Vol. 77 Tuesday, No. 200 October 16, 2012
Part II
Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Endangered Status for the Neosho Mucket, Threatened Status for the Rabbitsfoot, and Designation of Critical Habitat for Both Species; Proposed Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63440 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR We will post all comments on http:// populations live in waters considered www.regulations.gov. This generally impaired under section 303(d) of the Fish and Wildlife Service means that we will post any personal Clean Water Act or have numerous information you provide us (see the tributaries in their watersheds also 50 CFR Part 17 Public Comments section below for listed as impaired. Thus, these mussels [Docket No. FWS–ES–R4–2012–0031; more information). are subjected to water quality and 4500030113] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: quantity and sediment quality constraints. These constraints RIN 1018–AX73 James F. Boggs, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arkansas (impairment) are expected to be Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Ecological Services Office, 110 South exacerbated by increased water demand, and Plants; Proposed Endangered Amity Road, Suite 300, Conway, AR habitat degradation, and climate change. Status for the Neosho Mucket, 72032, by telephone 501–513–4470 or Therefore, the viability of the majority Threatened Status for the Rabbitsfoot, by facsimile 501–513–4480. Persons of rabbitsfoot populations is uncertain. • The majority of extant rabbitsfoot and Designation of Critical Habitat for who use a telecommunications device populations are marginal to small (40 of Both Species for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 51 extant populations (78 percent)) and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 800–877–8339. isolated (41 of 51 extant populations (80 Interior. percent)); because of the isolation, it is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This unlikely that recruitment between ACTION: Proposed rule. document consists of: (1) A proposed populations or establishment of new rule to list the Neosho mucket SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and populations could occur naturally. Wildlife Service, propose to list the (Lampsilis rafinesqueana) as • We are proposing to list the Neosho Neosho mucket (Lampsilis endangered and rabbitsfoot (Quadrula mucket as an endangered species in rafinesqueana), a freshwater mussel, as cylindrica cylindrica) as threatened; and Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and endangered and rabbitsfoot (Quadrula (2) a proposed critical habitat Oklahoma and the rabbitsfoot as a cylindrica cylindrica), a freshwater designation for both species. threatened species in Alabama, mussel, as threatened under the Executive Summary Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Endangered Species Act; and propose to Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Why we need to publish a rule. Under designate critical habitat for both Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, the Endangered Species Act (Act), a species. This rule fulfills our obligation Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West species may warrant protection through under a settlement agreement. The effect Virginia. of this regulation is to conserve the listing if it is endangered or threatened The basis for our action. Under the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot and throughout all or a significant portion of Endangered Species Act, a species may their habitats under the Endangered its range. The Neosho mucket and be determined to be endangered or Species Act. rabbitsfoot are highly restricted in their threatened based on any of five factors: DATES: We will accept comments ranges and the threats occur throughout (1) Destruction, modification, or received or postmarked on or before their ranges; therefore, the species curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) December 17, 2012. Comments qualify for listing. We are proposing to overuse; (3) disease or predation; (4) submitted electronically using the list the Neosho mucket as an inadequate existing regulations; or (5) Federal eRulemaking Portal (see endangered species and rabbitsfoot as a other natural or manmade factors. ADDRESSES section, below) must be threatened species. Their protection We have determined that both species received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on under the Act can only be done by are threatened by destruction, the closing date. We must receive issuing a rule. • modification, or curtailment of habitat requests for public hearings, in writing, We estimate the Neosho mucket has or range, inadequate existing regulatory at the address shown in the ADDRESSES been extirpated (no longer in existence) mechanisms, and other manmade section by November 30, 2012. from approximately 62 percent of its factors: ADDRESSES: You may submit comments historical range with only 9 of the 16 This rule designates critical habitat by one of the following methods: historical populations remaining for each species. (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal (extant). This mussel is declining • We are proposing to designate eRulemaking Portal: http:// rangewide (eight of the nine extant critical habitat for the Neosho mucket in www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword populations) with only one remaining Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and box, enter Docket No. FWS–R4–ES– large viable population. Oklahoma and for the rabbitsfoot in • 2012–0031, which is the docket number We estimate the rabbitsfoot has Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search been extirpated from approximately 64 Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, panel on the left side of the screen, percent of its historical range. While 51 Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, under the Document Type heading, of the 140 historical populations are Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. click on the Proposed Rules link to extant (remain), only 11 populations (22 • In total, approximately 779 river locate this document. You may submit percent of extant populations or 8 kilometers (rkm) (484 river miles (rmi)) a comment by clicking on ‘‘Send a percent of the historical populations) in the Cottonwood, Elk, Fall, Illinois, Comment or Submission.’’ are viable; 23 populations (45 percent of Neosho, Shoal, Spring, North Fork (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail extant populations) are at risk of Spring, and Verdigris Rivers are being or hand-delivery to: Public Comments extirpation; and 17 populations (33 proposed for designation as critical Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2012– percent of extant populations) show habitat for the Neosho mucket in 0031; Division of Policy and Directives limited recruitment with little evidence Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife of sustainability. Rabbitsfoot is Oklahoma. Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS extirpated from 2 States within its • The proposed critical habitat for the 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. historical range. Neosho mucket is located in: We request that you send comments • The majority (8 of the 11 or 73 Æ Benton and Washington Counties, only by the methods described above. percent) of the viable rabbitsfoot Arkansas;
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63441
Æ Allen, Chase, Cherokee, Coffey, Elk, Information Requested (9) Any foreseeable economic, Greenwood, Labette, Montgomery, We intend that any final action national security, or other relevant Neosho, Wilson, and Woodson resulting from this proposal will be impacts that may result from Counties, Kansas; based on the best scientific and designating any area that may be Æ Jasper, Lawrence, McDonald, and commercial data available and be as included in the final designation. We Newton Counties, Missouri; and accurate and as effective as possible. are particularly interested in any Æ Adair, Cherokee, and Delaware Therefore, we request comments or impacts on small entities, and the benefits of including or excluding areas Counties, Oklahoma. information from the public, other from the proposed designation that are • In total, approximately 2,662 rkm concerned governmental agencies, (1,654 rmi) in the Neosho, Spring subject to these impacts. Native American tribes, the scientific (10) Whether our approach to (Arkansas River system), Verdigris, community, industry, or any other designating critical habitat could be Black, Buffalo, Little, Ouachita, Saline, interested party concerning this improved or modified in any way to Middle Fork Little Red, Spring (White proposed rule. We particularly seek provide for greater public participation River system), South Fork Spring, comments concerning: and understanding, or to assist us in Strawberry, White, St. Francis, Big (1) Biological, commercial trade, or accommodating public concerns and Sunflower, Big Black, Paint Rock, Duck, other relevant data concerning any comments. Tennessee, Red, Ohio, Allegheny, threats (or lack thereof) to these species (11) The likelihood of adverse social Green, Tippecanoe, Walhonding, and regulations that may be addressing reactions to the designation of critical Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion, those threats. habitat and how the consequences of and North Fork Vermilion Rivers and (2) Additional information concerning such reactions, if likely to occur, would Bear, French, Muddy, Little Darby and the historical and current status, range, relate to the conservation and regulatory Fish Creeks in Alabama, Arkansas, distribution, and population size of benefits of the proposed critical habitat Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, these species, including the locations of designation. Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, any additional populations of these Please note that submissions merely Pennsylvania, and Tennessee are being species. stating support for or opposition to the proposed for designation as critical (3) Any information on the biological action under consideration without habitat for the rabbitsfoot. or ecological requirements of the species providing supporting information, • The proposed critical habitat for the and ongoing conservation measures for although noted, will not be considered rabbitsfoot is located in: the species and their habitat. in making a determination, as section Æ Colbert, Jackson, Madison, and (4) Any information regarding water 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that Marshall Counties, Alabama; quality data that may be helpful in determinations as to whether any Æ Arkansas, Ashley, Bradley, Clark, determining the water quality species is a threatened or endangered Cleveland, Dallas, Drew, Fulton, Grant, parameters necessary for Neosho species must be made ‘‘solely on the Hot Spring, Independence, Izard, mucket and rabbitsfoot. basis of the best scientific and Jackson, Lawrence, Little River, Marion, (5) The reasons why we should or commercial data available.’’ Monroe, Montgomery, Newton, should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical You may submit your comments and Ouachita, Randolph, Saline, Searcy, habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 materials concerning this proposed rule Sevier, Sharp, Van Buren, White, and U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether by one of the methods listed in the Woodruff Counties, Arkansas; there are threats to the species from ADDRESSES section. We request that you Æ Allen and Cherokee Counties, human activity, the degree of which can send comments only by the methods Kansas; be expected to increase due to the described in the ADDRESSES section. Æ Ballard, Green, Hart, Livingston, designation, and whether that increase If you submit information via http:// Logan, Marshall, and McCracken in threat outweighs the benefit of www.regulations.gov, your entire Counties, Kentucky; designation such that the designation of submission—including any personal critical habitat is not prudent. identifying information—will be posted Æ Massac, Pulaski, and Vermilion (6) Specific information on: on the Web site. If your submission is Counties, Illinois; Carroll, Pulaski, (a) The amount and distribution of made via a hardcopy that includes Tippecanoe, and White Counties, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot habitat; personal identifying information, you Indiana; Hinds, Sunflower, Tishomingo, (b) What areas, that were occupied at may request at the top of your document and Warren Counties, Mississippi; Æ the time of listing (or are currently that we withhold this information from Jasper, Madison, and Wayne occupied) and that contain features public review. However, we cannot Counties, Missouri; essential to the conservation of the Æ guarantee that we will be able to do so. Coshocton, Madison, Union, and species, should be included in the We will post all hardcopy submissions Williams Counties, Ohio; designation and why; on http://www.regulations.gov. Please Æ McCurtain and Rogers Counties, (c) What areas not occupied at the include sufficient information with your Oklahoma; Crawford, Erie, Mercer, and time of listing are essential for the comments to allow us to verify any Venango Counties, Pennsylvania; and conservation of the species and why. scientific or commercial information Æ Hardin, Hickman, Marshall, Maury, (7) Land use designations and current you include. and Robertson Counties, Tennessee. or planned activities in the areas Comments and materials we receive, Peer review of our methods. During occupied by the species or proposed to as well as supporting documentation we the public comment period, we will be designated as critical habitat, and used in preparing this proposed rule, obtain review and opinions from possible impacts of these activities on will be available for public inspection knowledgeable individuals with these species and proposed critical on http://www.regulations.gov, or by scientific expertise on our technical habitat. appointment, during normal business assumptions, analysis, adherence to (8) Information on the projected and hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife regulations, and whether or not we used reasonably likely impacts of climate Service, Arkansas Ecological Services the best available information in change on the Neosho mucket and Office, Conway, Arkansas (see FOR developing the proposed rule. rabbitsfoot and proposed critical habitat. