of the PBFs in six units (10 subunits) as critical flows in this river and the lower necessary for the Guadalupe orb and is habitat for Texas pimpleback. The Guadalupe River. This segment contains the most resilient population known. critical habitat areas we describe below all of the PBFs essential to the Existing protections for the San Marcos constitute our current best assessment of conservation of the species. and Comal Springs from the Edwards areas that meet the definition of critical The San Marcos River Subunit is in a Aquifer Authority Habitat Conservation habitat for Texas pimpleback. The five mostly rural setting with some Plan provide some protection to spring areas we propose as critical habitat are: urbanization and downstream from an flows and help ensure flow rates and TXPB–1: Elm Creek Unit; TXPB–2: urban area; is influenced by drought, water quality are generally believed to Concho River Unit; TXPB–3: Upper low flows, flooding (leading to scour), be suitable for downstream mussel beds Colorado River/Lower San Saba River and wastewater discharges; and is being during times of drought and low flows. Unit; TXPB–4: Upper San Saba River affected by ongoing agricultural The Lower Guadalupe River subunit Unit; TXPB–5: Llano River Unit; and activities and development, resulting in is in a mostly rural setting with some TXPB–6: Lower Colorado River Unit. excessive sedimentation, water quality urbanization downstream from some Table 13 shows the occupancy of the degradation, ground water withdrawals urban areas; is influenced by reservoir units, the riparian ownership, and and surface water diversions, and operations, drought, low flows, flooding approximate length of the proposed wastewater inputs. Therefore, special (leading to scour), and wastewater designated areas for the Texas management is necessary to reduce discharges; and is being affected by pimpleback. We present brief sedimentation, improve water quality, ongoing agricultural activities and maintain adequate flows, and improve development, resulting in excessive descriptions of all proposed units, and habitat connectivity. This subunit is sedimentation, water quality reasons why they meet the definition of also occupied by the false spike. degradation, ground water withdrawals critical habitat for Texas pimpleback, Subunit GORB–2b: Lower Guadalupe and surface water diversions, and below. River. The Lower Guadalupe River wastewater inputs. Therefore, special

TABLE 13—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE TEXAS PIMPLEBACK [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding.]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

TXPB–1: Elm Creek ...... TXPB–1a: Bluff Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 11.8 (19.0) TXPB–1b: Lower Elm Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 12.5 (20.2) TXPB–2: Concho River ...... TXPB–2a: Lower Concho River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 35.6 (57.2) TXPB–2b. Upper Concho River ...... Private ...... Unoccupied 16.0 (25.7) TXPB–3. Upper Colorado River/Lower San TXPB–3a. Upper Colorado River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 153.8 (247.6) Saba River. TXPB–3b. Lower San Saba River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 50.4 (81.1) TXPB–4: Upper San Saba River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 52.8 (85.0) TXPB–5: Llano River ...... TXPB–5a: Upper Llano River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 38.3 (61.6) TXPB–5b: Lower Llano River ...... Private ...... Unoccupied 12.2 (19.7) TXPB–6. Lower Colorado River ...... Private ...... Occupied .... 111.3 (179.1)

Total ...... 494.7 (796.1)

Colorado River Basin pimpleback. The Bluff Creek subunit is Subunit TXPB–1b: Lower Elm Creek. in a rural setting, is influenced by This subunit consists of 12.5 river mi Unit TXPB–1: Elm Creek drought, low flows, and elevated (20.2 km) of Elm Creek beginning at the Subunit TXPB–1a: Bluff Creek. This chlorides, and is being affected by County Road 344 crossing downstream occupied critical habitat subunit ongoing agricultural activities and to Elm Creek’s confluence with the consists of 11.8 river mi (19.0 km) of development resulting in excessive Colorado River in Runnels County, Bluff Creek, a tributary to Elm Creek, in sedimentation, water quality Texas. The riparian lands adjacent to Runnels County, Texas. The subunit degradation, and ground water this subunit are privately owned. The extends from the County Road 153 withdrawals and surface water Elm Creek watershed is relatively small bridge crossing, near the town of diversions. Therefore, special and remains largely rural and Winters, Texas, downstream to the management is necessary to reduce dominated by agricultural practices. confluences of Bluff and Elm creeks. sedimentation, improve water quality, This stream regularly has extremely low The riparian area of this subunit is maintain adequate flows, and improve or no flow during times of drought. privately owned. This subunit is habitat connectivity. This subunit is Moreover, this stream has elevated currently occupied by Texas also occupied by Texas fatmucket. chloride concentrations and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47966 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

sedimentation resulting in reduced subunit consists of 16.0 river mi (25.7 Water quality (PBF 4) is degraded in habitat quality and availability, and river km) of the Concho River in Tom this subunit. The Upper Concho River decreased water quality. Lower Elm Green County, Texas, from the FM 380 subunit, due in part to low flows and Creek is occupied by Texas pimpleback bridge crossing, downstream of San high water temperature, experiences and contains some of the PBFs essential Angelo, Texas, to the FM 1692 bridge decreased levels of dissolved oxygen at to the conservation of the species such where it adjoins subunit TXPB–2a. The such a level that could preclude mussel as presence of host fish; others are in riparian lands adjacent to this subunit occupancy. We believe these periods of degraded condition and would benefit are privately owned. low dissolved oxygen primarily occur from management actions. The Lower This subunit is essential to the during hot summer months when Elm Creek subunit is influenced by conservation of Texas pimpleback droughts are common. Therefore, drought, low flows, and elevated because it would expand one of the management actions that increase flow chlorides, and is being affected by smaller populations to a length that rates would also improve water quality ongoing agricultural activities and would be highly resilient to stochastic in this reach. development resulting in excessive events; its loss would shrink the Because this reach of the Concho sedimentation, water quality distribution of Texas pimpleback and River periodically contains the degradation, and groundwater reduce redundancy of the species, appropriate substrate conditions and withdrawals and surface water limiting its viability. The Upper Concho host fish species used by Texas diversions. Therefore, special River subunit is in a mostly rural setting pimpleback, it qualifies as habitat management is necessary to reduce with some urbanization downstream according to our regulatory definition sedimentation, improve water quality, from an urban area; is influenced by (50 CFR 424.02). maintain adequate flows, and improve reservoir operations, wastewater If the Texas pimpleback can be habitat connectivity. This unit is also discharges, and chlorides; and is being reestablished in this reach, it will occupied by Texas fatmucket. affected by ongoing agricultural expand the occupied reach length in the activities and development resulting in Concho River to a length that will be Unit TXPB–2: Concho River excessive sedimentation, water quality more resilient to the stressors that the Subunit TXPB–2a: Lower Concho degradation, groundwater withdrawals species is facing. The longer the reach River. The Lower Concho River Subunit and surface water diversions, and occupied by a species, the more likely consists of approximately 35.6 river mi wastewater inputs. it is that the population can withstand (57.2 river km) in Tom Green and Although it is considered unoccupied, stochastic events such as extreme Concho Counties, Texas. The Concho portions of this subunit contain some or flooding, dewatering, or water River subunit extends from the FM 1692 all of the physical or biological features contamination. In the SSA report, we bridge crossing downstream to the FM essential for the conservation of the identified 50 miles (80.5 km) as a reach 1929 crossing. This subunit is occupied, species. Flowing water (PBF 1) is not at long enough for a population to be able and its riparian area is privately owned. levels appropriate for Texas pimpleback to withstand stochastic events, and the The Lower Concho River Subunit does in this subunit. Several upstream addition of this 16.0-mile reach to the not currently contain all of the PBFs reservoirs divert the already limited 35.6-mile occupied section of the essential to the conservation of the flows, and reduced precipitation has Concho River would expand the Texas pimpleback, as it does not resulted in an overall decrease in river existing Texas fawnsfoot population in currently have sufficient water quality flow rates. Management actions to the Concho River to 51.6 miles, (e.g., water temperature is high and increase stream flows in this subunit achieving a length that would allow for dissolved oxygen is low) and instream would be required for the Texas a highly resilient population to be flow is too low at certain times of the pimpleback population to be reestablished, increasing the species’ year. Upstream reservoirs, built for flood reestablished. future redundancy. This unit is essential control and municipal water storage, Currently, appropriate substrates (PBF for the conservation of the species have contributed to a downward trend 2) exist in isolated areas throughout this because it will provide habitat for range in normal river base-flows in recent subunit. These isolated pockets of expansion in portions of known years. The Lower Concho River subunit suitable habitat could allow for historical habitat that is necessary to is in a mostly rural setting downstream expansion and recolonization of Texas increase viability of the species by from an urban area, is influenced by pimpleback. However, future increasing its resiliency, redundancy, reservoir operations and chlorides, and management actions that focus on and representation. is being affected by ongoing agricultural habitat restoration in this reach to We are reasonably certain that this activities and development resulting in improve connectivity between habitat unit will contribute to the conservation excessive sedimentation, water quality patches would improve the resiliency of of the species, because the need for degradation, ground water withdrawals this population, once restored. conservation efforts is recognized and is and surface water diversions, and Recent research on the closely related being discussed by our conservation wastewater inputs. Therefore, special Guadalupe orb indicated that several partners, and methods for restoring and management is necessary to reduce species of catfishes are likely suitable reintroducing the species into sedimentation, improve water quality, host fishes for Texas pimpleback, as unoccupied habitat are being worked maintain adequate flows, and improve well. Currently, we believe appropriate on. The Texas pimpleback is listed as habitat connectivity. host fishes (PBF 3) are occurring threatened by the State of Texas, and the Subunit TXPB–2b: Upper Concho throughout the subunit and would allow Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts River. Because we have determined for reproduction of Texas pimpleback has funded research, surveys, occupied areas are not adequate for the when the species is reestablished. propagation, and reintroduction studies conservation of the species, we have Management actions could address any for this species. State and Federal evaluated whether any unoccupied deficit in the abundance and partners have shown interest in areas are essential for the conservation distribution of fish hosts in this area propagation and reintroduction efforts of Texas pimpleback and identified this allowing for expansion and future for the Texas pimpleback. As previously area as essential for the conservation of reestablishment of this subunit from the mentioned, efforts are underway the species. The Upper Concho River adjacent occupied subunit TXPB–2a. regarding a captive propagation program