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63442 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Previous Federal Actions eliminated in 1996 (61 FR 7596). On surface to take in food and oxygen from November 9, 2009, we added the the water column. Juveniles typically Neosho Mucket rabbitsfoot to our candidate list in the burrow completely beneath the The Neosho mucket was first Federal Register (74 FR 57804) with an substrate surface and are pedal (foot) identified as a candidate for protection LPN of 9. An LPN of 9 indicates threats feeders (bringing food particles inside under the Act in the May 22, 1984, of a moderate magnitude; some of the the shell for ingestion that adhere to the Federal Register (49 FR 21664) notice. threats are nonimminent, most are foot while it is extended outside the As a candidate, it was assigned a status ongoing, and the threats are imminent shell) until the structures for filter Category 2 designation, which was overall. In our Notice of Review dated feeding are more fully developed given to those species with some November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69222), it (Yeager et al. 1994, pp. 200–221; evidence of vulnerability but for which was again identified as a candidate Gatenby et al. 1996, p. 604). additional biological information was species with an LPN of 9. Sexes in unionid (refers to taxonomic needed to support a proposed rule to list family Unionidae) mussels, such as the as endangered or threatened. In our Status Assessment for Neosho Mucket Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, are Notices of Review dated January 6, 1989 and Rabbitsfoot usually separate. Males release sperm (54 FR 554), November 21, 1991 (56 FR Background into the water column, which are drawn 58804), and November 15, 1994 (59 FR It is our intent to discuss below only in by females through their siphons 58982), we retained a status Category 2 those topics directly relevant to the during feeding and respiration. designation for this species. We listing of the Neosho mucket as Fertilization takes place inside the shell, discontinued assigning categories to endangered and the rabbitsfoot as and success is apparently influenced by candidate species in our Notice of threatened in this section of the mussel density and water flow Review dated February 28, 1996 (61 FR proposed rule. conditions (Downing et al. 1993, pp. 7596), and only species for which the 153–154). The eggs are retained in the Service had sufficient information on Introduction gills of the female until they develop biological vulnerability and threats to North American freshwater mussel into mature larvae called glochidia. The support issuance of a proposed rule fauna is the richest in the world and glochidia of most freshwater mussel were regarded as candidate species. historically numbered around 300 species, including the two species Thus, Neosho mucket was no longer species (Williams et al. 1993, p. 6). addressed in this rule, have a parasitic considered a candidate species. Freshwater mussels are in decline, stage during which they must attach to On October 30, 2001, we identified however, and in the past century have the gills, fins, or skin of a fish to the Neosho mucket in the Federal become more imperiled than any other transform into a juvenile mussel. Register (66 FR 54808) as a candidate group of organisms (Williams et al. Depending on the mussel species, species based on available information 2008, p. 55). Approximately 66 percent females release glochidia either to support a proposed rule. Candidate of North America’s freshwater mussel separately, in masses known as species are assigned listing priority species are considered vulnerable to conglutinates (gelatinous or jelly-like), numbers (LPNs) based on immediacy extinction or possibly extinct (Williams or in one large mass known as a super- and magnitude of threats, as well as et al. 1993, p. 6). Within North America, conglutinate. The duration of the taxonomic status. The lower the LPN, the southeastern United States is the hot parasitic stage varies by mussel species, the higher priority that species is for us spot for mussel diversity. Seventy-five water temperature, and perhaps host to determine appropriate action using percent of southeastern mussel species fish species. When the transformation is our available resources. We assigned an are in varying degrees of rarity or complete, the juvenile mussels drop LPN of 5 to Neosho mucket. In our possibly extinct (Neves et al. 1997, pp. from their fish host and sink to the Notices of Review dated June 13, 2002 47–51). The central reason for the stream bottom where, given suitable (67 FR 40657), and May 4, 2004 (69 FR decline of freshwater mussels is the conditions, they grow and mature into 24876), we maintained an LPN of 5. modification and destruction of their adults. Host specificity is discussed in We published a petition finding for habitat, especially from sedimentation, more detail below. the Neosho mucket on May 11, 2005 (70 dams, and degraded water quality Growth rates for mussels are highly FR 24870), in response to a petition (Neves et al. 1997, p. 60). These two variable among individual mussel received on May 11, 2004, stating in the mussels, like many other southeastern species, but overall, mussels tend to finding that the Neosho mucket would mussel species, have undergone grow relatively rapidly for the first few retain an LPN of 5. In our Notices of reductions in total range and population years (Scruggs 1960, pp. 28–30; Negus Review dated September 12, 2006 (71 density. 1966, pp. 517–518) then slow FR 53756), December 6, 2007 (72 FR appreciably (Bruenderman and Neves 69034), and December 8, 2008 (73 FR General Biology 1993, p. 88; Hove and Neves 1994, pp. 75176), we maintained an LPN of 5, Freshwater mussels generally live 34–36). This reduction in growth rate is reflecting the nonimminent threats of embedded in the bottom of rivers, correlated to sexual maturity, probably high magnitude. The LPN was elevated streams, and other bodies of water. They as a result of energy being diverted from to 2 in our Notice of Review dated siphon water into their shells and across growth to gamete production (Baird November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69222), to four gills that are specialized for 2000, pp. 63–71). Heavy-shelled species, reflect the change from nonimminent to respiration and food collection. Food such as Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, imminent threats of high magnitude. items include algae, bacteria, detritus grow slowly relative to thin-shelled (disintegrated organic debris), and species (Coon et al. 1977, pp. 19–21; Rabbitsfoot microscopic animals (Strayer et al. Hove and Neves 1994, p. 38). The rabbitsfoot was first identified as 2004, pp. 430–431). It also has been Strayer (1999a, pp. 468 and 472) a candidate for protection under the Act surmised that dissolved organic matter demonstrated that mussels in streams in the November 15, 1994, Federal may be a significant source of nutrition occur chiefly in ‘‘flow refuges’’ Register (59 FR 58982). As a candidate, (Strayer et al. 2004, p. 430). Adults are (relatively stable areas that displayed it was assigned a status Category 2 filter feeders and generally orient little movement of substrate particles designation. The category 2 list was themselves on or near the substrate during flood events). Other researchers
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63443
also concluded that mussel location and shape differs) species; the male is mantle flap in addition to its fish-like density are greatest in areas where shear elliptical, rounded before biangulate shape has pigmentation that resembles stress (stream’s ability to entrain and behind, with dorsal and basal margin an eyespot as well as a fish’s lateral line. transport bed material created by the equally arched, while the female is Muscular contractions of the mantle flow acting on the bed material) is low ovate with a widely expanded fan- flaps create an undulating or and sediments remain generally stable shaped posterior. The shell is up to 9.5 ‘‘swimming’’ motion that suffices to lure during flooding (Layzer and Madison centimeters (cm) (4 inches (in)), fish hosts (Obermeyer 2000, p. 9). 1995, p. 341; Strayer 1999a, pp. 468 and compressed, and relatively thin (Oesch The Neosho mucket is associated with 472; Hastie et al. 2001, pp. 111–114). 1984, pp. 219–221). The epidermis is shallow riffles and runs comprising These ‘‘flow refuges’’ conceivably allow olive-yellow to brown, becoming darker gravel substrate and moderate to swift relatively immobile mussels, such as the brown with age; green rays cover the currents. The species is most often Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, to surface, but are often discontinuous. found in areas with swift current, but in remain in the same general location Oesch (1984, pp. 219–221) describes the Shoal Creek and the Illinois River it throughout their life span. However, left valve as having two stout, divergent, prefers near-shore areas or areas out of these areas may be more important for striated, triangular pseudocardinal the main current (Oesch 1984, p. 221; the rabbitsfoot since it typically does teeth. The two lateral teeth are short, Obermeyer 2000, pp. 15–16). Neosho not burrow like the Neosho mucket, stout, and slightly curved. The right mucket historically occurred in at least making it more susceptible to valve has a single, tall, triangular to 16 streams within the Illinois, Neosho, displacement into unsuitable habitat. columnar, striated pseudocardinal and Verdigris River basins covering four However, flow refuges are not created tooth. The nacre (crystalline carbonate states (Arkansas, Kansas, Oklahoma, equally and other habitat variables are shell material of freshwater mussels) is and Missouri). It is endemic to the important, but poorly understood bluish white to white. Arkansas River system (Gordon 1980, (Roberts 2008, pers. comm.). Neosho mucket glochidia are an pp. 318 and 347; Harris and Gordon obligate parasite on smallmouth bass 1987, pp. 53–54; Obermeyer 1996, pp. Taxonomy, Life History, and (Micropterus dolomieu), largemouth 3–4; Vaughn 1996, pp. 3–5; Mather Distribution bass (Micropterus salmoides), and 1990, pp. 7–13; Obermeyer et al. 1997a, The Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot spotted bass (Micropterus punctulatus) pp. 44–47; Harris et al. 2009, p. 68). The are freshwater mussels in the family (Barnhart and Roberts 1997, p. 18; U.S. Neosho mucket’s known river and creek Unionidae. Both species are currently Fish and Wildlife Service 2005, p. 7). occurrences and current status are deemed valid by the Committee on Neosho mucket is unusual among other shown in Table 1. Scientific and Vernacular Names of Lampsilis species in the timing of For the purposes of this rule, a Mollusks of the Council of Systematic reproduction. Neosho mucket spawns in population is considered extant if live Malacologists and the American late April and May, and female brooding individuals or fresh dead specimens Malacological Union (Turgeon et al. occurs May through August. Most other have been located since 1985. A 1998, pp. 35 and 37). Lampsilis spawn in the late summer or population is considered viable if it is fall and brood glochidia throughout the sizeable, comprised of different age Neosho Mucket winter months into the following spring classes, recruiting juveniles, and able to Neosho mucket was originally or summer. Barnhart (2003, p. 9) sustain itself over several decades described as Lampsilis rafinesqueana reported an average fecundity to be without human intervention (Butler from Indian Creek, McDonald County, approximately 1.3 million glochidia per 2005, p. 23). Population trend estimates Missouri (Frierson 1927, pp. 69–70). female in the Spring River, Kansas. The were generally made with a 20- to 30- There is no synonomy (scientific names female Neosho mucket inflates and year perspective when adequate previously describing the same species) extends a pair of mantle flaps (actually historical information was available. of the Neosho mucket. Frierson (1927, an extension of the inner lobe of the Populations were deemed to have pp. 69–70) described the Neosho mantle edge) that, from a side angle, improving, stable, declining, or mucket as a dimorphic (male and female remarkably resembles a small fish. Each unknown status (Table 1).