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47967

for Texas pimpleback at the San Marcos is largely absent from the rest of the Unit TXPB–5: Llano River Aquatic Resource Center and Inks Dam species’ range. Subunit TXPB–5a: Upper Llano River. National Fish Hatchery. The State of This subunit is primarily rural, with The Upper Llano River Subunit consists Texas, San Marcos Aquatic Resource cattle grazing and irrigated orchards. of approximately 38.3 river mi (61.6 Center, Inks Dam National Fish Summer drought and water withdrawals river km) in Kimble and Mason Hatchery, and the Service’s Austin and cause occasional periods of low flow, Counties, Texas. Adjacent riparian areas Texas Coastal Field Offices collaborate which results in water quality are privately owned. This subunit regularly on conservation actions. extends from the Ranch Road RR 385 Therefore, this unoccupied critical degradation as water temperatures are high and dissolved oxygen is low. bridge crossing downstream to the US habitat subunit is essential for the Highway 87 bridge. This reach of the conservation of the Texas pimpleback Additionally, high-flow events during flooding can result in habitat scour and Llano River is largely rural, with much and is reasonably certain to contribute of the land in agricultural use. The to such conservation. sedimentation. The Lower San Saba River Subunit is experiencing some Upper Llano River Subunit is occupied Unit TXPB–3: Upper Colorado River urbanization; is influenced by drought, by the Texas pimpleback and contains and Lower San Saba River low flows, and wastewater discharges; all the necessary PBFs essential to the Subunit TXPB–3a: Upper Colorado and is being affected by ongoing conservation of the species most of the year. However, drought conditions and River. The Upper Colorado River agricultural activities and development, flooding in the Llano River can be Subunit consists of approximately 153.8 resulting in excessive sedimentation, extreme, causing the species to river mi (247.6 river km) in Coleman, water quality degradation, ground water experience either extreme low-flow McCulloch, Brown, San Saba, Mills, and withdrawals and surface water conditions with related reduced water Lampasas Counties, Texas. The subunit diversions, and wastewater inputs. extends from the Coleman and quality or extreme high flows that Therefore, special management is mobilize substrate, eroding habitat or McCulloch county line downstream to necessary to reduce sedimentation, the confluence of the Colorado River depositing sediment on Texas improve water quality, maintain pimpleback populations. The Upper and Cherokee Creek. The riparian area adequate flows, and improve habitat of this subunit is privately owned. The Llano River Subunit is in a rural setting; connectivity. This subunit is also Upper Colorado River is occupied by is influenced by drought, low flows, and occupied by Texas fawnsfoot and false Texas pimpleback and contains some of flooding (leading to scour); and is being spike. the PBFs essential to the conservation of affected by ongoing agricultural the species, including host fishes in Unit TXPB–4: Upper San Saba River activities and development resulting in appropriate abundance and small areas excessive sedimentation, water quality of suitable substrate habitat, but not The Upper San Saba River Unit degradation, ground water withdrawals several PBFs, such as sufficient flow consists of approximately 52.8 river mi and surface water diversions, and rate and sufficient water quality (85.0 river km) of the San Saba River in collection. Therefore, special (dissolved oxygen is often low, and Menard County, Texas. Adjacent management is necessary to reduce temperature reaches unsuitably high riparian habitats are privately owned. sedimentation, improve water quality, levels during summer drought). The The Upper San Saba River Unit extends maintain adequate flows, improve Upper Colorado River subunit is in a from the Schleicher County line near habitat connectivity, and manage mostly rural setting, is influenced by Fort McKavett, Texas, downstream to collection. This subunit is also occupied reservoir operations and chlorides, and the FM 1311 bridge crossing in Menard, by Texas fatmucket. is being affected by ongoing agricultural County, Texas. Texas pimpleback Subunit TXPB–5b: Lower Llano River. Because we have determined occupied activities and development resulting in occupies the Upper San Saba River Unit areas are not adequate for the excessive sedimentation, water quality in low densities. The Upper San Saba conservation of the species, we have degradation, groundwater withdrawals River Unit contains the PBFs essential evaluated whether any unoccupied and surface water diversions, and to the conservation of Texas pimpleback areas are essential for the conservation wastewater inputs. Therefore, special most of the year, although flows decline of Texas pimpleback and identified this management is necessary to reduce to low levels during summer drought. sedimentation, improve water quality, area as essential for the conservation of The PBFs of sufficient water flow and maintain adequate flows, and improve the species. The Lower Llano River water quality are lacking during these habitat connectivity. This subunit is Subunit consists of 12.2 river mi (19.7 times, as low-flow conditions lead to also occupied by Texas fawnsfoot. river km) of the Llano River. This Subunit TXPB–3b: Lower San Saba high water temperature and low subunit extends from the US Highway River. The Lower San Saba River dissolved oxygen. The Upper San Saba 87 bridge in Mason County downstream Subunit consists of 50.4 river mi (81.1 River unit is in a rural setting; is to the Mason and Llano county line. river km) of the San Saba River. This influenced by drought, low flows, and Adjacent riparian lands are privately subunit is currently occupied by the underlying geology resulting in a losing owned. species, and adjacent riparian areas are reach; and is being affected by ongoing This subunit is essential to the privately owned. The Lower San Saba agricultural activities and development conservation of Texas pimpleback Subunit extends from the Brady Creek resulting in excessive sedimentation, because it would expand one of the confluence in San Saba County, Texas, water quality degradation, groundwater smaller populations to a length that downstream to the Colorado River withdrawals and surface water would be highly resilient to stochastic confluence where it adjoins the Upper diversions, and collection. Therefore, events in a separate tributary; its loss Colorado River subunit (TXPB–3a). This special management is necessary to would reduce the distribution of Texas subunit contains all the PBFs essential reduce sedimentation, improve water pimpleback and reduce redundancy of to the conservation of the Texas quality, maintain adequate flows, and the species, limiting its viability. The pimpleback most of the year. This improve habitat connectivity. This Lower Llano River Subunit is in a rural population contains evidence of recent subunit is also occupied by Texas setting; is influenced by drought, low Texas pimpleback reproduction, which fatmucket. flows, and flooding (leading to scour);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47968 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

and is being affected by ongoing resilient to the stressors that the species (179.1 river km) of the Colorado River agricultural activities and development, is facing. The longer the reach occupied in Colorado and Wharton Counties, resulting in excessive sedimentation, by a species, the more likely it is that Texas. The Lower Colorado River unit water quality degradation, and ground the population can withstand stochastic extends from the Fayette and Colorado water withdrawals and surface water events such as extreme flooding, County line downstream to the Wharton diversions. dewatering, or water contamination. In and Matagorda County line. The unit is Although it is considered unoccupied, the SSA report, we identified 50 miles currently occupied, and adjacent portions of this subunit contain some or (80.5 km) as a reach long enough for a riparian lands are privately owned. This all of the physical or biological features population to be able to withstand unit contains all of the PBFs essential to essential for the conservation of the stochastic events, and the addition of the conservation of Texas pimpleback. species. Flowing water (PBF 1) is this 12.2-mile reach to the 38.3-mile Periodic low flows due to drought and generally sufficient in this subunit occupied section of the Llano River during portions of the year. However, in would expand the existing Texas water management activities contribute the past decade the Llano River has seen pimpleback population in the Llano to diminished and variable flows, both the highest and lowest flow rates River to 50.5 miles, achieving a length dewatering, scour, and water quality ever recorded, with extremely low water that would allow for a highly resilient decline from urban run-off, agricultural levels and stranding of mussels during population to be reestablished, operations, and wastewater treatment low flow, and scour and entrainment of increasing the species’ future effluent. The Lower Colorado River Unit mussels with subsequent deposition redundancy. This unit is essential for is in a mostly rural setting with some over suitable habitat during floods. the conservation of the species because urbanization downstream from an urban Spring inputs from the South Llano it will provide habitat for range area and is influenced by reservoir River help mitigate the effects of expansion in portions of known operations, drought, low flows, flooding drought in the lower portions of the historical habitat that is necessary to (leading to scour), and wastewater Llano River, although water increase viability of the species by discharges. The unit is being affected by withdrawals for agricultural operations increasing its resiliency, redundancy, ongoing agricultural activities and contribute to decreased flows during and representation. development, resulting in excessive drought. Ongoing management actions We are reasonably certain that this sedimentation, water quality by resource management agencies and unit will contribute to the conservation degradation, ground water withdrawals non-profit organizations are of the species, because the need for and surface water diversions, contributing to restoring a natural flow conservation efforts is recognized and is wastewater inputs, and rock, sand and regime. being discussed by our conservation In the Llano River, suitable substrates partners, and methods for restoring and gravel mining. Therefore, special (PBF 2) exist as isolated riffles between reintroducing the species into management is necessary to reduce larger pools. Given the hydrology of the unoccupied habitat are being worked sedimentation, improve water quality, Llano River basin, suitable substrates on. The Texas pimpleback is listed as maintain adequate flows, and improve have been degraded in this reach and threatened by the State of Texas, and the habitat connectivity. This subunit is would need restoration. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts also occupied by Texas fatmucket. The Texas pimpleback uses similar has funded research, surveys, False Spike host fishes as the closely related propagation, and reintroduction studies Guadalupe orb, including channel for this species. State and Federal We are proposing to designate catfish, flathead catfish, and tadpole partners have shown interest in approximately 328.2 river mi (528.2 km) madtom. Sufficient abundance of host propagation and reintroduction efforts in four units (seven subunits) as critical fishes (PBF 3) are present in the lower for the Texas pimpleback. As previously habitat for false spike. Each of the seven Llano River subunit to support a mentioned, efforts are underway subunits is currently occupied by the population of Texas pimpleback. regarding a captive propagation program Water quality in the lower Llano River species and contains all of the PBFs for Texas pimpleback at the San Marcos essential to the conservation of the subunit (PBF 4) are generally sufficient Aquatic Resource Center and Inks Dam species. The critical habitat areas we for the species during portions of the National Fish Hatchery. The State of describe below constitute our current year. However, dissolved oxygen Texas, San Marcos Aquatic Resource declines and water temperature Center, Inks Dam National Fish best assessment of areas that meet the increases during periods of low flow. Hatchery, and the Service’s Austin and definition of critical habitat for false Management to ensure sufficient flow Texas Coastal Field Offices collaborate spike. The four areas we propose as rates in this reach will improve water regularly on conservation actions. critical habitat are: FASP–1: Little River quality as well. Therefore, this unoccupied critical Unit; FASP–2: San Saba River Unit; Because this reach of the Llano River habitat subunit is essential for the FASP–3: Llano River Unit; and FASP– periodically contains the flowing water conservation of the Texas pimpleback 4: Guadalupe River Unit. Table 14 conditions, suitable substrates, and host and is reasonably certain to contribute shows the occupancy of the units, the fish species used by Texas pimpleback, to such conservation. This subunit is riparian ownership, and approximate it qualifies as habitat according to our also occupied by Texas fatmucket and length of the proposed designated areas regulatory definition (50 CFR 424.02). false spike. for the false spike. We present brief If the Texas pimpleback can be Unit TXPB–6: Lower Colorado River descriptions of all proposed units, and reestablished in this reach, it will reasons why they meet the definition of expand the occupied reach length in the The Lower Colorado River Unit critical habitat for false spike, below. Llano River to a length that will be more consists of approximately 111.3 river mi

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47969

TABLE 14—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR FALSE SPIKE [Note: Lengths may not sum due to rounding]

Riparian River miles Unit Subunit ownership Occupancy (kilometers)

FASP–1: Little River ...... FASP–1a: Little River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 35.6 (57.3) FASP–1b: San Gabriel River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 31.4 (50.5) FASP–1c: Brushy Creek ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 14.0 (22.5) FASP–2: San Saba River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 50.4 (81.1) FASP–3: Llano River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 50.5 (81.3) FASP–4: Guadalupe River ...... FASP–4a: San Marcos River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 21.6 (34.8) FASP–4b: Guadalupe River ...... Private ...... Occupied .. 124.7 (200.7)

Total ...... 328.2 (528.2)