TABLE 1—NEOSHO MUCKET RIVER AND CREEK OCCURRENCES AND CURRENT POPULATION STATUS
Date of last River basin River/Creek State(s) Current status observation
Neosho River ...... Neosho River ...... KS, OK ...... Declining ...... 2000. Cottonwood River ...... KS ...... Unknown ...... 2011. South Fork Cottonwood River ...... KS ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1979. Spring River ...... KS, MO, OK ..... Stable ...... 2010. North Fork Spring River ...... MO ...... Declining ...... 1995. Center Creek ...... KS, MO ...... Extirpated ...... 1995. Shoal Creek ...... KS, MO ...... Declining ...... 2001. Elk River ...... MO, OK ...... Declining ...... 1995. Indian Creek ...... MO ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1980. Little Sugar Creek ...... MO ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1980. Illinois River ...... Illinois River ...... AR, OK ...... Declining ...... 2008 Verdigris River ...... Verdigris River ...... KS, OK ...... Declining ...... 2010 Otter Creek ...... KS ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1993. Fall River ...... KS ...... Declining ...... 2004. Elk River ...... KS ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1979. Caney River ...... KS, OK ...... Extirpated ...... Pre-1979.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63444 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Neosho River Basin records of Neosho mucket from the sites (Obermeyer et al. 1995, p. 45; Neosho River: The Neosho River Spring River prior to the late 1970s. McMurray 2011, pers. comm.). No drains southeast through Kansas and Miscellaneous records from 1979 to specimens were found in the Kansas Oklahoma. Historical data of Neosho 2010 report 10 localities yielding 119 portion of Shoal Creek. Elk River: The Elk River, a tributary of mucket densities for the Neosho River live Neosho mucket specimens between the Spring River, drains southwestern are not available prior to the late 1970s Missouri Highway 97 near Stott City, Missouri and northeastern Oklahoma. (Obermeyer et al. 1997b, p. 112). Mussel Lawrence County, Missouri, and the The Oklahoma reach downstream of harvest records from the early 1900s Missouri and Kansas state line Buffalo Creek just west of the Missouri provide useful insight on the abundance (McMurray 2011, pers. comm.). Cope and Oklahoma state line is inundated by of mussels in the river. From 1911 (1985, pp. 19–20, 26–27, 33–34) collected 424 live Neosho mucket Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees, resulting through 1912, the Neosho River specimens out of 993 live mussels in the loss of Neosho mucket habitat. provided 17 percent or approximately collected in 79 total one-square-meter Live Neosho mucket individuals have 85 million mussels used in the nation’s quadrat samples from three Kansas sites been collected from two sites in pearl button industry. Many of the 30 upstream of Empire Lake. Missouri, eight individuals in 1978 and tons of mussel shells processed weekly Obermeyer (1996, p. 11) provides the two individuals in 1995, and the species in 1918 at a shell blank factory in Iola, most comprehensive status assessment is rare from Noel, Missouri, to the Kansas, came from the Neosho River of Neosho mucket in the Spring River. Kansas and Missouri state line near LeRoy, Kansas (Obermeyer et al. He collected 1,104 live Neosho mucket (McMurray 2011, pers. comm.). 1997b, p. 112). specimens from 13 of 20 sites extending Brooding Neosho mucket females and Since the 1990s, extant populations from Missouri Highway 97 downstream juveniles were reported in this reach at have been found downstream of John to near the Turkey Creek confluence in two sites in 1992 and 1998 (Barnhart Redmond Reservoir Dam to near Kansas. The KDWP surveyed a site 2008, pers. comm.). Parsons, Kansas, in Allen, Coffey, approximately 0.5 to 0.8 rkm (0.3 to 0.5 Illinois River Basin Labette, and Neosho Counties, Kansas. rmi) downstream of the Kansas and In addition, fresh dead or relict (shell Missouri state line in 2003 and collected Illinois River: The Illinois River drains shows no sign of recent mortality, such 201 live Neosho mucket specimens portions of northwest Arkansas and as tissue inside shell or outer shell (approximately 30 percent of live northeast Oklahoma. There are few material (periostracum) is weathered) mussels collected). In 2006, KDWP historical records of Neosho mucket shells were collected at 11 sites collected 141 live Neosho mucket from the Illinois River prior to the late extending to near the Kansas–Oklahoma specimens (approximately 30 percent of 1970s. In 1978, Gordon et al. (1979, pp. state line in Cherokee County, Kansas live mussels collected) at a site just 35–36) surveyed 16 sites between (Obermeyer et al. 1997a, pp. 44–46; upstream of the Kansas and Missouri Hogeye and Siloam Springs, Arkansas, Obermeyer 2000, pp. 8–9). In 1994, Highway YY (Miller 2011, pers. comm.). but only report Neosho mucket as part Obermeyer et al. (1995, p. 24) collected Eight to 10 percent of live Neosho of the mussel fauna. Eighteen live 32 live Neosho mucket specimens mucket specimens collected at the 2006 Neosho mucket specimens were (relative abundance = 0.6 percent) at 7 site were quantitatively aged at less than reported from four Arkansas locations in of 19 sites in Kansas. The Neosho 5 years (Tabor 2008, pers. comm.). A the early 1990s, including the only mucket is becoming increasingly rare in 2010 survey, 6 km (4 miles) east of specimen ever collected from the the Oklahoma segment of the river Crestline, Kansas, found 400 live mussel Muddy Fork Illinois River (Harris 1991, (Tabor 2011, pers. comm.) with searches specimens, of which approximately half p. 7; Environmental and Gas Consulting, yielding no live or recently dead were Neosho mucket (Tabor 2011, pers. Inc. 1994, pp. field data sheets). Harris specimens. However, relict Neosho comm.). The Spring River Neosho (1998) conducted a status survey of the mucket shells confirm the historical mucket population represents the only Neosho mucket and found live presence of the species (Mather 1990, viable population rangewide. specimens at 19 of 22 sites in the 48 rkm pp. 16–17; Vaughn 1996, p. 3; 1997, pp. North Fork Spring River: The North (30 rmi) reach, Washington and Benton 7–9). Fork Spring River is a tributary of the Counties, Arkansas. Neosho mucket was Cottonwood River: The Cottonwood Spring River in Missouri. There are no the third most abundant species River drains easterly through eastern historical records for Neosho mucket in collected, but there was little evidence Kansas. There are few historical records the North Fork Spring River prior to of recent recruitment (Harris 1998, p. 5). of Neosho mucket from the Cottonwood 1980. Neosho mucket distribution is In 2005, 92 live Neosho mucket River prior to the late 1970s. Obemeyer limited to a few sites downstream of the specimens were collected from two et al. (1997a, p. 111) collected 59 live Dry Fork confluence southwest of Benton County, Arkansas, sites mussels from 6 sites surveyed from 1993 Jasper, Jasper County, Missouri. Three (Robinson Road Bridge and 800 m through 1995, but only found weathered sites yielded 136 live Neosho mucket (2,624 feet) downstream of Chambers dead shells of Neosho mucket. Neosho specimens in the mid 1990s (Obermeyer Spring Road, Benton County, Arkansas; mucket was considered extirpated from et al. 1997a, p. 45; McMurray 2011, Posey 2005, pers. comm.). The Arkansas the Cottonwood River until Kansas pers. comm.). Game and Fish Commission (AGFC) and Department of Wildlife and Parks Shoal Creek: Shoal Creek is a the Service conducted a comprehensive (KDWP) reintroduced mature male and southern tributary of the Spring River status survey for Neosho mucket in the brooding female Neosho mucket draining portions of southwest Missouri Arkansas portion of the Illinois River in individuals at two sites east of and southeast Kansas. There are few 2008. Live specimens of Neosho mucket Cottonwood Falls, Chase County, historical records for Neosho mucket in were collected at 9 of 15 survey sites. Kansas, in 2011 (Tabor and Barnhart Shoal Creek prior to 1979. Surveys of There was a 32 and 53 percent decline 2012, pers. comm.). Shoal Creek conducted from 1979 to in number of extant (still in existence) Spring River: The Spring River drains 2001 from Missouri Highway W near mussel sites and sites inhabited by live southwesterly through southwest Ritchey, Missouri, to Empire Lake, Neosho mucket specimens, respectively, Missouri, southeast Kansas, and eastern Cherokee County, Kansas, yielded 75 versus the Harris (1998) status survey. Oklahoma. There are few historical live Neosho mucket specimens from 11 Sixty-seven percent of the sites with
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63445
Neosho mucket present were total sample from the Verdigris River New Harmony, Posey County, Indiana, represented by three or fewer live between Altoona, Wilson County, and adjacent Illinois. Parmalee and specimens. Neosho mucket was the Kansas, and Sycamore, Montgomery Bogan (1998, p. 210) summarize the fourth most abundant species in this County, Kansas. The KDWP surveyed synonomy of the rabbitsfoot. The portion of the river, but 3 sites eight sites between the Fall and rabbitsfoot has been considered a accounted for 85 percent of live Neosho Verdigris River and Elk and Verdigris member of the genera Unio, Mya, mucket specimens (52 individuals) River confluences in 2003 and 2010. Six Margarita, Margaron, and Orthonymus collected during this survey. Of the 15 live Neosho mucket specimens were at various times in history. It was first survey sites, only 2 appear stable with collected from two of these sites in 2003 considered a member of the genus the rest in decline, indicating imminent (0.1 percent of the total mussel Quadrula by Lewis (1870, p. 218). The extirpation. No mussels were collected community) and seven live specimens description of U. cylindricus strigillatus at the sites AGFC sampled in 2005 in from four sites in 2010 (0.2 percent of B.H. Wright, 1898 (=Q. cylindrica 2008 further documenting the the total mussel community). Overall strigillata, the federally endangered precipitous decline of mussels in the relative abundance of Neosho mucket in rough rabbitsfoot; Turgeon et al. 1998, Arkansas portion of the Illinois River the Verdigris River in Kansas has ranged p. 37), rendered the rabbitsfoot, Q. c. (Davidson 2011, pers. comm.). between 0.1 to 0.3 percent in the years cylindrica, a subspecies for Q. Neosho mucket was locally common from 1993 to 2010 (Miller 2011, pp. 1– cylindrica. Davis and Fuller (1981, p. prior to the late 1990s in approximately 2). 241) and Sproules et al. (2006, p. 3) 89 rkm (55 rmi) of the Illinois River The majority of the Oklahoma reach conducted taxonomic and genetic from the Oklahoma and Arkansas state has been inundated (Oologah Lake) and studies on the rough rabbitsfoot (Q. c. line downstream to Lake Tenkiller, channelized as part of the McClellan- strigillata) and rabbitsfoot (Q. c. Cherokee County, Oklahoma (Mather Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. cylindrica). Although discussion 1990, pp. 7–11). The population within In 1996 and 1997, searches in the continues over the correct taxonomic the survey reach was estimated at more Verdigris in Oklahoma found no live placement of the rabbitsfoot, the than 1,200 individuals in 1990. In 1995, Neosho mucket specimens at 32 sites. designation of the rabbitsfoot as a Vaughn (1995, p. 3; 1997, p. 14) However, relict Neosho mucket shells species would not affect its qualification estimated the Neosho mucket confirmed the historical presence of the for listing under the Act as it would population in the same reach surveyed species (Vaughn 1996, p. 3; 1997, pp. 7– qualify as a listable entity whether it by Mather in 1990 at between 500 and 9). In 2008, researchers confirmed that was a subspecies or a species. 1,000 individuals and locally common the species is still extirpated from the The rabbitsfoot is a medium to large at 9 of 52 sites. Although some evidence Oklahoma reach (Boeckman 2008, pers. mussel, elongate and rectangular, of reproductive potential was observed comm.). reaching 12 cm (6 inches) in length during 1990 and 1995 (for example, (Oesch 1984, pp. 91–93). Parmalee and Summary of Neosho Mucket Rangewide gravid females displaying mantle lures), Bogan (1998, pp. 210–212) describe the Population Status there was little evidence of recruitment beaks as moderately elevated and raised into the population. Neosho mucket The Neosho mucket is declining only slightly above the hinge line. Beak specimens were not found in or rangewide, with the exception of one sculpture consists of a few strong ridges downstream of Lake Tenkiller. population. Based on historical and or folds continuing onto the newer current data, Neosho mucket has been growth of the umbo (raised or domed Verdigris River Basin extirpated from approximately 1,342 part of the dorsal margin of the shell) as Fall River: The Fall River is a rkm (834 rmi) of its historical range (62 small tubercles (small, rounded southern tributary of the Verdigris River percent). Most of this extirpation has projection on surface of the shell). Shell in southeast Kansas. There are few occurred within the Oklahoma and sculpture consists of a few large, historical records from the Fall River Kansas portions of its range. The rounded, low tubercles on the posterior prior to the mid 1990s (Obermeyer et al. extirpation of this species from slope, although some individuals will 1995, p. 24). In 1994, Obermeyer et al. numerous streams and stream reaches have numerous small, elongated (1995 p. 24) found 34 live specimens within its historical range signifies that pustules (small raised spots) (relative abundance = 1.7 percent) from substantial population losses have particularly on the anterior. The 5 sites in the Fall River, with little occurred. Extant populations are periostracum (external shell surface) is evidence of recruitment into the disjunct (not contiguous) in generally smooth and yellowish, population. In 2004, two sites were approximately 819 rkm (509 rmi). The greenish, or olive in color becoming resurveyed and Neosho mucket Spring River in Missouri supports the darker and yellowish-brown with age composed 1.0 and 0.5 percent of only viable population based on the and usually covered with dark green or qualitative and quantitative surveys, presence of a large number of nearly black chevrons and triangles respectively (Tabor 2008, pers. comm.). individuals and evidence of recent pointed ventrally (Say 1817, p. 13). All specimens were found downstream recruitment. Given this compilation of These patterns are absent in some of Fall River Lake in Greenwood, Elk, current distribution, abundance, and individuals. and Wilson Counties (Obermeyer et al. status trend information, the Neosho Internally, the color of the nacre is 1995, p. 24). mucket exhibits range reductions and white and iridescent, often with a Verdigris River: The Verdigris River population declines throughout its grayish-green tinge in the umbo cavity. flows through southeast Kansas and range. Specimens from the southern periphery northeast Oklahoma until it reaches the of its range are occasionally purplish. Arkansas River in Oklahoma. There are Rabbitsfoot Soft parts generally have an orange few historical records from the Verdigris The rabbitsfoot was originally coloration (Oesch 1984, p. 91; Parmalee River in either State prior to the 1990s. described as Unio cylindricus (Say, and Bogan 1998, pp. 211–212). Obermeyer et al. (1997a, p. 44; 1997b, p. 1817, no pagination but p. 13 of However, Vidrine (1993, p. 55) noted 111) collected five Neosho mucket publication). The type locality is the that the rabbitsfoot in the Ouachita specimens from 4 of 14 sites from 1993 Wabash River (Parmalee and Bogan River system in Louisiana had black soft to 1995, representing 0.2 percent of the 1998, p. 210), probably in the vicinity of parts. Aspects of the soft anatomy are