Brazos River Basin degradation, and ground water bank stabilization, and increased flows Unit FASP–1: Little River withdrawals and surface water during low-flow periods. diversions. Therefore, special Colorado River Basin Subunit FASP–1a: Little River. This management is necessary to reduce subunit consists of 35.6 river miles (57.3 sedimentation, improve water quality, Unit FASP–2: San Saba River km) of the Little River in Milam County, maintain adequate flows, and improve This unit consists of 50.4 river mi Texas. This subunit begins at the Bell habitat connectivity. (81.1 km) of the San Saba River in San and Milam county line and continues Subunit FASP–1c: Brushy Creek. The Saba County, Texas. The unit extends downstream to the confluence of the subunit consists of 14.0 river mi (22.5 from the San Saba River and Brady Little and San Gabriel Rivers. The lands km) of Brushy Creek in Milam County, Creek confluence and continues adjacent to the critical habitat unit are Texas. The subunit begins at the US downstream to the confluence of the privately owned. The unit is currently Highway 79 bridge crossing and extends San Saba and Colorado Rivers. The occupied by the species and supports all downstream to the confluence with riparian land adjacent to the critical of the PBFs essential to the conservation Brushy Creek and the San Gabriel River. habitat unit is privately owned. The unit of the species. The Little River subunit The unit is currently occupied by the is currently occupied by the species and is in a mostly rural setting, is influenced species, and the adjacent riparian areas contains all of the PBFs essential to the by ongoing development in the upper are privately owned. This stream drains conservation of false spike. The San reaches associated with the Austin- a large portion of the City of Cedar Park, Saba River subunit is in a rural setting, Round Rock metropolitan area, and is resulting in altered hydrology, altered is influenced by drought, low flows, and being affected by ongoing agricultural flow regimes, and increased wastewater discharges, and is being activities and development resulting in sedimentation. Brushy Creek contains affected by ongoing agricultural excessive sedimentation, water quality some of the PBFs essential to the activities and development resulting in degradation, and ground water conservation of the false spike, such as excessive sedimentation, water quality withdrawals and surface water adequate fish hosts, but other factors degradation, groundwater withdrawals diversions. Therefore, special like water flow rates and water quality and surface water diversions, and management is necessary to reduce parameters may not be adequate during wastewater inputs. Therefore, special sedimentation, improve water quality, summer low-flow periods. The Brushy management is necessary to reduce maintain adequate flows, and improve Creek subunit is in a rural but sedimentation, improve water quality, habitat connectivity. This subunit is urbanizing setting, and it is influenced maintain adequate flows, and improve also occupied by the Texas fawnsfoot. by wastewater discharges and ongoing habitat connectivity. Much of the land Subunit FASP–1b: San Gabriel River. development in the upper reaches use in the watershed is agricultural, and This subunit consists of 31.4 river mi associated with the Austin-Round Rock special management considerations or (50.5 km) of the San Gabriel River in metropolitan area. It is also being protection may be required to address Williamson and Milam Counties, Texas. affected by ongoing development and excess nutrients, sediment, and The subunit starts downstream of the agricultural activities resulting in pollutants that enter the San Saba River Granger Lake dam (at the downstream excessive sedimentation, water quality and reduce instream water quality. edge of the Pecan Grove State Wildlife degradation, ground water withdrawals Sources of these types of pollution are Management Area) and continues and surface water diversions, and wastewater, agricultural runoff, and through Williamson County to the wastewater inputs. Therefore, special urban stormwater runoff. Additional confluence of the San Gabriel and Little management is necessary to reduce special management considerations or Rivers in Milam County. The land sedimentation, improve water quality, protection may be required in this unit adjacent to this subunit is all privately maintain adequate flows, and improve to address low water levels that result owned. The San Gabriel River subunit is habitat connectivity. Additionally, from water withdrawals and drought, as currently occupied by the species and hydrological alterations in this well as excessive erosion. This subunit currently supports all of the PBFs watershed result in scour and is also occupied by Texas pimpleback. essential to the conservation of the mobilization of sediment during times species. The San Gabriel River subunit of high-flow rates, resulting in loss of Unit FASP–3: Llano River is in a rural setting, is influenced by appropriate mussel habitat. Special This unit consists of 50.5 river mi releases from Granger Reservoir, and is management considerations for this area (81.3 km) of the Llano River in Kimble being affected by ongoing agricultural could include the highest level of and Mason Counties, Texas. The Llano activities and development resulting in wastewater treatment, decreased River unit begins at the Ranch Road 385 excessive sedimentation, water quality pollutant inputs from surface flows, bridge crossing in Kimble County and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47970 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

continues downstream to the Mason and all of the PBFs essential to the population decline. This subunit is also Llano County line. The unit is occupied conservation of the species. Because the occupied by Guadalupe orb. by the species, and surrounding riparian San Marcos River subunit is Effects of Critical Habitat Designation areas are privately owned. The majority downstream from an urban area in a of the Llano River basin is rural and rural but urbanizing setting, it is Section 7 Consultation composed of agricultural operations that influenced by wastewater discharges were historically used for sheep and and ongoing development in the upper Section 7(a) of the Act requires goat ranching. During 2018, the Llano reaches associated with the Austin- Federal agencies to evaluate their River experienced some of the largest Round Rock metropolitan area. It is also actions with respect to any species that floods and most severe drought within being affected by ongoing development is proposed or listed as an endangered the same year. Extreme floods and and agricultural activities resulting in or threatened species and with respect drought conditions result in both stream excessive sedimentation, water quality to its critical habitat, if any is bed mobilization, sedimentation, and degradation, ground water withdrawals designated. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act dewatering. The Llano River unit and surface water diversions, and requires Federal agencies, including the contains all the PBFs essential to the wastewater inputs. Therefore, special Service, to ensure that any action they conservation of false spike. The Llano management is necessary to reduce fund, authorize, or carry out is not likely River unit is in a rural setting; is sedimentation, improve water quality, to jeopardize the continued existence of influenced by drought, low flows, and maintain adequate flows, and improve any endangered species or threatened flooding (leading to scour); and is being habitat connectivity. Special species or result in the destruction or affected by ongoing agricultural management considerations may be adverse modification of designated activities and development resulting in required to address riparian bank critical habitat of such species. In excessive sedimentation, water quality sloughing, increased sedimentation, and addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act degradation, ground water withdrawals pollutants from upstream urbanization requires Federal agencies to confer with and surface water diversions, and and agricultural practices. This subunit the Service on any agency action that is collection. Therefore, special is also occupied by Guadalupe orb. likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be management is necessary to reduce Subunit FASP–4b: Guadalupe River. listed under the Act or result in the sedimentation, improve water quality, This subunit consists of 124.7 river mi destruction or adverse modification of maintain adequate flows, improve (200.7 km) of the Guadalupe River in proposed critical habitat. habitat connectivity, and manage Gonzales, DeWitt, and Victoria collection. Additionally, special Counties, Texas. The Guadalupe River We published a final regulation with management may be required to address subunit begins at the confluence of the a revised definition of destruction or excess nutrients, sediment, and Guadalupe and San Marcos Rivers and adverse modification on August 27, pollutants, as well as exceptionally low continues downstream for 124.7 river 2019 (84 FR 44976). Destruction or and high flows. This subunit is also miles to the US highway 59 bridge near adverse modification means a direct or occupied by Texas fatmucket, Texas Victoria, Texas. Adjacent riparian areas indirect alteration that appreciably fawnsfoot, and Texas pimpleback. within this subunit are privately owned. diminishes the value of critical habitat as a whole for the conservation of a Guadalupe River Basin This subunit is occupied by the false spike and contains all of the PBFs listed species. Unit FASP–4: Guadalupe River essential to the conservation of the If a Federal action may affect a listed Subunit FASP–4a: San Marcos River. species. The Guadalupe River subunit is species or its critical habitat, the This subunit consists of 21.6 river mi in a mostly rural but urbanizing setting, responsible Federal agency (action (34.8 km) of the San Marcos River in is influenced by reservoir releases (from agency) must enter into consultation Gonzales County, Texas. The San Canyon and Guadalupe Valley) and with us. Examples of actions that are Marcos River subunit begins at the flooding (leading to scour), and is being subject to the section 7 consultation Farm-to-Market (FM) 2091 bridge affected by ongoing development and process are actions on State, tribal, crossing within Palmetto State Park agricultural activities resulting in local, or private lands that require a (Park Road 11) and continues for 21.7 excessive sedimentation, water quality Federal permit or that involve some river miles downstream to the San degradation, ground water withdrawals other Federal action. Federal agency Marcos River confluence with the and surface water diversions, and actions within the species’ habitat that Guadalupe River. The riparian lands wastewater inputs. Therefore, special may require conference or consultation adjacent to this subunit are primarily management is necessary to reduce or both include management and any privately owned; Texas Parks and sedimentation, improve water quality, other landscape-altering activities on Wildlife Department’s Palmetto State maintain adequate flows, and improve Federal lands administered by the U.S. Park occurs in the upstream reaches. habitat connectivity. This subunit Fish and Wildlife Service, Army The San Marcos River drains the City of contains the most resilient known National Guard, U.S. Forest Service, and San Marcos, including the campus of population of false spike. During times National Park Service; issuance of Texas State University, which causes of drought, spring water influence from section 404 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. the river to be impacted by urban runoff, the Comal and San Marcos Rivers can 1251 et seq.) permits by the U.S. Army wastewater inputs, and altered contribute as much as 50 percent of the Corps of Engineers; and construction hydrology. The San Marcos springs flows to the lower Guadalupe River. and maintenance of roads or highways complex, the second largest in Texas, Continued protections for these spring by the Federal Highway Administration. contributes significantly to the flows in systems are imperative for protecting Federal actions not affecting listed this river and the lower Guadalupe mussel beds in the lower Guadalupe species or critical habitat, and actions River. The lower San Marcos River River. Special management on State, tribal, local, or private lands watershed is characterized by considerations may be required to that are not federally funded, agricultural land in the lower portion of ensure low flows, sedimentation, and authorized, or carried out by a Federal the San Marcos River. The subunit is degraded water quality parameters do agency, do not require section 7 occupied by the false spike and contains not worsen and contribute to future consultation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47971