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63446 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
described by Ortmann (1912, pp. 256– 15–16). Similar to other species of Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, 257), Utterback (1915, pp. 148–149), Quadrula, the rabbitsfoot uses all four and West Virginia. Rabbitsfoot Davis and Fuller (1981, pp. 228–233 and gills as a marsupium (pouch) for its populations are considered to be extant 241), and Oesch (1984, p. 91). glochidia (Fobian 2007, p. 26). Female in 51 streams in 13 states (Butler 2005, Suitable fish hosts for rabbitsfoot rabbitsfoot release glochidia as pp. 18–20; Boeckman 2008, pers. populations west of the Mississippi conglutinates (matrices holding comm.), representing a 64 percent River include blacktail shiner numerous glochidia together and decline (51 extant streams of 140 (Cyprinella venusta) from the Black and embryos and undeveloped ova), which historical populations). In streams Little River and cardinal shiner (Luxilus mimic flatworms or similar fish prey. where it remains extant, populations are cardinalis), red shiner (C. lutrensis), Fecundity (capacity of abundant highly fragmented and restricted to spotfin shiner (C. spiloptera), and production) in river basins west of the short reaches. Based upon existing bluntface shiner (C. camura) from the Mississippi River ranged from 46,000 to Spring River, but host suitability 169,000 larvae per female (Fobian 2007, habitat use (need for flowing vs. information is lacking for the eastern p. 19). impounded habitats) and fish host range (Fobian 2007, p. ii). In addition, Rabbitsfoot is primarily an inhabitant (small minnow species with limited rosyface shiner (Notropis rubellus), of small to medium sized streams and individual ranges) data, it is unlikely striped shiner (L. chrysocephalus), and some larger rivers. It usually occurs in that recruitment between populations or emerald shiner (N. atherinoides) served shallow water areas along the bank and establishment of new populations could as hosts for rabbitsfoot, but not in all adjacent runs and shoals with reduced occur naturally. stream populations tested (Fobian 2007, water velocity. Specimens also may Although quantitative historical p. 69). occupy deep water runs, having been abundance data are rare for rabbitsfoot, Rabbitsfoot populations west of the reported in 2.7 to 3.7 m (9 to 12 feet) relative abundance information can be Mississippi River reach sexual maturity of water. Bottom substrates generally gathered from museum lots. Historical between the ages of 4 to 6 years (Fobian include gravel and sand (Parmalee and museum data indicated stable 2007, p. 50). Rabbitsfoot exhibit Bogan 1998, pp. 211–212). This species rabbitsfoot populations occurred in the seasonal movement towards shallower seldom burrows but lies on its side water during brooding periods, a (Watters 1988, p. 13; Fobian 2007, p. Ohio, Walhonding, Big Sandy, Scioto, strategy to increase host fish exposure 24). Olentangy, Nolin, Wabash, North Fork but one that also leaves them more Rabbitsfoot historically occurred in Vermilion, Obey, Tennessee, White, vulnerable to predation and fluctuating 140 streams within the lower Great Black, Spring (White River system), water levels, especially downstream of Lakes Subbasin and Mississippi River Strawberry, Illinois, Glover and Cossatot dams (Fobian 2007, pp. 48–49; Barnhart Basin (Table 2). The historical range Rivers (Butler 2005, p. 20). Call (1895, 2008, pers. comm.). It is a short–term included Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, p. 15) considered the rabbitsfoot brooder, with females brooding between Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, ‘‘abundant in the St. Francis, Saline, May and late August (Fobian 2007, pp. Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, and Ouachita Rivers in Arkansas.’’
TABLE 2—RABBITSFOOT RIVER AND CREEK OCCURRENCES AND CURRENT POPULATION STATUS
Current sta- Date of last River basin River/Creek States tus observation
Lower Great Lakes ...... Maumee River ...... IN, OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1927. St. Joseph River ...... IN, OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1967. Fish Creek ...... IN, OH ...... Declining ...... 2009. Feeder Canal ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... 1908. St. Mary’s River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1920. Auglaize River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Mid 1900s. Ohio River ...... Ohio River ...... IL, IN, KY, OH, Stable ...... 2005. PA, WV. Allegheny River ...... PA ...... Declining ...... 2007. French Creek ...... PA ...... Stable ...... 2008. Le Boeuf Creek ...... PA ...... Unknown ...... 2006. Muddy Creek ...... PA ...... Declining ...... 2003. Conneautee Creek ...... PA ...... Unknown ...... 2006. Monongahela River ...... PA ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1890. West Fork River ...... WV ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1913. Beaver River ...... PA ...... Extirpated ..... 1898. Shenango River ...... PA ...... Unknown ...... 2009. Pymatuning Creek ...... PA ...... Extirpated ..... 1909. Mahoning River ...... OH, PA ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Muskingum River ...... OH ...... Declining ...... 2007. Tuscarawas River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1990. Walhonding River ...... OH ...... Declining ...... 2009. Killbuck Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Mohican River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1977. Black Fork Mohican River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Little Kanawha River ...... WV ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1900. Elk River ...... WV ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Big Sandy River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1800. Levisa Fork ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1909. Scioto River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1962. Olentangy River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1962. Whetstone Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1930.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63447
TABLE 2—RABBITSFOOT RIVER AND CREEK OCCURRENCES AND CURRENT POPULATION STATUS—Continued
Current sta- Date of last River basin River/Creek States tus observation
Big Walnut Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1961. Alum Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1961. Walnut Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Big Darby Creek ...... OH ...... Declining ...... 2002. Little Darby Creek ...... OH ...... Declining ...... 2000. Deer Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1980. Ohio Brush Creek ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... 1970. Little Miami River ...... OH ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1900. Licking River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1990. South Fork Licking River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1980. Kentucky River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1920. South Fork Kentucky River ...... KY ...... Declining ...... 1998. Salt River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1980. Green River ...... KY ...... Improving ..... 2009. Russell Creek ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1908. Nolin River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1983. Barren River ...... KY ...... Declining ...... 1993. Drakes Creek ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1926. West Fork Drakes Creek ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1927. Rough River ...... KY ...... Declining ...... 1993. Wabash River ...... IL, IN ...... Declining ...... 1988. Mississinewa River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Eel River ...... IN ...... Declining ...... 2007. Tippecanoe River ...... IN ...... Stable ...... 2005. Vermilion River ...... IL ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. North Fork Vermilion River ...... IL ...... Declining ...... 2006. Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion River ...... IL ...... Declining ...... 2002. Middle Fork Vermilion River ...... IL ...... Extirpated ..... 1918. Salt Fork Vermilion River ...... IL ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1920. Sugar Creek ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... 1932. Embarras River ...... IL ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1980. White River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1960. East Fork White River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... 1964. Driftwood River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1940s. Big Blue River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Early 1900s. Brandywine Creek ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Sugar Creek ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Mid 1990s. Flatrock River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Mid 1900s. West Fork White River ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Black Creek ...... IN ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Cumberland River ...... Cumberland River ...... KY, TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1979. Rockcastle River ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1911. Big South Fork ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1911. Beaver Creek ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... 1949. Obey River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1939. East Fork Obey River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Caney Fork ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1961. Stones River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1964. East Fork Stones River ...... TN ...... Declining ...... 2002. West Fork Stones River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1966. Harpeth River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Late 1800s. Red River ...... KY, TN ...... Declining ...... 1992. Whippoorwill Creek ...... KY ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1980. Tennessee River ...... Tennessee River ...... AL, KY, MS, TN Stable ...... 2009. Holston River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1915. French Broad River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Little Pigeon River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Little Tennessee River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Clinch River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1935. Lookout Creek ...... GA ...... Extirpated ..... 1973. Sequatchie River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1925. Paint Rock River ...... AL ...... Improving ..... 2007. Hurricane Creek ...... AL ...... Extirpated ..... 1991. Estill Fork ...... AL ...... Extirpated ..... 1970. Larkin Fork ...... AL ...... Extirpated ..... 1966. Flint River ...... AL ...... Extirpated ..... 1955. Elk River ...... TN ...... Declining ...... 2006. Shoal Creek ...... AL, TN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Bear Creek ...... AL, MS ...... Declining ...... 2005. Duck River ...... TN ...... Improving ..... 2009. Big Rock Creek ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63448 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—RABBITSFOOT RIVER AND CREEK OCCURRENCES AND CURRENT POPULATION STATUS—Continued
Current sta- Date of last River basin River/Creek States tus observation
Buffalo River ...... TN ...... Extirpated ..... 1969. Lower Mississippi River ...... St. Francis River ...... AR, MO ...... Declining ...... 2008. Big Creek ...... MO ...... Extirpated ..... 1976. Yazoo River ...... MS ...... Extirpated ..... Unknown. Big Sunflower River ...... MS ...... Declining ...... 2004. Big Black River ...... MS ...... Declining ...... 1980. White River ...... White River ...... AR, MO ...... Stable ...... 2004. War Eagle Creek ...... AR ...... Unknown ...... 2004. Buffalo River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 1995. North Fork White River ...... AR ...... Extirpated ..... 1914. Black River ...... AR, MO ...... Declining ...... 2005. Current River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 1983. Spring River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 2004. South Fork Spring River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 2002. Strawberry River ...... AR ...... Unknown ...... 2006. Little Red River ...... AR ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1970. Middle Fork Little Red River ...... AR ...... Stable ...... 2009. Reeses Fork Cache River ...... AR ...... Extirpated ..... 1980. Arkansas River ...... Verdigris River ...... KS, OK ...... Unknown ...... 2009. Fall River ...... KS ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1900. Neosho River ...... KS, OK ...... Declining ...... 1999. Cottonwood River ...... KS ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1990. Spring River ...... KS, MO ...... Declining ...... 2006. Center Creek ...... MO ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1920. Shoal Creek ...... MO ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1920. Illinois River ...... AR, OK ...... Declining ...... 2008. Red River ...... Blue River ...... OK ...... Extirpated ..... Circa 1900. Little River ...... AR, OK ...... Stable ...... 2006. Glover River ...... OK ...... Declining ...... 1996. Mountain Fork Little River ...... OK ...... Extirpated ..... 1968. Cossatot River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 2007. Ouachita River ...... AR, LA ...... Stable ...... 2007. Caddo River ...... AR ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1986. Little Missouri River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 1996. Saline River ...... AR ...... Declining ...... 2006. North Fork Saline River ...... AR ...... Extirpated ..... Pre-1986. Bayou Bartholomew ...... LA ...... Declining ...... 2005.