Compliance with the requirements of designated that may be affected by the its host fish and result in direct or section 7(a)(2), is documented through identified action. In such situations, cumulative adverse effects to these our issuance of: Federal agencies sometimes may need to individuals and their life cycles. (1) A concurrence letter for Federal request reinitiation of consultation with (3) Actions that would significantly actions that may affect, but are not us, but the regulations also specify some increase sediment deposition within the likely to adversely affect, listed species exceptions to the requirement to stream channel. Such activities could or critical habitat; or reinitiate consultation on specific land include, but are not limited to, excessive (2) A biological opinion for Federal management plans after subsequently sedimentation from livestock grazing, actions that may affect, and are likely to listing a new species or designating new road construction, channel alteration, adversely affect, listed species or critical critical habitat. See the regulations for a timber harvest, off-road vehicle use, habitat. description of those exceptions. agricultural, industrial, and urban When we issue a biological opinion development, and other watershed and concluding that a project is likely to Application of the ‘‘Adverse Modification’’ Standard floodplain disturbances. These activities jeopardize the continued existence of a could eliminate or reduce the habitat listed species and/or destroy or The key factor related to the necessary for the growth and adversely modify critical habitat, we destruction or adverse modification reproduction of the mussel and its fish provide reasonable and prudent determination is whether host by increasing the sediment alternatives to the project, if any are implementation of the proposed Federal deposition to levels that would identifiable, that would avoid the action directly or indirectly alters the adversely affect their ability to complete likelihood of jeopardy and/or designated critical habitat in a way that their life cycles. destruction or adverse modification of appreciably diminishes the value of the (4) Actions that would significantly critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable critical habitat as a whole for the alter channel morphology or geometry. and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR conservation of the listed species. As Such activities could include, but are 402.02) as alternative actions identified discussed above, the role of critical not limited to, channelization, during consultation that: habitat is to support physical or impoundment, road and bridge (1) Can be implemented in a manner biological features essential to the construction, mining, dredging, and consistent with the intended purpose of conservation of a listed species and destruction of riparian vegetation. These the action, provide for the conservation of the activities may lead to changes in water (2) Can be implemented consistent species. flows and levels that would degrade or with the scope of the Federal agency’s Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us eliminate the mussel or its fish host legal authority and jurisdiction, to briefly evaluate and describe, in any and/or their habitats. These actions can (3) Are economically and proposed or final regulation that also lead to increased sedimentation designates critical habitat, activities technologically feasible, and and degradation in water quality to (4) Would, in the Service Director’s involving a Federal action that may levels that are beyond the tolerances of opinion, avoid the likelihood of violate 7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying the mussel or its fish host. jeopardizing the continued existence of or adversely modifying such habitat, or (5) Actions that result in the the listed species and/or avoid the that may be affected by such introduction, spread, or augmentation of likelihood of destroying or adversely designation. nonnative aquatic species in occupied modifying critical habitat. Activities that the Service may, stream segments, or in stream segments Reasonable and prudent alternatives during a consultation under section that are hydrologically connected to can vary from slight project 7(a)(2) of the Act, find are likely to occupied stream segments, even if those modifications to extensive redesign or destroy or adversely modify critical segments are occasionally intermittent, relocation of the project. Costs habitat include, but are not limited to: associated with implementing a (1) Actions that would alter the or introduction of other species that reasonable and prudent alternative are minimum flow or the existing flow compete with or prey on the Central similarly variable. regime. Such activities could include, Texas mussels. Possible actions could Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth but are not limited to, impoundment, include, but are not limited to, stocking requirements for Federal agencies to channelization, water diversion, water of nonnative fishes, stocking of sport reinitiate formal consultation on withdrawal, and hydropower fish, or other related actions. These previously reviewed actions. These generation. These activities could activities can introduce parasites or requirements apply when the Federal eliminate or reduce the habitat disease for host fish, and can result in agency has retained discretionary necessary for the growth and direct predation, or affect the growth, involvement or control over the action reproduction of the Central Texas reproduction, and survival, of Central (or the agency’s discretionary mussels and its fish host by decreasing Texas mussels. involvement or control is authorized by or altering flows to levels that would Exemptions law) and, if subsequent to the previous adversely affect their ability to complete consultation: (1) If the amount or extent their life cycles. Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act of taking specified in the incidental take (2) Actions that would significantly Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 statement is exceeded; (2) if new alter water chemistry or temperature. U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that the information reveals effects of the action Such activities could include, but are Secretary shall not designate as critical that may affect listed species or critical not limited to, release of chemicals habitat any lands or other geographical habitat in a manner or to an extent not (including pharmaceuticals, metals, and areas owned or controlled by the previously considered; (3) if the salts), biological pollutants, or heated Department of Defense, or designated identified action is subsequently effluents into the surface water or for its use, that are subject to an modified in a manner that causes an connected groundwater at a point integrated natural resources effect to the listed species or critical source or by dispersed release (non- management plan (INRMP) prepared habitat that was not considered in the point source). These activities could under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 biological opinion; or (4) if a new alter water conditions to levels that are U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines species is listed or critical habitat beyond the tolerances of the mussel or in writing that such plan provides a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47972 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

benefit to the species for which critical measures specifically designed to designated). The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ habitat is proposed for designation. provide a net conservation benefit to the scenario describes the incremental There are no Department of Defense covered species, including the Central impacts associated specifically with the (DoD) lands with a completed INRMP Texas mussels, in the covered area for designation of critical habitat for the within the proposed critical habitat the term of the CCAA. The Brazos River species. The incremental conservation designation. Authority CCAA would cover the false efforts and associated impacts would spike and Texas fawnsfoot. The Trinity Consideration of Impacts Under Section not be expected without the designation River Authority of Texas is developing 4(b)(2) of the Act of critical habitat for the species. In a CCAA that would cover the Texas other words, the incremental costs are Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that fawnsfoot. The Colorado River those attributable solely to the the Secretary shall designate and make Authority is developing a CCAA that designation of critical habitat, above and revisions to critical habitat on the basis would cover the Texas fawnsfoot and beyond the baseline costs. These are the of the best available scientific data after Texas pimpleback. Finally, the costs we use when evaluating the taking into consideration the economic Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, in benefits of inclusion and exclusion of impact, national security impact, and partnership with the Upper Guadalupe particular areas from the final any other relevant impact of specifying River Authority, has plans to develop a designation of critical habitat should we any particular area as critical habitat. comprehensive Habitat Conservation choose to conduct a discretionary The Secretary may exclude an area from Plan (HCP) for the entire Guadalupe 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. critical habitat if she determines that the River Basin that would cover the false benefits of such exclusion outweigh the For these proposed designations, we spike, Guadalupe orb, and Guadalupe developed an incremental effects benefits of specifying such area as part fatmucket, among other species. None of of the critical habitat, unless she memorandum (IEM) considering the these plans have been approved or probable incremental economic impacts determines, based on the best scientific operationalized as of the time this data available, that the failure to that may result from these proposed proposal is published. While these designations of critical habitat. The designate such area as critical habitat agreements are not yet completed, if and will result in the extinction of the information contained in our IEM was when they are, we may consider then used to develop a screening species. In making that determination, excluding areas covered by the analysis of the probable effects of the the statute on its face, as well as the completed agreements from our critical designations of critical habitat for the legislative history, are clear that the habitat designations. Secretary has broad discretion regarding Central Texas mussels (Industrial which factor(s) to use and how much Consideration of Economic Impacts Economics, Inc. (IEc) 2019, entire). We weight to give to any factor. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its began by conducting a screening Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we implementing regulations require that analysis of the proposed designation of may exclude an area from designated we consider the economic impact that critical habitat in order to focus our critical habitat based on economic may result from a designation of critical analysis on the key factors that are impacts, impacts on national security, habitat. To assess the probable likely to result in incremental economic or any other relevant impacts. In economic impacts of a designation, we impacts. The purpose of the screening considering whether to exclude a must first evaluate specific land uses or analysis is to filter out particular particular area from the designation, we activities and projects that may occur in geographic areas of critical habitat that identify the benefits of including the the area of the critical habitat. We then are already subject to such protections area in the designation, identify the must evaluate whether a specific critical and are, therefore, unlikely to incur benefits of excluding the area from the habitat designation may restrict or incremental economic impacts. In designation, and evaluate whether the modify specific land uses or activities particular, the screening analysis benefits of exclusion outweigh the for the benefit of the species and its considers baseline costs (i.e., absent benefits of inclusion. If the analysis habitat within the areas proposed. We critical habitat designation) and indicates that the benefits of exclusion then identify which conservation efforts includes probable incremental outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the may be the result of the species being economic impacts where land and water Secretary may exercise the discretion to listed under the Act versus those use may be subject to conservation exclude the area only if such exclusion attributed solely to the designation of plans, land management plans, best would not result in the extinction of the critical habitat. The probable economic management practices, or regulations species. We describe below the process impact of a proposed critical habitat that protect the habitat area as a result that we undertook for taking into designation is analyzed by comparing of the Federal listing status of the consideration each category of impacts scenarios both ‘‘with critical habitat’’ species. Ultimately, the screening and our analyses of the relevant and ‘‘without critical habitat.’’ analysis allows us to focus our analysis impacts. The ‘‘without critical habitat’’ on evaluating the specific areas or The Service is aware of efforts scenario represents the baseline for the sectors that may incur probable currently under way by the Brazos River analysis, which includes the existing incremental economic impacts as a Authority, Trinity River Authority of regulatory and socioeconomic burden result of the designation. The screening Texas, and Lower Colorado River imposed on landowners, managers, or analysis also assesses whether units are Authority (collectively the River other resource users potentially affected unoccupied by the species and thus may Authorities) to develop comprehensive by the designation of critical habitat require additional management or management plans for one or more (e.g., under the Federal listing as well as conservation efforts as a result of the species of Central Texas mussels. The other Federal, State, and local critical habitat designation for the Service is currently working with the regulations). The baseline, therefore, species; these additional efforts may River Authorities individually to represents the costs of all efforts incur incremental economic impacts. develop Candidate Conservation attributable to the listing of the species This screening analysis, combined with Agreements with Assurances (CCAAs) under the Act (i.e., conservation of the the information contained in our IEM, that address activities conducted by the species and its habitat incurred constitute our draft economic analysis River Authorities and conservation regardless of whether critical habitat is (DEA) of the proposed critical habitat