Butler (2005, pp. 89–90) categorized streams as well (for example, Allegheny in Butler 2005, p. 23; Brady et al. 2004 the extant populations of rabbitsfoot River, Walhonding River, Cossatot in Butler 2005, pp. 23–24; Tetzloff 2009, into three groups based on population River, Buffalo River, and Bear Creek). pers. comm.). In 2009, Ahlstedt (2009, size, general distribution, evidence of The following is a summary of relative p. 3) found one fresh dead rabbitsfoot recent recruitment, and assessment of abundance and trends of extant specimen in Fish Creek. This current viability. Sizeable populations rabbitsfoot populations by river basin. population is categorized as marginal. with evidence of recent recruitment Lower Great Lakes Subbasin Ohio River Basin were categorized as viable. Small populations were categorized based on The Great Lakes Basin represents the Historically, rabbitsfoot populations limited levels of recent recruitment, most zoogeographically (geographic were found in 66 streams within the generally highly restricted distribution, distribution of an animal) distinct Ohio River basin, the largest eastern or doubtful or limited viability population center for the rabbitsfoot. All tributary of the Mississippi River. increasing its susceptibility to known records for the rabbitsfoot in the Today, rabbitsfoot is extant in 20 extirpation in the near future. Marginal Great Lakes Basin are from the Maumee streams, a 70 percent decline from populations were considered rare, with River system, a tributary of western historical stream occurrences. Several of no evidence of recent recruitment, of Lake Erie. Populations historically the extant populations are represented doubtful viability, and possibly on the occurred in five streams in addition to by single living or fresh dead specimens verge of extirpation in the immediate a canal in this system, but Fish Creek is in recent years (Muskingum, Wabash, future. the only remaining stream population. Eel, South Fork Kentucky, Barren, and Many of the small and marginal Fish Creek: Fish Creek is a tributary Rough Rivers and Big Darby Creek). populations are demonstrably (clearly of the St. Joseph River, flowing through Ohio River: Historically, about 60 evident) declining (Table 2). Of 21 Indiana and eastward into Ohio. In records for rabbitsfoot have been streams with marginal populations, 9 1988, rabbitsfoot comprised 1.2 percent reported over 1,570 rkm (981 rmi) of the streams (43 percent) are represented by relative abundance of all mussels in the main stem (Butler 2005, p. 25). Linear a single recent living or fresh dead stream (Watters 1988, p. 17). From 1996 river kilometers of mussel beds in the specimen. Although we have sporadic to 2005, 17 live specimens were river declined greater than 20 percent collections from the last century, trends collected during 3 surveys (Watters from 1967 to 1982 (Williams and indicate declining populations in other 1996 in Butler 2005, p. 23; Watters 2000 Schuster 1989, pp. 7–10). By 1982, a
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63449
1,069-rkm (664-rmi) mussel survey of French Creek: French Creek is a major rabbitsfoot were collected from four the Ohio River (Ohio River Mile 317.0 tributary of the Allegheny River, with sites located 1,203 m (3,947 ft) to 2,014 to 981.0) yielded one rabbitsfoot rabbitsfoot known from downstream of m (6,608 ft) upstream of Six Mile Dam. specimen from near the mouth of the Union City Reservoir to approximately No live or dead rabbitsfoot individuals Green River, Kentucky (Williams and 11 rkm (7 rmi) above the Allegheny were collected from Six Mile Dam Schuster 1989, p. 23). River confluence, a total of 121 rkm (75 downstream 2,267 m (7,438 ft) Currently, two extant rabbitsfoot rmi) (Butler 2005, p. 31). Museum (EnviroScience 2010, Figure 5). The populations exist in the Ohio River. One records from 1985 to 1994 indicate that rabbitsfoot population is categorized as population is located near Spencer rabbitsfoot was known from 12 sites small and appears to be in decline County, Indiana and Hancock County, (Butler 2005, p. 30). Intensive (Butler 2005, p. 33). Kentucky (Clarke 1995, p. 81). The quantitative sampling at 4 sites in Shenango River: The Shenango River largest Ohio River rabbitsfoot Venango County from 1998 to 1999 is a tributary of the Beaver River in population is located downstream of yielded 205 live rabbitsfoot specimens Mercer County, Pennsylvania. Nelson Lock and Dam 52 and 53. Numerous (Butler 2005, p. 30). In 2003 and 2004, and Villelo (2010, p. 1) surveyed the live or fresh dead rabbitsfoot specimens timed searches (qualitative) yielded 41 Shenango River from Pymatuning have been reported over the past 25 live rabbitsfoot specimens from 12 of 25 Reservoir to Shenango River Lake in years from this reach, mostly sites in Erie, Crawford, Mercer, and 2009 and they collected 34 live downstream of Lock and Dam 52 Venango Counties, Pennsylvania, while rabbitsfoot specimens (relative (approximately Ohio River km 1,511.2 a quantitative survey at 7 of 10 sites abundance = 1.1 percent) from this or mile 939) near Paducah, Kentucky yielded 57 live rabbitsfoot specimens reach (Nelson and Villelo 2010, pp. 9– (Butler 2005, p. 26). In addition, the (Smith and Crabtree (2010 p. 391–398). 10). Prior to this survey, rabbitsfoot was rabbitsfoot population downstream of Rabbitsfoot abundance at the seven sites believed to be extirpated from the Lock and Dam 52 and 53 includes was estimated to be from 43 to 372 Shenango River (Butler 2005, p. 96). Muskingum River: The Muskingum multiple age or size classes (Butler 2005, individuals (standard error = 30 to 123). River is a major tributary of the Ohio p. 26). The Ohio River and lower Evidence of recent recruitment was River. Rabbitsfoot was believed to be Tennessee River (downstream of found at three sites (Smith and Crabtree extirpated circa 1980 until two live Kentucky Lake Dam) populations may 2010, p. 400). The French Creek specimens were found in 2007 near be considered a single meta–population population appears to be healthy and Dresden, Muskingum County, Ohio due to the absence of a significant stable, with evidence of recruitment. LeBoeuf and Conneautee Creeks: (Service 2010, p. 10). This population is barrier separating them and are LeBoeuf and Conneautee Creeks are categorized as marginal. considered to be a sizeable population tributaries of French Creek in Big Darby Creek: Big Darby Creek is a (Butler 2005, p. 26). Pennsylvania. Historical surveys for tributary of the Scioto River in central Allegheny River: The Allegheny River rabbitsfoot in these creeks are restricted Ohio. Watters (1994, p. 99) claimed the begins in northwestern Pennsylvania, to one relict found in 1991 from creek had the highest mussel diversity flows into New York, and then LeBoeuf Creek. In 2006, live rabbitsfoot of any stream its size in North America. continues south into Pennsylvania specimens were confirmed near the Many rabbitsfoot records exist for Big before converging with the confluence of each creek with French Darby Creek, dating back to the late Monongahela River near Pittsburgh, Creek. Recruitment has not been 1950’s (Butler 2005, p. 34). However, Pennsylvania, to form the Ohio River. confirmed in either creek and the only weathered rabbitsfoot specimens Historical records from Pennsylvania populations are considered marginal were found during two intensive indicate rabbitsfoot was sporadically and likely a single meta–population sampling years, 1986 and 1990 (Watters known from at least Armstrong County with French Creek. 1990, p. 31; 1994, p. 101). Since 1990, upstream to Warren County, Muddy Creek: Muddy Creek is a live and fresh dead rabbitsfoot records Pennsylvania (Butler 2005, p. 28), but tributary of French Creek in Crawford are limited to five live specimens from little sampling effort was performed County, Pennsylvania. Dennis (1984 p. two localities (Tetzloff 2008, pers. over the past 100 years. Five live 34) first reported the rabbitsfoot from comm.; Butler 2005, p. 35). Currently, rabbitsfoot specimens were found from Muddy Creek in the 1970s from a site the population is considered marginal. 1998 to 2001 at three of four intensely near its confluence with French Creek. Little Darby Creek: Little Darby Creek sampled sites at Kennerdell, Venango Three live rabbitsfoot specimens were is the main tributary for Big Darby County, Pennsylvania (Villella 2008, collected at 3 of 20 sites in 2003, a 3- Creek. Rabbitsfoot were known from pers. comm.). During surveys from 2001 rkm (2 rmi) reach located 6 rkm (4 rmi) Little Darby Creek dating back to circa to 2002 (25 sites) and 2007 (63 sites) upstream of its confluence with French 1960, primarily in Madison County, encompassing 129 rkm (80 rmi), Creek (Butler 2005 p. 32; Mohler et al. Ohio (Butler 2005, p. 35–36). Watters rabbitsfoot was found only at four sites, 2006, pp. 574 and 581). The rabbitsfoot (1994, p. 101) located seven live with very low densities. Three of four population is categorized as small. rabbitsfoot specimens at three sites sites were downstream of the French Walhonding River: The Walhonding during a 1990 survey. The population in Creek confluence (Villella 2008, pers. River converges with the Tuscarawas Little Darby Creek, although categorized comm.). A 2006–2007 survey yielded no River to create the Muskingum River as small, appears to be persisting and evidence of rabbitsfoot at five pools near Coshocton, Coshocton County, stable in approximately 32 rkm in within the Allegheny River, Ohio. The rabbitsfoot was historically Union and Madison Counties, Ohio (20 approximately 60 rkm (37 rmi) (Smith common at some sites in the rmi) (Watters 1994, p. 106; Tetzloff and Meyer 2010, p. 558). The lower Walhonding River (Butler 2005, p. 32). 2008, pers. comm.). Allegheny River and French Creek While subsequent surveys in the early South Fork Kentucky River: The South likely represent a metapopulation 1990’s collected live mussels, relative Fork Kentucky River is a tributary of the because no barriers exist between the abundance of rabbitsfoot was 0.3 Kentucky River in southeastern streams, but the Alleghany population is percent with limited evidence of Kentucky that essentially converges to considered marginal (Butler 2005, p. recruitment (Hoggarth 1995–1996, pp. form the latter near Beattyville, Lee 29). 157, 166–174). In 2009, five live County, Kentucky. The rabbitsfoot was
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63450 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