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47973

designations for the Central Texas it has been our experience that it is modifications that arise from mussels, and is summarized in the more difficult to discern which consultation, we project consultations narrative below. conservation efforts are attributable to in unoccupied critical habitat to cost Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and the species being listed and those which approximately $15,000 per consultation. 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess would result solely from the designation In total, in both occupied and the costs and benefits of available of critical habitat. However, the unoccupied critical habitat, we expect regulatory alternatives in quantitative following specific circumstances in this the total cost of critical habitat (to the extent feasible) and qualitative case help to inform our evaluation: (1) designations not to exceed $82,500 per terms. Consistent with the E.O. The essential physical or biological year. regulatory analysis requirements, our features identified for critical habitat are We are soliciting data and comments effects analysis under the Act may take the same features essential for the life from the public on the DEA discussed into consideration impacts to both requisites of the species, and (2) any above, as well as on all aspects of this directly and indirectly affected entities, actions that would result in sufficient proposed rule and our required where practicable and reasonable. If harm or harassment to constitute determinations. During the development sufficient data are available, we assess jeopardy to the Central Texas mussels of a final designation, we will consider to the extent practicable the probable would also likely adversely affect the the information presented in the DEA impacts to both directly and indirectly essential physical or biological features and any additional information on affected entities. As part of our of critical habitat. The IEM outlines our economic impacts received during the screening analysis, we considered the rationale concerning this limited public comment period to determine types of economic activities that are distinction between baseline whether any specific areas should be likely to occur within the areas likely conservation efforts and incremental excluded from the final critical habitat affected by the proposed critical habitat impacts of the designations of critical designation under authority of section designations. In our December 4, 2019, habitat for these species. This 4(b)(2) and our implementing IEM describing probable incremental evaluation of the incremental effects has regulations at 50 CFR 17.90. If we economic impacts that may result from been used as the basis to evaluate the receive credible information regarding the proposed designations, we first probable incremental economic impacts the existence of a meaningful economic identified probable incremental of these proposed designations of or other relevant impact supporting a economic impacts associated with each critical habitat. benefit of exclusion, we will conduct an of the following categories of activities: The proposed critical habitat exclusion analysis for the relevant area (1) Federal lands management (National designations for the Central Texas or areas. We may also exercise the Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, mussels totals approximately 1,944 river discretion to evaluate any other Department of Defense); (2) agriculture; mi (3,129 river km) in 27 units with a particular areas for possible exclusion. (3) forest management/silviculture/ combination of occupied and Furthermore, when we conduct an timber; (4) development; (5) recreation; unoccupied areas. In occupied areas, exclusion analysis based on impacts (6) restoration activities; and (7) any actions that may affect the species identified by experts in, or sources with transportation. We considered each or their habitat would likely also affect firsthand knowledge about, impacts that industry or category individually. proposed critical habitat, and it is are outside the scope of the Service’s Additionally, we considered whether unlikely that any additional expertise, we will give weight to those the activities have any Federal conservation efforts would be required impacts consistent with the expert or involvement. Critical habitat to address the adverse modification firsthand information unless we have designation generally will not affect standard over and above those rebutting information. We may exclude activities that do not have any Federal recommended as necessary to avoid an area from critical habitat if we involvement; under the Act, designation jeopardizing the continued existence of determine that the benefits of excluding of critical habitat only affects activities the species. Therefore, the only the area outweigh the benefits of conducted, funded, permitted, or additional costs that are expected in the including the area, provided the authorized by Federal agencies. If we occupied proposed critical habitat exclusion will not result in the list any of the species, as proposed in designations are administrative costs, extinction of this species. this document, in areas where the due to the fact that this additional Central Texas mussels are present, analysis will require time and resources Exclusions under section 7 of the Act, Federal by both the Federal action agency and Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts agencies would be required to consult the Service. However, it is believed that, with the Service on activities they fund, in most circumstances, these costs The first sentence of section 4(b)(2) of permit, or implement that may affect the would not reach the threshold of the Act requires the Service to consider species. If we finalize this proposed ‘‘significant’’ under E.O. 12866. We the economic impacts (as well as the critical habitat designation, anticipate incremental costs of section 7 impacts on national security and any consultations to avoid the destruction or consultations in occupied critical other relevant impacts) of designating adverse modification of critical habitat habitat to total less than $75,000 per critical habitat. In addition, economic would be incorporated into the existing year. impacts may, for some particular areas, consultation process. In unoccupied critical habitat, any play an important role in the In our IEM, we attempted to clarify costs of section 7 consultations would discretionary section 4(b)(2) exclusion the distinction between the effects that not be incurred due to the listing of the analysis under the second sentence of would result from the species being species. We are proposing to designate section 4(b)(2). In both contexts, the listed and those attributable to the six subunits that are currently Service will consider the probable critical habitat designations (i.e., unoccupied by the Central Texas incremental economic impacts of the difference between the jeopardy and mussels. We anticipate approximately designation. When the Service adverse modification standards) for the five new formal section 7 consultations undertakes a discretionary section Central Texas mussels. Because the to occur in the next 10 years in these 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis with respect designation of critical habitat is being subunits. Considering the costs of to a particular area, we will weigh the proposed concurrently with the listing, formal consultation as well as project economic benefits of exclusion (and any

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47974 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

other benefits of exclusion) against any whether there are non-permitted Regulatory Planning and Review benefits of inclusion (primarily the conservation agreements and (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) conservation value of designating the partnerships that would be encouraged Executive Order 12866 provides that area). The conservation value may be by designation of, or exclusion from, the Office of Information and Regulatory influenced by the level of effort needed critical habitat. In addition, we look Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of to manage degraded habitat to the point whether there are Tribal conservation Management and Budget will review all where it could support the listed plans or parnerships, Tribal resources, significant rules. OIRA has determined species. or government-to-government that this rule is not significant. The Service will use its discretion in relationships of the United States with Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the determining how to weigh probable Tribal entities that may be affected by principles of E.O. 12866 while calling incremental economic impacts against the designation. We also consider any for improvements in the Nation’s conservation value. The nature of the State, local, public health, community regulatory system to promote probable incremental economic impacts interest, environmental, or social predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and not necessarily a particular impacts that might occur because of the and to use the best, most innovative, threshold level triggers considerations designations. of exclusions based on probable and least burdensome tools for In preparing this proposal, we have achieving regulatory ends. The incremental economic impacts. For determined that there are currently no example, if an economic analysis Executive order directs agencies to HCPs or other management plans for the consider regulatory approaches that indicates high probable incremental Central Texas mussels, and the impacts of designating a particular reduce burdens and maintain flexibility proposed designations do not include and freedom of choice for the public critical habitat unit of low conservation any tribal lands or trust resources. We value (relative to the remainder of the where these approaches are relevant, anticipate no impact on tribal lands, feasible, and consistent with regulatory designation), the Service may consider partnerships, or HCPs from these exclusion of that particular unit. objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes proposed critical habitat designations. further that regulations must be based Exclusions Based on National Security We are aware of efforts currently under on the best available science and that Impacts or Homeland Security Impacts way by the River Authorities to develop the rulemaking process must allow for CCAAs for the Central Texas mussels, as Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we public participation and an open discussed above, and will take those consider whether there are lands where exchange of ideas. We have developed efforts into account in a final a national security impact might exist. this rule in a manner consistent with designation. During the development of In preparing this proposal, we have these requirements. a final designation, we will consider any determined that there are no lands additional information received through Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 within the proposed designations of the public comment period regarding et seq.) critical habitat for the Central Texas other relevant impacts to determine mussels owned or managed by the Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Department of Defense or Department of whether any specific areas should be (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended Homeland Security. We anticipate no excluded from the final critical habitat by the Small Business Regulatory impact on national security because designation under authority of section Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 there are no lands owned or managed by 4(b)(2) and our implementing (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Department of Defense within this regulations at 50 CFR 17.90. whenever an agency is required to proposal, and we have not identified Required Determinations publish a notice of rulemaking for any any national security or homeland proposed or final rule, it must prepare security activities that would be affected Clarity of the Rule and make available for public comment by the proposed designations. However, We are required by Executive Orders a regulatory flexibility analysis that if through the public comment period 12866 and 12988 and by the describes the effects of the rule on small we receive credible information Presidential Memorandum of June 1, entities (i.e., small businesses, small regarding impacts on national security 1998, to write all rules in plain organizations, and small government or homeland security from designating language. This means that each rule we jurisdictions). However, no regulatory particular areas as critical habitat, then publish must: flexibility analysis is required if the as part of developing the final (1) Be logically organized; head of the agency certifies the rule will designation of critical habitat, we will (2) Use the active voice to address not have a significant economic impact conduct a discretionary exclusion readers directly; on a substantial number of small analysis to determine whether to (3) Use clear language rather than entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA exclude those areas under authority of jargon; to require Federal agencies to provide a section 4(b)(2) and our implementing (4) Be divided into short sections and certification statement of the factual regulations at 50 CFR 17.90. sentences; and basis for certifying that the rule will not (5) Use lists and tables wherever have a significant economic impact on Exclusions Based on Other Relevant possible. a substantial number of small entities. Impacts If you feel that we have not met these According to the Small Business Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we requirements, send us comments by one Administration, small entities include consider any other relevant impacts, in of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To small organizations such as addition to economic impacts and better help us revise the rule, your independent nonprofit organizations; impacts on national security. We comments should be as specific as small governmental jurisdictions, consider a number of factors including possible. For example, you should tell including school boards and city and whether there are permitted us the numbers of the sections or town governments that serve fewer than conservation plans covering the species paragraphs that are unclearly written, 50,000 residents; and small businesses in the area such as HCPs, safe harbor which sections or sentences are too (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses agreements, or candidate conservation long, the sections where you feel lists or include manufacturing and mining agreements with assurances (CCAAs), or tables would be useful, etc. concerns with fewer than 500

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47975

employees, wholesale trade entities number of small business entities. condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a with fewer than 100 employees, retail Therefore, an initial regulatory duty arising from participation in a and service businesses with less than $5 flexibility analysis is not required. voluntary Federal program.’’ million in annual sales, general and The designations of critical habitat do Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— heavy construction businesses with less not impose a legally binding duty on Executive Order 13211 than $27.5 million in annual business, non-Federal Government entities or special trade contractors doing less than Executive Order 13211 (Actions private parties. Under the Act, the only $11.5 million in annual business, and Concerning Regulations That regulatory effect is that Federal agencies agricultural businesses with annual Significantly Affect Energy Supply, must ensure that their actions do not sales less than $750,000. To determine Distribution, or Use) requires agencies destroy or adversely modify critical if potential economic impacts to these to prepare Statements of Energy Effects habitat under section 7. While non- small entities are significant, we when undertaking certain actions. In Federal entities that receive Federal considered the types of activities that our economic analysis, we did not find funding, assistance, or permits, or that might trigger regulatory impacts under that the designations of this proposed otherwise require approval or this designation as well as types of critical habitat will significantly affect authorization from a Federal agency for project modifications that may result. In energy supplies, distribution, or use. an action, may be indirectly impacted general, the term ‘‘significant economic Therefore, this action is not a significant by the designation of critical habitat, the impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical energy action, and no Statement of legally binding duty to avoid small business firm’s business Energy Effects is required. destruction or adverse modification of operations. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 critical habitat rests squarely on the Under the RFA, as amended, and as U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) Federal agency. Furthermore, to the understood in the light of recent court extent that non-Federal entities are decisions, Federal agencies are required In accordance with the Unfunded indirectly impacted because they to evaluate the potential incremental Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et receive Federal assistance or participate impacts of rulemaking only on those seq.), we make the following findings: in a voluntary Federal aid program, the entities directly regulated by the (1) This proposed rule would not Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would rulemaking itself and, therefore, are not produce a Federal mandate. In general, not apply, nor would critical habitat required to evaluate the potential a Federal mandate is a provision in shift the costs of the large entitlement impacts to indirectly regulated entities. legislation, statute, or regulation that programs listed above onto State The regulatory mechanism through would impose an enforceable duty upon governments. which critical habitat protections are State, local, or tribal governments, or the (2) We do not believe that this realized is section 7 of the Act, which private sector, and includes both proposed rule would significantly or requires Federal agencies, in ‘‘Federal intergovernmental mandates’’ uniquely affect small governments consultation with the Service, to ensure and ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ because the lands being proposed for that any action authorized, funded, or These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. critical habitat designation are owned carried out by the agency is not likely 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental by the State of Texas. This government to destroy or adversely modify critical mandate’’ includes a regulation that entity does not fit the definition of habitat. Therefore, under section 7, only ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ Federal action agencies are directly upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ Therefore, a Small Government Agency subject to the specific regulatory with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a Plan is not required. condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also requirement (avoiding destruction and Takings—Executive Order 12630 adverse modification) imposed by excludes ‘‘a duty arising from critical habitat designation. participation in a voluntary Federal In accordance with E.O. 12630 Consequently, it is our position that program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates (Government Actions and Interference only Federal action agencies would be to a then-existing Federal program with Constitutionally Protected Private directly regulated if we adopt the under which $500,000,000 or more is Property Rights), we have analyzed the proposed critical habitat designations. provided annually to State, local, and potential takings implications of There is no requirement under the RFA tribal governments under entitlement designating critical habitat for the to evaluate the potential impacts to authority,’’ if the provision would Central Texas mussels in a takings entities not directly regulated. ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of implications assessment. The Act does Moreover, Federal agencies are not assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or not authorize the Service to regulate small entities. Therefore, because no otherwise decrease, the Federal private actions on private lands or small entities would be directly Government’s responsibility to provide confiscate private property as a result of regulated by this rulemaking, the funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal critical habitat designation. Designation Service certifies that, if promulgated, governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust of critical habitat does not affect land the proposed critical habitat accordingly. At the time of enactment, ownership, or establish any closures or designations will not have a significant these entitlement programs were: restrictions on use of or access to the economic impact on a substantial Medicaid; Aid to Families with designated areas. Furthermore, the number of small entities. Dependent Children work programs; designation of critical habitat does not In summary, we have considered Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social affect landowner actions that do not whether the proposed designations Services Block Grants; Vocational require Federal funding or permits, nor would result in a significant economic Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, does it preclude development of habitat impact on a substantial number of small Adoption Assistance, and Independent conservation programs or issuance of entities. For the above reasons and Living; Family Support Welfare incidental take permits to permit actions based on currently available Services; and Child Support that do require Federal funding or information, we certify that, if made Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector permits to go forward. However, Federal final, the proposed critical habitat mandate’’ includes a regulation that agencies are prohibited from carrying designations will not have a significant ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty out, funding, or authorizing actions that economic impact on a substantial upon the private sector, except (i) a would destroy or adversely modify