first discovered in the river in the late Wabash River: The Wabash River is et al. (1998, p. 92) considered the North 1990s in Owsley County; a single relict the largest northern tributary of the Fork to have ‘‘perhaps the last rabbitsfoot specimen was collected in Ohio River. It originates in west–central reproducing population of the 1996 and a single live specimen was Ohio, flows across Indiana, and then rabbitsfoot in the state [Illinois].’’ The observed in 1998. The population is forms the boundary between North Fork Vermilion River is considered marginal and of questionable southwestern Indiana and southeastern considered a small metapopulation with viability (Butler 2005, p. 37). Illinois. The rabbitsfoot was once the Middle Branch North Fork Green River: The Green River is a widespread throughout the Wabash Vermilion River population (Butler major Ohio River tributary, located in River prior to the 1960s (Cummings and 2005, p. 47). west–central Kentucky. Rabbitsfoot Mayer 1997, p. 137). Surveys conducted Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion occurrences span almost 241 rkm (150 from the 1960s through 2004 yielded a River: The Middle Branch North Fork rmi) of the upper Green River (Butler single live rabbitsfoot specimen and a Vermilion River is a tributary of the 2005, p. 37). Historical rabbitsfoot few relicts (Cummings et al. 1992, p. 3; North Fork Vermilion River. Headwaters records date back to circa 1900 (Butler Butler 2005, p. 42). Fisher (2006, p. 107) of the Middle Branch drain 2005, p. 38). Periodic sampling from considered the rabbitsfoot ‘‘functionally northwestern Warren County, Indiana, 1984 to 1996 produced live and fresh extirpated (in the Wabash River) and and northeastern Vermilion County, dead rabbitsfoot specimens from nine restricted to the tributaries.’’ Illinois. The rabbitsfoot was discovered Green River sites between Green River Eel River: The Eel River is a northern in the lowermost reach of the Middle Lake Dam and Munfordville, Kentucky tributary of the Wabash River in north- Branch North Fork Vermilion River in (Cicerello 1999, p. 23). Cicerello (1999, central Indiana. Historical records from 1998 (Butler 2005, p. 47). Since that Figure 1 and Table 1) sampled 40 sites the Eel River prior to 1997 are sparse time, a few live and fresh dead from 1996 to 1998 over the 153-rkm (95- (Henschen 1987 in Butler 2005, p. 43), rabbitsfoot specimens are known from rmi) reach between Mammoth Cave but rabbitsfoot was considered common two sites sampled in 2000 and 2002. National Park and Green River Lake by Daniels (1903, p. 651). Collections The population is very small and Dam and reported the rabbitsfoot to be since 1997 are limited to nine live apparently contiguous with the ‘‘uncommon’’ at 13 sites extending from rabbitsfoot specimens found at sites in rabbitsfoot population occurring in the Green River km 373.0 to 489.1 (mile Miami and Cass Counties, Indiana North Fork Vermilion River (Butler 231.8 to 303.9; relative abundance of 0.1 (Butler 2005, p. 43). The rabbitsfoot is 2005, p. 47). no longer considered common in the Eel percent) upstream of Munfordville, Cumberland River Basin River, restricted to less than 32 rkm (20 Kentucky. Sampling from 2000 to The Cumberland River is a large present has produced high numbers of rmi) of the lower main stem, and is now categorized as marginal (Butler 2005, p. southern tributary of the Ohio River. fresh dead and numerous living 43). Historically, the rabbitsfoot was known specimens in Adair, Green, and Hart Tippecanoe River: The Tippecanoe from the main stem and 12 tributaries. Counties (Butler 2005, pp. 38–39). The River flows across north-central Indiana Most records for the species were prior Green River population is one of a few until reaching its confluence with the to 1950. Parmalee et al. (1980, pp. 93– rabbitsfoot populations that appear to be Wabash River. Daniels (1903, p. 651) 95) found shells of the rabbitsfoot in sizeable and improving, based on considered the rabbitsfoot to be shellers cull and stock piles in 1977, evidence of recruitment. common in the Tippecanoe River. 1978, and 1979. Rabbitsfoot was Barren River: The Barren River is the Surveys conducted between 1987 and considered rare at the time, comprising largest tributary of the Green River and 2001 yielded numerous live rabbitsfoot less than one percent of 1,000 flows in a northwesterly direction specimens at numerous sites specimens. No more recent records exist towards its confluence with the Green (Cummings and Berlocher 1990, pp. 84– for the main stem. Recent collections River in west–central Kentucky. 87; Ecological Specialists, Inc. 1993, pp. suggest populations may still exist in Historical records of rabbitsfoot in the 47–50, 55–67, 84). Survey efforts over only two tributaries of the Cumberland Barren River prior to the 1990s are the past decade continue to produce River, an 85 percent decline of stream limited to a couple collections in the similar results (EnviroScience, Inc. populations. The East Fork Stones and 1920s and 1940s (Butler 2005, p. 40). 2005, p. 35; Ecological Specialists, Inc. Red Rivers are the only tributaries with Two surveys since the 1990s have 2003, p. 9–15; Fisher 2008 and 2009, extant populations, and their continued yielded one live rabbitsfoot and relicts pers. comm.). The rabbitsfoot survival is tenuous. in small numbers (Gordon and Sherman population is sizable, stable and viable East Fork Stones River: The East Fork 1995, Appendix A). If extant, the in the Tippecanoe River, but at disjunct Stones River is one of two major rabbitsfoot population in the Barren localities within the lower two–thirds of headwater tributaries, the other being River is marginal and its viability is the river in Fulton, Pulaski, White, the West Fork Stones River, which highly doubtful (Butler 2005, p. 41). Carroll, and Tippecanoe Counties converge to form the Stones River. Rough River: The Rough River is a (Butler 2005, p. 45). Researchers sampled numerous pre- major Green River tributary flowing North Fork Vermilion River: The impoundment sites from 1964 to 1967 westward towards its confluence in North Fork Vermilion River flows south on the East Fork Stones River, reporting western Kentucky. There are no out of western Indiana into eastern rabbitsfoot from two sites but never historical rabbitsfoot records from the Illinois until reaching its confluence more than three live specimens per site Rough River prior to the 1990s (Butler with the Wabash River. Through 45 (Butler 2005, p. 49). Schmidt et al. 2005, p. 41). A single fresh dead years of collection history, four sites in (1989, pp. 56–59) sampled 23 East Fork specimen collected in 1993 is the only an approximately 10-rkm (6-rmi) reach Stones River sites during 1980 to 1981 known record of the rabbitsfoot in the have produced rabbitsfoot records. and reported the rabbitsfoot to be ‘‘rare’’ Rough River (Gordon and Sherman Since 1980, researchers have at two lower sites. Sampling in 2002 at 1995, Appendix A). This single documented 28 live and 6 fresh dead these two sites produced a single fresh specimen suggests a marginal and rabbitsfoot specimens (Illinois Natural dead specimen (Butler 2005, p. 48). The nonviable population (Butler 2005, p. History Survey (INHS) museum records; rabbitsfoot in the East Fork Stones River 41). Cummings et al. 1998, p. 99). Cummings is considered very rare and declining;
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63451
thus it is categorized as marginal (Butler same general reach of river as late as was the second most abundant species 2005, p. 49). 2003 (Butler 2005, p. 124). This portion (Fobian et al. 2008, pp. 6–37). This Red River: The Red River is a large of the rabbitsfoot population exhibited population is categorized as sizeable tributary of the lower Cumberland River recruitment in the 1990s (Hubbs 2010, and viable (Butler 2005, pp. 89–90). that drains southwestern Kentucky and pers. comm.). Elk River: The Elk River is a tributary northwestern Tennessee. Despite its Downstream of Kentucky Lake Dam, of the Tennessee River draining portions size, no thorough survey of the stream the rabbitsfoot has been found live and of south-central Tennessee to north- has ever been attempted, although there fresh dead at several sites in low central Alabama. From 1965 to 1967, are intermittent sampling dates to the numbers from 1985 to 2005 (Butler Isom et al. (1973, pp. 438–440) found 1960s. Records indicate that a small 2005, p. 52). In 1999, a 3.0-cm (1.2-inch) the rabbitsfoot at three locations on the population of the rabbitsfoot existed fresh dead rabbitsfoot juvenile was Elk River. Survey efforts on Elk River from a few sites on the main stem in found at Tennessee River km 28.2 (mile tributaries, Sugar and Richland Creek, Logan County, Kentucky, and Robertson 17.5) (Butler 2005, p. 52). In 2011, did not yield any rabbitsfoot. In 1980, County, Tennessee. From 1988 to 1990, surveyors found greater than 80 live Ahlstedt (1983, pp. 44–45) found 10 live the rabbitsfoot has been found live and rabbitsfoot from Kentucky Lake Dam to rabbitsfoot specimens at 6 of 108 sites fresh dead at five sites in Kentucky the confluence with the Ohio River. in the Elk River, Lincoln County, (Butler 2005, p. 49). Subsequent Rabbitsfoot were found to occur most Tennessee (Ahlstedt 1983, pp. 46–49). sampling efforts in Kentucky have frequently in a narrow band of Two live rabbitsfoot specimens were yielded no additional specimens. In transitional substrate from clay and silt found at approximately Elk River km 1990 and 1992, the Aquatic Resources to sand and gravel along the toe of 122 (mile 76) in 1999 (Service 1999, p. Center (ARC) (1993, p. 1 and Appendix descending banks. Although not 6). Tennessee Valley Authority 1) qualitatively surveyed a reach of the considered common, there were a few conducted a survey in 2006 and found Red River in Tennessee and collected a locations at which rabbitsfoot occurred three live individuals, one objectively total of four live rabbitsfoot (relative in greater numbers (Koch 2012, pers. aged at 6 or 7 years (Chance 2008, pers. abundance of 2.1 and 1.3 percent, comm.). This population is likely comm.). This population is categorized respectively). The Red River rabbitsfoot contiguous with the population in the as marginal (Butler 2005, pp. 89–90). population is categorized as marginal lower Ohio River, although the Bear Creek: Bear Creek is a southern due to its small size, distribution and rabbitsfoot appears to be concentrated tributary of the Tennessee River in doubtful viability (Butler 2005, p. 50). from Tennessee River km 16 to 32 (mile northwestern Alabama and northeastern 10 to 20) (Butler 2005, p. 52). The Mississippi. Historical records indicate Tennessee River Basin Tennessee River rabbitsfoot population rabbitsfoot occurred in 72 rkm (45 rmi; The Tennessee River is the largest is considered sizable and viable (Butler Ortmann 1925, p. 337; Butler 2005, pp. tributary of the Ohio River. Historically 2005, pp. 89–90). 56–57). In 1977, three live rabbitsfoot the rabbitsfoot was known from the Paint Rock River: The Paint Rock specimens were found at approximately entire length of the Tennessee River and River is a northern Alabama tributary of Bear Creek km 90 (rmi 56) in Alabama 17 of its tributaries. Today, it is known the Tennessee River. Historically, the (Butler 2005, p. 56). A 1991 record of a only from five streams in the Tennessee three headwater tributaries, Estill and single fresh dead specimen is known River basin, a 71 percent reduction in Larkin Forks and Hurricane Creek, of from approximately Bear Creek km 40 stream populations. Almost the entire the Paint Rock River had (mile 25) in Colbert County, Alabama. length of the 1,046-rkm (650-rmi) metapopulations of rabbitsfoot. Live McGregor and Garner (2004, p. 64) Tennessee River main stem has been rabbitsfoot specimens were collected at conducted the only comprehensive impounded beginning in 1925, three of five Paint Rock River sites in survey of the system from 1996 to 2001 destroying hundreds of km of riverine 1965 and 1967 (Isom and Yokley 1973, and found rabbitsfoot live or fresh dead habitat for the rabbitsfoot. Extant pp. 444–445). In 1980, only two live at two sites. It occurred on the main rabbitsfoot populations persist in the rabbitsfoot specimens were found in the stem in the immediate vicinity of the two lowermost tail waters of the middle reaches of the river during the Natchez Trace Parkway of the National Tennessee River, Duck River, Paint Rock first comprehensive survey (18 sites; Park Service (NPS) system in Colbert River, Elk River, and Bear Creek. Ahlstedt 1991a, p. 168). Ahlstedt (1995– County, Alabama (Bear Creek km 39.4 Tennessee River: The Tennessee River 96a, pp. 69–73) sampled 18 sites in 1991 and 40.9; mile 24.5 and 25.4). In is formed from the confluence of the and reported good numbers of Mississippi, one live and eight fresh Holston and French Broad Rivers near rabbitsfoot. He collected 35 live dead specimens were found in a four- Knoxville, Tennessee. Historically, the rabbitsfoot specimens at 8 of 18 main rkm (2.5-rmi) reach in 2002 and 2005 rabbitsfoot was found throughout the stem sites. Seven tributary sites also (Jones 2011, pers. comm.). Bear Creek is length of the Tennessee River (Ortmann were sampled, but no rabbitsfoot were categorized as a small population 1925, p. 337). Today, extant populations found in tributaries. (Butler 2005, pp. 89–90). only occur in the two lowermost tail During more recent sampling efforts Duck River: The Duck River is a large waters, downstream of Pickwick in 1995 and 2002, three fresh dead and tributary of the lower Tennessee River Landing Dam and Kentucky Dam nine relict shells were found at a main in central Tennessee. Ortmann (1924, (Hubbs 2008, pers. comm.). stem site and a single live specimen pp. 24–33) documented the presence of Over 20 live rabbitsfoot specimens upstream of the Larkin Fork confluence, rabbitsfoot in the early 1920s, were located along the marginal shelf of respectively (McGregor and Shelton considering it ‘‘all over the interior the Pickwick Lake tail waters in 1991 1995, Appendix A; Godwin 2002, pp. region (and elsewhere).’’ Surveys (Butler 2005, p. 51). From 1993 to 2000, 10–11, 22–23). In 2004, two live and conducted between 1965 and 1979 live and fresh dead rabbitsfoot some fresh dead rabbitsfoot specimens found similar results (Isom and Yokley specimens were found at Tennessee were found at a site on the lower main 1968, p. 36; Ahlstedt 1981, p. 62; River km 316.7 (mile 196.8, Diamond stem (Butler 2005, p. 54). An intensive Ahlstedt 1991, pp. 142–147). Island) and km 321.9 (mile 200). Fresh survey (42 main stem and 5 Estill Fork Using stratified random sampling, dead rabbitsfoot specimens aged at less sites) in 2008 found 218 live and fresh Barr et al. (1993–94, p. 205) in 1981 than 10 years have been found in this dead rabbitsfoot at 19 sites. Rabbitsfoot estimated that 591 live rabbitsfoot
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63452 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
occurred at Lillards Mill. Twenty been found in the St. Francis River, back to circa 1910, but now it is rabbitsfoot were collected from Lillards Arkansas (Butler 2005, p. 61). The restricted to the lower reaches Mill and translocated to a site in rabbitsfoot is rare in the St. Francis downstream of Batesville, Independence Bedford County in 1988 (Layzer and River, may be at risk from extirpation County, Arkansas (Harris et al. 2009, p. Gordon 1993, pp. 89–91). Resampling (Hutson and Barnhart 2004, p. 84), and 73). Historical abundance data are the Bedford County site in 2002, is categorized as a small population scarce. However, records indicate that evidence of recruitment was noted by (Butler 2005, pp. 89–90). the population was large (Butler 2005, Ahlstedt et al. (2004, p. 101). Madison Big Sunflower River: A major tributary p. 65). et al. (1999, Table 1) reported 34 live of the Yazoo River, the Big Sunflower From the 1980s to late 2000s, rabbitsfoot specimens from a Maury River drains a large portion of the numerous live and fresh dead County site in 1998. Mississippi Delta in west-central rabbitsfoot specimens have been found Ahlstedt et al. (2004, p. 101) Mississippi. The rabbitsfoot was first at numerous sites in two disjunct conducted an extensive mussel survey reported in 1969 from the lower portion reaches of the White River (rkm 319 and in the system beginning in 2000. They of the river (Florida Museum of Natural 410; rmi 198 and 255 and rkm 92 to 146; reported 403 live and fresh dead History, museum lot # 233299). rmi 57 to 91) (Bates and Dennis 1983, rabbitsfoot specimens from 31 of 78 Currently, rabbitsfoot occurs in a 32-rkm p. 42; AGFC Mussel Database 2011). In sites sampled (a few sites were sampled (20-rmi) reach upstream of the Quiver 1992, Christian (1995, pp. 146–197) more than once). An average of 13 live River confluence in Sunflower County. estimated the total rabbitsfoot or fresh dead rabbitsfoot specimens was From 2000 to 2010, live and fresh dead population from 13 sites on the lower found per site of occurrence. The rabbitsfoot specimens were collected at White River at 928 individuals. The rabbitsfoot population on the Duck Blaine Road west of Blaine, Mississippi, rabbitsfoot population is categorized as River is primarily located between rkm downstream to near the Quiver River sizable, but remains extant in two 209 to 288 (miles 179 to 130), and confluence (Jones 2011, pers. comm.). disjunct reaches separated by scattered in the lower river (rkm 60 to Butler (2005, pp. 89–90) categorized this approximately 161 rkm (100 rmi). The 61; rmi 37 to 38; Hickman County) population as small. uppermost reach extends from the (Hubbs 1995, p. 46; Schilling and Big Black River: The Big Black River Batesville Dam at Batesville, Williams 2002, p. 409; Butler 2005, p. is a tributary to the lower Mississippi Independence County, Arkansas, 59). The extant rabbitsfoot population draining central and southwestern downstream to the Little Red River extends over at least 274 rkm (170 rmi; Mississippi. Hartfield and Rummel confluence north of Georgetown, White approximately Duck River km 60 to 333, (1985, pp. 117–119) sampled the lower and Woodruff Counties, Arkansas. The mile 37 to 207) and ‘‘* * * represents three-quarters of this 426-rkm (265-rmi) lowermost reach extends from U.S. one of the best known populations long river. The rabbitsfoot is restricted Highway 79 at Clarendon, Monroe rangewide’’ (Ahlstedt et al. (2004, p. to a small portion of the lower river County, Arkansas, downstream to 101). cutting through the Loess Hills Arkansas Highway 1 near St. Charles, physiographic division where mussels Arkansas County, Arkansas (Butler Lower Mississippi River Subbasin were generally found in gravel riffles 2005, p. 66; AGFC mussel database The rabbitsfoot is known from five and runs. At that time, 19 dead 2011). streams within the lower Mississippi rabbitsfoot specimens were recorded at War Eagle Creek: War Eagle Creek is River subbasin (excluding the White, nine sites in Hinds and Warren Counties a small, eastern White River tributary Arkansas, and Red River systems). The (Butler 2005, p. 64). The only other located in northwest Arkansas. five streams include St. Francis River, record is for a dead specimen located in Rabbitsfoot was not documented in War Big Creek, Yazoo River, Big Sunflower 2000. Rabbitsfoot is still considered Eagle Creek until 1974. Since 1979, one River, and Big Black River. Rabbitsfoot extant in this reach (Jones 2011, pers. live specimen was collected in 1981, is extirpated from Big Creek and the comm.), and the population is and two fresh dead were found in 2004 Yazoo River (Butler 2005, p. 61). categorized as small. (AGFC mussel database 2011). Little is St. Francis River: The St. Francis known about the viability of this River is a tributary of the Mississippi White River Basin population. Therefore, it has been River draining portions of southeastern Historically, 13 rivers within the categorized as marginal (Butler 2005, Missouri and northeastern Arkansas. In White River system harbored rabbitsfoot pp. 89–90). the 1800s the rabbitsfoot was considered populations. Extant populations occur Buffalo River: The Buffalo River is a abundant in the St. Francis River (Call in 9 of 13 (69 percent) rivers in the western White River tributary in north- 1895, p. 15). Extant rabbitsfoot records basin. Further, no other major river central Arkansas. Rabbitsfoot was first are from the upper part of the river in basin has as many sizeable populations. documented in the Buffalo River in Butler and Wayne Counties, Missouri At one time, the main stem of White 1910 by Meek and Clark (1912, pp. 7– (Butler 2005, p. 61). Hutson and River and 11 of its tributaries had a large 20). They reported rabbitsfoot as Barnhart (2004, pp. 84, 109) in 2002 metapopulation of rabbitsfoot (Butler ‘‘common’’ at 11 of 26 sites; almost all found 16 live rabbitsfoot specimens at 3 2005, p. 65). Three of the streams may specimens were located within the sites upstream of Lake Wappapello, still contain a metapopulation (Black, lower 40 rkm (25 rmi) within Searcy Missouri; including 11 at rkm 277.0 (rmi Spring, and Strawberry Rivers). County, Arkansas. Two comprehensive 172.1), 3 at rkm 294.5 (rmi 183.0), and Unfortunately, many of the tributaries surveys of the Buffalo River mussel 2 at rkm 306.6 (rmi 190.5). At rkm 277.0 appear to have declining populations fauna in 1995 and 2004 to 2005 found (rmi 172.1), 35 live rabbitsfoot (Buffalo, Black, Current, Spring, and live rabbitsfoot specimens concentrated specimens were found in the 1970s, but South Fork Spring Rivers). between Arkansas Highway 7 in Newton only 8 and 11 live specimens were White River: The White River is a County to near the Cedar Creek found in 2001 and 2002, respectively. In large western tributary of the confluence downstream of Rush, 2005, seven live rabbitsfoot specimens Mississippi River. The rabbitsfoot Arkansas (Harris 1996, p. 12; Matthews were sampled at a site in the same reach population once extended throughout et al. 2009, pp. 116 and 122). NPS staff (Butler 2005, p. 62). With the exception most of the 1,110-rkm (690-rmi) length collected four live rabbitsfoot in 2008 of Call’s description, no rabbitsfoot have of the White River and site records date from a site near the Cedar Creek
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63453
confluence near Rush, Arkansas was ‘‘relatively common’’ (Miller and River in north-central Arkansas. (Hodges 2011, pers. comm.). During a Hartfield 1986, pp. 9–10; Harris and Rabbitsfoot was first discovered in the 2011 survey of this same site, changes Gordon 1987, p. 54; ANSP 359907). A Middle Fork in 1991 with a single in channel geomorphology caused by survey upstream of the South Fork specimen from 26 sites (Harris 1992, p. 2009 and 2011 flooding resulted in the Spring River confluence in 1985 did not 64). The Middle Fork Little Red River entire site being covered with sand. Few find any rabbitsfoot (Miller and has been extensively surveyed during live mussels were encountered, but one Hartsfield 1986, p. 9). In 1991, Rust the past decade. Winterringer (2003, p. live rabbitsfoot was found and relocated (1993, Appendices 1.2 and 1.4) 46 and Appendix F) found 28 live to more suitable habitat downstream. estimated rabbitsfoot relative abundance rabbitsfoot specimens, including 2 While no live rabbitsfoot were at 1.9 to 4.0 percent at 5 of 6 sites and juveniles, at 2 sites sampled in 2001 encountered at the downstream total population size at 563 individuals downstream of Little Tick Creek. The relocation site, 2 fresh dead and 23 at 3 of these sites. Sixty-eight live AGFC and Service collected seven live weathered rabbitsfoot shells were found rabbitsfoot were collected in the river rabbitsfoot, including one juvenile, from at this site. Two live rabbitsfoot also reach from near Ravenden to Imboden, two sites in this same reach in 2009 were collected in 2011 at two sites Arkansas, during 2004 to 2005 (Harris et (Davidson 2011, pers. comm.). The located between Arkansas Highway 7 al. 2007, p. 16). The rabbitsfoot rabbitsfoot population is categorized as and U.S. Highway 65. The Buffalo River population appears to be recruiting, but small. population is small and very susceptible the numbers of individuals are Arkansas River Basin to extirpation based on recent surveys decreasing from the high numbers found (Davidson 2011, pers. comm.). in the mid-1980s (Butler 2005, p. 72). The rabbitsfoot distribution in the Black River: The Black River