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47976 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

critical habitat. A takings implications Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order recognized Federal Tribes on a assessment has been completed and 12988 government-to-government basis. In concludes that, if adopted, these In accordance with Executive Order accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 designations of critical habitat for the 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Central Texas mussels does not pose of the Solicitor has determined that the Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust significant takings implications for rule does not unduly burden the judicial Responsibilities, and the Endangered lands within or affected by the system and that it meets the Species Act), we readily acknowledge designations. requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) our responsibilities to work directly of the Order. We have proposed with tribes in developing programs for Federalism—Executive Order 13132 designating critical habitat in healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that tribal lands are not subject to the same In accordance with E.O. 13132 accordance with the provisions of the controls as Federal public lands, to (Federalism), this proposed rule does Act. To assist the public in remain sensitive to Indian culture, and not have significant federalism effects. understanding the habitat needs of the species, this proposed rule identifies the to make information available to tribes. A federalism summary impact statement We have determined that no tribal lands is not required. In keeping with elements of physical or biological features essential to the conservation of fall within the boundaries of the Department of the Interior and the species. The proposed areas of proposed critical habitat designations Department of Commerce policy, we designated critical habitat are presented for the Central Texas mussels, so no requested information from, and on maps, and the proposed rule tribal lands would be affected by the coordinated development of these provides several options for the proposed designations. proposed critical habitat designations interested public to obtain more References Cited with, appropriate State resource detailed location information, if desired. agencies in Texas. From a federalism A complete list of references cited in perspective, the designation of critical Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 this rulemaking is available on the habitat directly affects only the U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) internet at http://www.regulations.gov responsibilities of Federal agencies. The This rule does not contain and upon request from the Austin Act imposes no other duties with information collection requirements, Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR respect to critical habitat, either for and a submission to the Office of FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Management and Budget (OMB) under States and local governments, or for Authors anyone else. As a result, the proposed the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 rule does not have substantial direct (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required. The primary authors of this proposed effects either on the States, or on the We may not conduct or sponsor and you rule are the staff members of the U.S. relationship between the National are not required to respond to a Fish and Wildlife Service’s Species Government and the States, or on the collection of information unless it Assessment Team and the Austin Ecological Services Field Office. distribution of powers and displays a currently valid OMB control responsibilities among the various number. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 levels of government. The proposed National Environmental Policy Act (42 Endangered and threatened species, designations may have some benefit to U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) Exports, Imports, Reporting and these governments because the areas It is our position that, outside the recordkeeping requirements, that contain the features essential to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals Transportation. conservation of the species are more for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to Proposed Regulation Promulgation clearly defined, and the physical or prepare environmental analyses biological features of the habitat pursuant to the National Environmental Accordingly, we propose to amend necessary to the conservation of the Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title species are specifically identified. This seq.) in connection with designating 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, information does not alter where and critical habitat under the Act. We as set forth below: what federally sponsored activities may published a notice outlining our reasons occur. However, it may assist these local for this determination in the Federal PART 17—ENDANGERED AND governments in long-range planning Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (because these local governments no 49244). This position was upheld by the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 longer have to wait for case-by-case U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth continues to read as follows: section 7 consultations to occur). Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– Where State and local governments 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise require approval or authorization from a noted. Federal agency for actions that may Government-to-Government ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding entries affect critical habitat, consultation Relationship With Tribes for ‘‘Fatmucket, Guadalupe’’; under section 7(a)(2) would be required. In accordance with the President’s ‘‘Fatmucket, Texas’’; ‘‘Fawnsfoot, While non-Federal entities that receive memorandum of April 29, 1994 Texas’’; ‘‘Orb, Guadalupe’’; Federal funding, assistance, or permits, (Government-to-Government Relations ‘‘Pimpleback, Texas’’; and ‘‘Spike, false’’ or that otherwise require approval or with Native American Tribal to the List of Endangered and authorization from a Federal agency for Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical an action, may be indirectly impacted Order 13175 (Consultation and order under Clams to read as follows: by the designation of critical habitat, the Coordination with Indian Tribal legally binding duty to avoid Governments), and the Department of § 17.11 Endangered and threatened destruction or adverse modification of the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we wildlife. critical habitat rests squarely on the readily acknowledge our responsibility * * * * * Federal agency. to communicate meaningfully with (h) * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47977

Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules

******* CLAMS

******* Fatmucket, Guadalupe ... Lampsilis bergmanni ..... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH. Fatmucket, Texas ...... Lampsilis bracteata ...... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH. Fawnsfoot, Texas ...... Truncilla macrodon ...... Wherever found ...... T [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.45(c)4d; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH.

******* Orb, Guadalupe ...... Cyclonaias necki ...... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH.

******* Pimpleback, Texas ...... Cyclonaias petrina ...... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH.

******* Spike, false ...... Fusconaia mitchelli ...... Wherever found ...... E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 17.95(f)CH.

*******

■ 3. As proposed to be added at 83 FR (iv) Possess and engage in other acts the species, stabilize degraded and 51570 (Oct. 11, 2018), and amended at with unlawfully taken Texas fawnsfoot, eroding stream banks to limit 85 FR 44821 (July 24, 2020) and 85 FR as set forth at § 17.21(d)(2). sedimentation and scour of the species’ 61384 (Sept. 29, 2020), § 17.45 is further (v) Take incidental to an otherwise habitats, and restore or enhance nearby amended by adding paragraph (c) to lawful activity caused by: upland habitats to limit sedimentation read as follows: (A) Channel restoration projects that of the species’ habitats and comply with create natural, physically stable, conservation practice standards and § 17.45 Special rules—snails and clams. ecologically functioning streams (or specifications, and technical guidelines * * * * * stream and wetland systems) that are developed by the Natural Resources (c) Texas fawnsfoot (Truncilla reconnected with their groundwater Conservation Service. macrodon)—(1) Prohibitions. The aquifers. (D) Presence or abundance surveys for following prohibitions that apply to (B) Bioengineering methods such as Texas fawnfoot conducted by endangered wildlife also apply to the streambank stabilization using live individuals who successfully complete Texas fawnsfoot. Except as provided at stakes (live, vegetative cuttings inserted and show proficiency by passing the paragraph (c)(2) of this section and or tamped into the ground in a manner end-of-course test with a score equal to that allows the stake to take root and §§ 17.4 and 17.5, it is unlawful for any or greater than 90 percent, with 100 grow), live fascines (live branch person subject to the jurisdiction of the percent accuracy in identification of cuttings, usually willows, bound United States to commit, to attempt to mussel species listed under the together into long, cigar-shaped commit, to solicit another to commit, or Endangered Species Act, in an approved bundles), or brush layering (cuttings or cause to be committed, any of the freshwater mussel identification and branches of easily rooted tree species following acts in regard to the Texas sampling course (specific to the species layered between successive lifts of soil fawnsfoot: and basins in which the Texas fill). These methods would not include (i) Import or export, as set forth at fawnsfoot is known to occur), such as the sole use of quarried rock (rip-rap) or § 17.21(b). that administered by the Service, a State the use of rock baskets or gabion (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(1). wildlife agency, or qualified university structures. In addition, to reduce (iii) Possession and other acts with experts. Those individuals exercising streambank erosion and sedimentation unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth the exemption in this paragraph into the stream, work using these at § 17.21(d)(1). (c)(2)(v)(D) should provide reports to the bioengineering methods would be Service annually on number, location, (iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in performed at base-flow or low-water and date of collection. The exemption in the course of commercial activity, as set conditions and when significant rainfall this paragraph (c)(2)(v)(D) does not forth at § 17.21(e). is not predicted. Further, streambank apply if lethal take or collection is (v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth stabilization projects must keep all anticipated. The exemption in this at § 17.21(f). equipment out of the stream channels paragraph (c)(2)(v)(D) only applies for 5 (2) Exceptions from the prohibitions. and water. With regard to this species, you may: (C) Soil and water conservation years from the date of successful course (i) Conduct activities as authorized by practices and riparian and adjacent completion. a permit under § 17.32. upland habitat management activities * * * * * (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(2) that restore in-stream habitats for the ■ 4. Amend § 17.95(f) by: through (4) for endangered wildlife. species, restore adjacent riparian ■ a. Adding critical habitat entries for (iii) Take, as set forth at § 17.31(b). habitats that enhance stream habitats for ‘‘Guadalupe Fatmucket (Lampsilis

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47978 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

bergmanni)’’, ‘‘Texas Fatmucket (2) Within this area, the physical or (D) Water temperature <29 °C (84.2 (Lampsilis bracteata)’’, and ‘‘Texas biological features essential to the °F); and Fawnsfoot (Truncilla macrodon)’’ conservation of Guadalupe fatmucket (E) Low levels of contaminants. immediately following the entry for consist of the following components ‘‘Appalachian Elktoe (Alasmidonta within waters and streambeds up to the (3) Critical habitat does not include raveneliana)’’; ordinary high-water mark: manmade structures (such as buildings, ■ b. Adding an entry for ‘‘Guadalupe (i) Flowing water at moderate to high aqueducts, runways, roads, and other Orb (Cyclonaias necki)’’ immediately rates with sufficient depth to remain paved areas) and the land on which they following the entry for ‘‘Carolina sufficiently cool and oxygenated during are located existing within the legal Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata)’’; and low-flow periods; boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF ■ c. Adding entries for ‘‘Texas THE FINAL RULE]. Pimpleback (Cyclonaias petrina)’’ and (ii) Substrate including bedrock and (4) The maps in this entry, as ‘‘False Spike (Fusconaia mitchelli)’’ boulder crevices, point bars, and modified by any accompanying immediately following the entry for vegetated run habitat comprising sand, ‘‘Georgia Pigtoe (Pleurobema gravel, and larger cobbles; regulatory text, establish the boundaries hanleyianum)’’. (iii) Green sunfish (Lepomis of the critical habitat designation. The The additions read as follows: cyanellus), bluegill (L. macrochirus), coordinates or plot points or both on largemouth bass (Micropterus which each map is based are available § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. salmoides), and Guadalupe bass (M. to the public at http:// * * * * * treculii) present; and www.regulations.gov under Docket No. (f) * * * (iv) Water quality parameters within FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. Guadalupe Fatmucket (Lampsilis the following ranges: (5) Index map of critical habitat for bergmanni) (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; the Central Texas mussels, which (1) A critical habitat unit is depicted (B) Salinity <2 ppt; includes the Guadalupe fatmucket, for Kendall and Kerr Counties, Texas, (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total follows: on the map in this critical habitat entry. ammonia nitrogen; BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47979

Central Texas Mussels Critical Habitat All S cies Overview

! ., .... L--,....,_J_~- .'t \ I ) '.

___ __,..---

Q - Critical Habitat - Occupied -- -- Rivers Mi 0 25 ~Critical Habitat- Unoccupied 8_88B: Lakes I ,--7 County Boundaries El Cities r--i KmO 25 = Interstates

(6) Map of Unit GUFM-1: Guadalupe River follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.031 47980 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Fatmucket Unit 1 • Guadalupe River

El IFredericksburgj Gillespie ~Johnson Cr: ... - ...... _,. ... , ' ' ',, ~ ~, GUFM-1b:-Johns·orf'Cre·ek I ' -~-~~-~~ar:~~~;,.,,i-...,,,_ ...... Kendall ' 'I ,,, ,' ~=;:------'

GUFM-:t·a:' North Fork Guadalupe

I'-' , -~~Guadalupe River , ... .., ...... ,,...... 1'\,.,_ \J ,,, - - ' , I 'J • ,n8 ~ -~ ~lur S Fl< 01.10

' ' , I

...... -,.,,~, ...... ,'- ...... ,J- .... ,, 1_._ ',

' '

Bandera ,

')

I ' ' /,/ ' I / Bexar Medina/t/ ,. ./ 1'xa~ e - Critical Habitat - Occupied - '- -- Rivers Mi 0 4 County Boundaries ~ Lakes I = Interstates El Cities r7 KmO 4 I Subunit Divider

TEXAS FATMUCKET (LAMPS/US BRACTEATA)

Texas Fatmucket (Lampsilis bracteata) (2) Within these areas, the physical or sufficiently cool and oxygenated during biological features essential to the low-flow periods; (1) Critical habitat units are depicted conservation of Texas fatmucket consist (ii) Substrate including bedrock and for Blanco, Gillespie, Hays, Kimble, of the following components within boulder crevices, point bars, and Llano, Mason, McCulloch, Menard, waters and streambeds up to the vegetated run habitat comprising sand, Runnels, San Saba, and Travis Counties, ordinary high-water mark: gravel, and larger cobbles; Texas, on the maps in this critical (i) Flowing water at moderate to high habitat entry. (iii) Green sunfish (Lepomis rates with sufficient depth to remain cyanellus), bluegill (L. macrochirus),

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.032 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47981

largemouth bass (Micropterus (3) Critical habitat does not include which each map is based are available salmoides), and Guadalupe bass (M. manmade structures (such as buildings, to the public at http:// treculii) present; and aqueducts, runways, roads, and other www.regulations.gov under Docket No. (iv) Water quality parameters within paved areas) and the land on which they FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. the following ranges: are located existing within the legal (5) Note: An index map of the critical (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF habitat designations for the Central (B) Salinity <2 ppt; THE FINAL RULE]. Texas mussels, which includes the (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total (4) The maps in this entry, as Texas fatmucket, can be found in this ammonia nitrogen; modified by any accompanying paragraph (f) at the entry for the (D) Water temperature <29 °C (84.2 regulatory text, establish the boundaries Guadalupe fatmucket. An index map of °F); and of the critical habitat designation. The critical habitat units for the Texas (E) Low levels of contaminants. coordinates or plot points or both on fatmucket follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fatmucket - Unit Overview

- Critical Habitat - Occupied = Interstates Critical Habitat - Unoccupied -- -- Rivers Mi O 10 -====- L__J County Boundaries ~ lakes f"7 KmO 10 Subunit Divider 3 Cities

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.033 47982 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(6) Map of TXFM–1: Elm Creek follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fatmucket Unit 1 • Elm Creek I , I I :t.; ' : It:: , I !Winters I ;S I E] I TXFM-1a: Bluff Creek TXFM-1 c: Upper Elm Creek I

Runnels

TXFM-1 b: Lower Elm Creek

COletuan

!Paint Rock I G Concho

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi O 3 -=::aCritical Habitat- Unoccupied G Cities I CJ County Boundaries r7 KmO 3 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.034 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47983

(7) Map of Unit TXFM–2: San Saba Unit TXFM–4: Llano River, and Unit River, Unit TXFM–3: Cherokee Creek, TXFM–5: Pedernales River, follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fatmucket Units: 2-San Saba River, 3-Cherokee Creek, 4-Llano River, 5-Pedemales River

Paint Rock El

C-0ucb.o

McCulloch

TXfM;;2:

Real (.,...... J"' .... _ .. t ...... '

- Criticaf Habitat~ Occupied -- - - Rivers Mi O 10 County Boundaries El Cities I c:::J ii I Subunit Divider KmO 10

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.035 47984 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(8) Map of Unit TXFM–6: Onion Creek follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fatmucket Unit 6 - Onion Creek

Bastrop

Caldwell

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied = Interstates Critical Habitat - Unoccupied - - - - Rivers Mi 0 2.5 -==- I D County Boundaries ffi: Lakes II KmO 2.5 I Subunit Divider 0 Cities

Texas Fawnsfoot (Truncilla macrodon) Pinto, Parker, Robertson, San Saba, of the following components within Shackelford, Stephens, Throckmorton, waters and streambeds up to the (1) Critical habitat units are depicted Waller, Washington, and Wharton ordinary high-water mark: for Anderson, Austin, Brazos, Burleson, Counties, Texas, on the maps in this (i) Flowing water at rates suitable to Colorado, Falls, Fort Bend, Freestone, critical habitat entry. prevent excess sedimentation but not so Grimes, Henderson, Houston, Kaufman, (2) Within these areas, the physical or Lampasas, Leon, Madison, Matagorda, biological features essential to the high as to dislodge individuals or McLennan, Milam, Mills, Navarro, Palo conservation of Texas fawnsfoot consist sediment;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.036 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47985

(ii) Stable bank and riffle habitats (E) Low levels of contaminants. which each map is based are available with gravel, sand, silt, and mud (3) Critical habitat does not include to the public at http:// substrates that are clean swept by manmade structures (such as buildings, www.regulations.gov under Docket No. flushing flows; aqueducts, runways, roads, and other FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. (iii) Freshwater drum (Aplodinotus paved areas) and the land on which they (5) Note: An index map of the critical grunniens) present; and are located existing within the legal (iv) Water quality parameters within habitat designations for the Central boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF Texas mussels, which includes the the following ranges: THE FINAL RULE]. (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; Texas fawnsfoot, can be found in this (B) Salinity <2 ppt; (4) The maps in this entry, as paragraph (f) at the entry for the (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total modified by any accompanying Guadalupe fatmucket. An index map of ammonia nitrogen; regulatory text, establish the boundaries critical habitat units for the Texas ° (D) Water temperature <29 C (84.2 of the critical habitat designation. The fawnsfoot follows: °F); and coordinates or plot points or both on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47986 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Critical Habitat for Texas Fa'Mlsfoot - Unit Overview

,... ,___ ----i-··-~·--~ !

- Critical Habitat• Occupied.. Rivers c:::::::11 Critical Habitat - Unoccupred 2.8&s: lakes Mi O 25 County Boundaries El Cities I r7 = Interstates KmO 25 Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.037 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47987

(6) Map of Unit TXFF–1: Clear Fork Brazos River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 1 - Clear Fork Brazos River

TI1foda:norton

Haskell TXFF-1 a: Upper Clear Fork Young Brazos River

TXFF-1 b: Lower Clear Fork ,,.._,,,. .... I Brazo~ River

~

I' I Jones ', Shackelford ~~ !Breckenridge I '

' I' I Stephens

Callahan Taylor

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied = Interstates Mi O 5 c:::::::11 Critical Habitat- Unoccupied - - - - Rivers I , County Boundaries El Cities II KmO 5 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.038 47988 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(7) Map of Unit TXFF–2: Upper Brazos River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 2 - Upper Brazos River

Young Jack Wise ,.;.,. I c1.,.,.._ J ,I ,, ,~ ':...... ,_/)- i'~ '✓ 'J5 Possum > KingdomL Parker ,.,,,, ~_.,.. ..,_.,.., I - ~ ' ~ ,,. ~ J.._J,.. l

Palo Pinto

, I I '

Eastland Erath

Somer\;-:eU '

~xa~ E) - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi 0 5 D County Boundaries ~ Lakes I 17 = Interstates El Cities KmO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.039 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47989

(8) Map of Unit TXFF–3: Lower Brazos River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 3 • Lower Brazos River

' \ Limestone

Robertson

LConroe ~~

' I ' Montgomery [\,

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers County Boundaries lakes Mi O 10 D 28..88: L__J = Interstates El Cities 17 I Subunit Divider KmO 10

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.040 47990 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(9) Map of Unit TXFF–4: Little River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 4 • Little River

Fath

Robertson

Burnet

Bm!eson

Washington

Hays Fayette

, ...... I'• ,_ I l _,- 1,,. ,, ,,1 Caldweli '

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied ., - - - Rivers Mi 0 8 D County Boundaries ~ Lakes I r-7 = Interstates G Cities KmO 8

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.041 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47991

(10) Map of TXFF–5: Lower San Saba and Upper Colorado River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 5 - Lower San Saba River and Upper Colorado River

Bwwn Hamilton

San Saba

McCulloch

Lrunpasas

,t '

Burnet

Mas011

Mason

- Critical Habitat- Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi O 5 D County Boundaries ~ Lakes II I Subunit Divider 3 Cities KmO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.042 47992 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(11) Map of Unit TXFF–6: Lower Colorado River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 6 - Lower Colorado River

Fayette

Colorado

I, ,-'' Lavaca

vVharton

Jackson

I ' -, Matagorda El I IBavcitvl Victmfa / ,_ I I I I ' ' ,I __ J'

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi 0 5 D County Boundaries El Cities I 17 = Interstates KmO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.043 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47993

(12) Map of Unit TXFF–7: East Fork Trinity River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 7 - East Fork Trinity River

,I Denton Collin

Dallas

Kaufimm

!Kaufman I I I 13 \, Van TXFF-7: East Fork Trinity River ~

Q - Critical Habitat- Occupied ~ - - - Rivers Mi O 5 D County Boundaries ~ Lakes I II = Interstates 13 Cities KmO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.044 47994 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(13) Map of Unit TXFF–8: Trinity River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot Unit 8 - Trinity River

Henderson

Navarro

Anderson

\ '

Houston

Robertson nmity Madison

- Critical Habitat- Occupied - -- - Rivers Mi O 8 D County Boundaries El Cities Ii = Interstates KmO 8

* * * * * (2) Within these areas, the physical or oxygenated and to prevent excess biological features essential to the sedimentation or scour during high-flow Guadalupe Orb (Cyclonaias necki) conservation of Guadalupe orb consist events but not so high as to dislodge (1) Critical habitat units are depicted of the following components within individuals; for Caldwell, Comal, DeWitt, Gonzales, waters and streambeds up to the (ii) Stable riffles and runs with ordinary high-water mark: Guadalupe, Kendall, Kerr, and Victoria substrate composed of cobble, gravel, Counties, Texas, on the maps in this (i) Flowing water at rates suitable to and fine sediments; critical habitat entry. keep riffle habitats wetted and well-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.045 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47995

(iii) Channel catfish (Ictalurus (3) Critical habitat does not include which each map is based are available punctatus), flathead catfish (Pylodictus manmade structures (such as buildings, to the public at http:// olivaris), and tadpole madtom (Noturus aqueducts, runways, roads, and other www.regulations.gov under Docket No. gyrinus) present; and paved areas) and the land on which they FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. (iv) Water quality parameters within are located existing within the legal (5) Note: An index map of the critical the following ranges: boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF habitat designations for the Central (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; THE FINAL RULE]. (B) Salinity <2 ppt; Texas mussels, which includes the (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total (4) The maps in this entry, as Guadalupe orb, can be found in this ammonia nitrogen; modified by any accompanying paragraph (f) at the entry for the (D) Water temperature <29 °C (84.2 regulatory text, establish the boundaries Guadalupe fatmucket. An index map of °F); and of the critical habitat designation. The critical habitat units for the Guadalupe (E) Low levels of contaminants. coordinates or plot points or both on orb follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 47996 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Orb - Unit Overview

I '

Q - Critical Habitat - Occupied -- -- Rivers Mi O 10 County Boundaries ~ Lakes L__J = Interstates 0 Citiea r7 KmO 10 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.046 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47997

(6) Map of Unit GORB–1: Upper Guadalupe River follows:

Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Orb Unit 1 - Upper Guadalupe River

!Fredericksburg I El Gillespie Blanco

Nfrk GuadallJP9 ,_;-~,i.t---~~L

;-•- ,.- .... \ ·GORB-1 a: South Fork-Guadalu~e River Kerr

1 ·"1- Medina R Bandera '.,, ..., .., ... ~,_;.,.,,,, '- ' ,

I~ // " / / i---,------4-:Medin;lL I' ,./

Medina ,I ., .,' I I,. ,,< ~ _) e - Critical Habitat- Occupied -- -- Rivers D County Boundaries ~ lakes Mi O 5 L__J = Interstates 3 Cities r7 KmO 5 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.047 47998 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(7) Map of Unit GORB–2: Lower Guadalupe River follows:

Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Orb Unit 2 - Lower Guadalupe River

',J ~TilSon

DeWitt

'I

Karnes I • !Victoria I '

- Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers County Boundaries Lakes Mio 8 D ffi I = Interstates 0 Cites II KmO 8 I Subunit Divider

* * * * * and Wharton Counties, Texas, on the (i) Flowing water at rates suitable to maps in this critical habitat entry. keep riffle habitats wetted and well- Texas Pimpleback (Cyclonaias petrina) (2) Within these areas, the physical or oxygenated and to prevent excess (1) Critical habitat units are depicted biological features essential to the sedimentation or scour during high-flow for Brown, Coleman, Colorado, Concho, conservation of Texas pimpleback events but not so high as to dislodge consist of the following components Kimble, Lampasas, Mason, McCulloch, individuals; within waters and streambeds up to the Menard, Mills, San Saba, Tom Green, ordinary high-water mark:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.048 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 47999

(ii) Stable riffles and runs with (D) Water temperature <29 °C (84.2 coordinates or plot points or both on substrate composed of cobble, gravel, °F); and which each map is based are available and fine sediments; (E) Low levels of contaminants. to the public at http:// (iii) Channel catfish (Ictalurus (3) Critical habitat does not include www.regulations.gov under Docket No. punctatus), flathead catfish (Pylodictus manmade structures (such as buildings, FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. aqueducts, runways, roads, and other olivaris), and tadpole madtom (Noturus (5) Note: An index map of the critical gyrinus) present; and paved areas) and the land on which they are located existing within the legal habitat designations for the Central (iv) Water quality parameters within boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF Texas mussels, which includes the the following ranges: THE FINAL RULE]. Texas pimpleback, can be found in this (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; (4) The maps in this entry, as paragraph (f) at the entry for the (B) Salinity <2 ppt; modified by any accompanying Guadalupe fatmucket. An index map of (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total regulatory text, establish the boundaries critical habitat units for the Texas ammonia nitrogen; of the critical habitat designation. The pimpleback follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 48000 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback - Unit Overview

- Critical Habitat - Occupied = Interstates Mi O 20 c:::::1 Critical Habitat - Unoccupied -- -- Rivers L__J County Boundaries El Cities 17 KmO 20 Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.049 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48001

(6) Map of Unit TXPB–1: Elm Creek follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 1 - Elm Creek

I I I I ' , I I I I I

TXPB-1a: Bluff Creek , , '

, I ,I

Runnels

,, - \ TXPB-1 b: Lower Elm Creek I l l

' ' /1 ' ' f \ \--; 1 ... , --~-.;...... ,

~ ~ ' , I, I, ~ I ' -- ' ... lo . __ , , IBall' 1nger I I - ... '\ .,- , Colorado R' ...... ,,I

'I

0 - Critical Habitat - Occupied -- -- Rivers Mi O .2 County Boundaries 13 Cities I II KmO 2 Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.050 48002 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(7) Map of Unit TXPB–2: Concho River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 2 - Concho River

Runnels Coke

I <-, Colanllll

ISan Angelo I [:] ,' TXPB-2b: Upper Concho River

Tom Green

,.,,._,,..,,...... - ...... __ ,,.--- .... Brady Cr/~

.,..;I ... - ...... _..__.,, ......

- Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi O 4 c:::::::11 Critical Habitat - Unoccupied [:] Cities I II County Boundaries KmO 4 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.051 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48003

(8) Map of Unit TXPB–3: Upper Colorado River and Lower San Saba River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 3 - Upper Colorado River and Lower San Saba River

!Brownwood I El

Coleman Brmvn /,) / //- TXPB-Ja: Upper Colorado.,,.,, River Mills

TXPBiJb: Lower McCulloch San Saba River:..-· 111111.,... w,1

, I Sari Saba

Mason TXPB-4 Llano LBuchanan

IMasonlEl ,- --LlanoR,,- ____ ,- ~--,, - ,,..,......

- Critical Habitat ;.; Occupied --- Rivers Mi O 6 D County Boundaries 1®:ii Lakes I II I Subunit Divider S Cities KmO 6

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.052 48004 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(9) Map of Unit TXPB–4: Upper San Saba River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 4 - Upper San Saba River

Tom Green , , Brady -, ~, Reservoir ..... - .... '

McCulloch

Menard Schleicher

N Valley Prong TXPB-4: Upper San Saba River

Kimble

Sutton

- Critical Habitat- Occupied -- ""' " Rivers Mi O 4 D County Boundaries m Lakes I II = Interstates El Cities KmO 4

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.053 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48005

(10) Map of Unit TXPB–5: Llano River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 5 - Llano River Mason

Menard IMasonl El TX.PB-Sb: Lower Llano River .,. .,,. ---

Llano i1XPB-5a: Upper Llano River

,- .... ,. -.. ...-, I

Kimble Gillespie

!Fredericksburg I El

Kerr

e - Critical Habitat- Occupied = Interstates Mi 0 4 ic::=:::a Critical Habiat - Unoccupied - - - - Rivers I I I County Boundaries El Cities r-7 KmO 4 I Subunit Divider

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.054 48006 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(11) Map of Unit TXPB–6: Lower Colorado River follows:

Critical Habitat for Texas Pimpleback Unit 6 - Lower Colorado River

I I Fayette \i;L_ Ila Grange! r - J -r-

Colorado

Bend

Lavaca

\Vharton

\ '

Jackson ' 'l,..._Ba-v -Cit~vl :G Matagorda : J ' I \ I '

e - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi 0 6 County Boundaries G Cities r-7 = Interstates KmO 6

False Spike (Fusconaia mitchelli) conservation of false spike consist of the sedimentation but not so high as to (1) Critical habitat units are depicted following components within waters dislodge individuals; for DeWitt, Gonzales, Kimble, Mason, and streambeds up to the ordinary high- (ii) Stable riffles and runs with cobble, Milam, San Saba, Victoria, and water mark: gravel, and fine sediments; Williamson Counties, Texas, on the (i) Flowing water at rates suitable to (iii) Blacktail shiner (Cyprinella maps in this critical habitat entry. keep riffle habitats wetted and well venusta) and red shiner (Cyprinella (2) Within these areas, the physical or oxygenated, and to prevent excess biological features essential to the lutrensis) present; and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.055 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48007

(iv) Water quality parameters within aqueducts, runways, roads, and other to the public at http:// the following ranges: paved areas) and the land on which they www.regulations.gov under Docket No. (A) Dissolved oxygen >2 mg/L; are located existing within the legal FWS–R2–ES–2019–0061. (B) Salinity <2 ppt; boundaries on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF (5) Note: An index map of the critical (C) Total ammonia <0.77 mg/L total THE FINAL RULE]. habitat designations for the Central ammonia nitrogen; (4) The maps in this entry, as (D) Water temperature <29 °C (84.2 modified by any accompanying Texas mussels, which includes the false °F); and regulatory text, establish the boundaries spike, can be found in this paragraph (f) (E) Low levels of contaminants. of the critical habitat designation. The at the entry for the Guadalupe (3) Critical habitat does not include coordinates or plot points or both on fatmucket. An index map of critical manmade structures (such as buildings, which each map is based are available habitat units for the false spike follows:

Critical Habitat for False Spike - Unit Overview

-critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers County Boundaries lakes Mi O 10 ffi L__J. = Interstates G Cities· r7· Subunit Divider KmO 10

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.056 48008 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(6) Map of Unit FASP–1: Little River follows:

Critical Habitat for False Spike Unit 1 - little River

\ l.jttleR .._.,, - '-·)

'\ I BeH I I !Holland j G

Milm.n

..I

/ ---- / ~x~ - Critical Habitat - Occupied - - - - Rivers e [~=l County Boundaries ~ Lakes Mi 0 4 "~·-'=- Interstates G Cities I ii Subunit Divider KmO 4

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.057 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48009

(7) Map of Unit FASP–2: San Saba River follows:

Critical Habitat for False Spike Unit 2 - San Saba River El !Brownwood I

Brown Hamilton

Mills

McCulloch Lampasas

San

Burnet

Mason Llano

- Critical Habitat - Occupied ·m: lakes Mi O 5 County Boundaries El Cities I II - -- - Rivers KmO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.058 48010 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(8) Map of Unit FASP–3: Llano River follows:

Critical Habitat for False Spike Unit 3 - Uano River

McCulloch San Saba

-a-IMe~~rdl-,, ,_ ,­ ...... J.._.,..' ... - Mason Menard

Llano

FASP-3: Llano River

Kirnble

Gillespie

!Fredericksburg! G

Kerr

- Critical Habitat- Occupied - - - - Rivers Mi O 5 I I County Boundaries G Cities II = Interstates KrnO 5

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.059 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Proposed Rules 48011

(9) Map of Unit FASP–4: Guadalupe River follows:

Critical Habitat for False Spike Unit 4 - Guadalupe River

Gonzales

I ! J FASP-4b:,Guadalupe I . ', \ Wilson R1ver

DeWitt

v1ctoria

) I Goliad

0 - Critical Habitat - Occupied = Interstates Mi O 5 D County Boundaries - - - - Rivers I II I Subunit Divider El Cities KmO 5

* * * * * Martha Williams, Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2021–18012 Filed 8–25–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333–15–C

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:39 Aug 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\26AUP3.SGM 26AUP3 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP26AU21.060