is the For this reason, the Spring River is Arkansas River system is restricted to largest White River tributary draining categorized as a small rabbitsfoot tributaries draining the western fringe of southeastern Missouri and northeastern population. the Ozark Plateaus and adjacent Central Arkansas. Based on data from the 1970s South Fork Spring River: The South Lowlands physiographic provinces and 1980s, the rabbitsfoot was abundant Fork Spring River is a Spring River located to the west. The rabbitsfoot at some Arkansas sites in the lower tributary draining portions of Howell range in the system includes east-central main stem between the confluences of County, Missouri, and Fulton and Sharp and southeastern Kansas, northeastern the Current and Strawberry Rivers Counties, Arkansas. The rabbitsfoot was Oklahoma, extreme northwestern (approximately 121 rkm, 75 rmi; Ohio discovered in the South Fork Spring Arkansas, and extreme southwestern State University Museum of Biological River in 2002 in central Fulton County, Missouri. Rabbitsfoot was once Diversity (OSUM) museum lot #s 47673 Arkansas (Butler 2005, p. 72). Judging distributed throughout hundreds of km and 47933; Miller and Hartfield 1986, from the number of fresh dead and relict (miles) of streams in the basin, with pp. 8–9). In 1992, Rust (1993, Appendix shells found, it appears to have been the populations in the Fall and Cottonwood 1.1) surveyed 48 sites in the Black River, dominant species at this site, although Rivers and Center and Shoal Creeks now finding rabbitsfoot live at 4 sites, and a no live mussels were located (Butler extirpated (50 percent reduction in combined population estimate of 1,503 2005, pp. 72–73). In 2006, a qualitative stream populations). Scammon (1906, individuals, between rkm 105 to 124 survey to assess mussel communities at pp. 348–349) described rabbitsfoot as (rmi 65 to 77). A 2000 to 2003 survey 35 sites in the South Fork Spring River ‘‘seeming to be nowhere abundant, it is at 51 sites in Missouri did not locate any did not yield any rabbitsfoot (Martin et not a rare species in [the Spring, rabbitsfoot (Hutson and Barnhart 2004, al. 2009, pp. 106–107). However, one Neosho, and Verdigris Rivers].’’ pp. 162–169). In 2005, AGFC collected live rabbitsfoot specimen was located on Rabbitsfoot is now confined to reduced 25 live rabbitsfoot specimens from a site the river a week later, representing the portions of the Verdigris, Neosho, located approximately two rkm (1 rmi) only live specimen ever collected from Spring, and Illinois Rivers. upstream of U.S. Highway 63 at Black the river (AGFC mussel database 2011). Neosho River: The Neosho River is a Rock, Arkansas (AGFC Mussel Database Based on limited information collected large northern tributary to the Arkansas 2011). The Black River population is over the past decade on the rabbitsfoot River in eastern Kansas and considered one of the largest remaining status in the South Fork Spring River, northeastern Oklahoma. Historical range-wide (Butler 2005, pp. 89–90). this population is categorized as small. evidence indicates rabbitsfoot was Current River: The Current River is a Strawberry River: The Strawberry present in almost the entire 740-rkm Black River tributary draining River is a Black River tributary draining (460-rmi) main stem of the Neosho River southeastern Missouri and northeastern portions of northeastern Arkansas. The (Butler 2005, p. 75). Live rabbitsfoot Arkansas. The rabbitsfoot is known only most upstream record of live rabbitsfoot specimens, including some juveniles, from the Arkansas portion of the stream. in the Strawberry River was collected have been collected in a 12.8-rkm (8- Few records exist for the species in the 2.9 rkm (1.8 rmi) upstream of Hars rmi) reach from near Iola to Humboldt, Current River, including several live Creek southeast of Franklin, Arkansas, Allen County, Kansas, from 1994 to and dead specimens in 1983–1984 and in 1998 (AGFC Mussel Database 2011). 1999 (Obermeyer et al. 1995, pp. 31–32; 1994 (AGFC mussel database). The From 1983 to 2006, 84 live rabbitsfoot Mulhern et al. 2002, p. 243; Butler 2005, rabbitsfoot population in the Current specimens, including some juveniles, p. 76). Relict shells were collected at 8 River is categorized as marginal. have been collected from 14 sites of 21 additional main stem sites from Spring River: The Spring River is a extending from the most upstream 1993 to 1995 (Obermeyer et al. 1995, p. Black River tributary draining south- record downstream through Sharp and 63). The rabbitsfoot is thought to be central Missouri and northeastern Lawrence counties (greater than 80 rkm extirpated from the Oklahoma portion Arkansas. Based on pre-1986 records, or 50 rmi) (Rust 1993, p. 30; Harris et and remaining stretches in Kansas. The the rabbitsfoot was once known from at al. 2007, pp. 23–27; INHS 27526). The extant population in Kansas is least 14 sites in the 80-rkm (50-rmi) Strawberry River rabbitsfoot population categorized as small. reach downstream of the South Fork is categorized as sizable. Spring River: The Spring River is a Spring River confluence (Harris et al. Middle Fork Little Red River: The Neosho River tributary draining 1997, pp. 80–82). Records from the Middle Fork Little Red River is a portions of southwest Missouri, 1980s also indicate that the rabbitsfoot headwater tributary of the Little Red southeast Kansas, and northeast
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63454 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Oklahoma. Rabbitsfoot is extant in the reaches within the Gulf Coastal Plain comprehensive survey data for the river Spring River from Missouri Highway 96 ecoregion in southern Arkansas and exists (Butler 2005, p. 83). in Carthage, Jasper County, Missouri, northern Louisiana. The rabbitsfoot is Ouachita River: The Ouachita River is downstream to the confluence of Turkey extant in 7 of 11 historical streams (64 the largest tributary of the Red River, Creek north of Empire, Cherokee percent) within the Red River basin. draining a large portion of southern County, Kansas. Six live rabbitsfoot Little River: The Little River is a Red Arkansas and eastern Louisiana. specimens were collected from four River tributary draining portions of Wheeler (1918, pp. 122–123) observed Missouri sites in the early 1990’s and southeastern Oklahoma and rabbitsfoot in the Ouachita River and 2006 (Obermeyer et al. 1995, p. 48; southwestern Arkansas. Isley (1924, p. declared it ‘‘in nearly every mussel bed Missouri Natural Heritage Database 57) discovered one specimen in 1910. In of the river.’’ Call (1895, p. 15) also 2011). In 2003, a Kansas site (known as 1983, six live individuals were located considered the rabbitsfoot ‘‘abundant.’’ the Pierce Site) located approximately in Sevier County, Arkansas (AGFC The rabbitsfoot is extant in a short reach 0.5 to 0.8 rkm (0.3 to 0.5 rmi) yielded mussel database 2011). Vaughn and (two sites) of the Ouachita River from 10 live rabbitsfoot, including 7 gravid Taylor (1999, p. 920) collected live Arkansas Highway 379 south of Oden, females (Miller 2011). In 2006, KDWP rabbitsfoot specimens at six sites in the Montgomery County, Arkansas, collected eight live rabbitsfoot Little River located downstream of the downstream to Arkansas Highway 298 specimens from one 30 m2 quadrat Glover River confluence. Its east of Pencil Bluff, Montgomery sample (1.9 percent of live mussels ‘‘abundance,’’ defined as the number of County, Arkansas (AGFC Mussel collected) at a site just upstream of mussels found per hour spent searching, Database, 2011). Three reservoirs (Lakes Kansas and Missouri Highway YY. This ranged from 0.6 to 8.0 at these sites. In Ouachita, Hamilton, and Catherine) rabbitsfoot population is categorized as 2002, survey work occurred in the separate the headwaters in the Ouachita small. lowermost section, downstream of Mountains from the Gulf Coastal Plain Illinois River: The Illinois River is an Millwood Reservoir, and no rabbitsfoot reaches in southern Arkansas and Arkansas River tributary draining were located at any of the 14 sites Louisiana. portions of northwest Arkansas and surveyed (Farris et al. 2003, Appendix Researchers collected 38 live northeast Oklahoma. Gordon et al. A). From 2006 to 2008, the AGFC and specimens from 1992 to 2005 at 8 sites (1979, p. 35) surveyed 11 sites in Service collected 89 live rabbitsfoot in Clark, Hot Spring, and Ouachita Arkansas in the 1970s and found only specimens from 13 Little River sites Counties, Arkansas (Posey 1997, a single shell. In 1994, Harris (1998, p. extending from near the Arkansas and Appendix 1.3; Butler 2005, p. 84, Harris 4) found 34 live rabbitsfoot specimens at Oklahoma state line to near U.S. 2006, Appendix 1e—1i; AGFC Mussel 7 of 22 sites in a 48-rkm (30-rmi) reach Highway 71 north of Ashdown, Database, 2011). Posey (1997, Appendix in Washington and Benton counties, Arkansas (AGFC Mussel Database, 1.3) estimated the rabbitsfoot population Arkansas. In 1995, Vaughn (1997, pp. 2011). The rabbitsfoot population is at 1,456 individuals in the Ouachita 28–30) surveyed 45 sites in Oklahoma sizeable and considered viable in this River from rkm 547 to 563 (rmi 340 to and found live rabbitsfoot at 2 sites. A reach of the Little River (Davidson 2011, 350). Rabbitsfoot has not been observed 2008 survey in Benton and Washington pers. comm.). in the Louisiana reach of the Ouachita Counties found 10 live rabbitsfoot at 2 Glover River: The Glover River is a River in over 100 years (Butler 2005, p. of 15 sites extending from just upstream Little River tributary draining portions 84). The Ouachita River population is of Muddy Fork to the Arkansas Highway of southeastern Oklahoma. Museum categorized as small due to its greatly 59 Bridge (Davidson 2011, pers. comm.). records indicate a healthy population of diminished distribution and limited This population is categorized as rabbitsfoot once occupied a 48-rkm (30- evidence of recent recruitment. marginal. rmi) reach of the river (Butler 2005, p. Little Missouri River: The Little Verdigris River: The Verdigris River is 82). An unspecified number of Missouri River originates in the an Arkansas River tributary draining specimens were located in a 1993 to Ouachita Mountains and flows portions of Kansas and Oklahoma. 1995 survey (Vaughn 2000, pp. 229). In southeast to the Ouachita River in Rabbitsfoot is extant in a short reach 1996, researchers systematically southwest Arkansas. The rabbitsfoot is from Oologah Lake dam north of surveyed 22 sites, and rabbitsfoot known from a single collection in 1996 Claremore, Oklahoma, downstream to relative abundance was 0.7 and 3.0 in the lower main stem in Clark County, Interstate 44 (Will Rogers Turnpike) percent at 2 sites (Vaughn 2003, p. 3). Arkansas (Davidson 1997, pp. 46 and west of Catoosa, Rogers County, The Glover River appears to support a 130). The Little Missouri population Oklahoma. Numerous live rabbitsfoot marginal population of rabbitsfoot that likely is a metapopulation with the specimens were collected at three sites is greatly diminished from historical Ouachita River population and is clustered upstream and downstream of accounts (Vaughn 2003, p. 1). categorized as marginal (Butler 2005, p. Oklahoma Highway 20 west of Cossatot River: The Cossatot River is 85). Claremore, Oklahoma, in 2006 and 2007 a Little River tributary draining portions Saline River: The Saline River flows (Boeckman 2008, pers. comm.). of southwestern Arkansas. Few mussel southward through south-central Rabbitsfoot has been extirpated from collections have been made in the Arkansas before converging with the reaches of the Verdigris River upstream Cossatot River. Rabbitsfoot was first Ouachita River at Felsenthal National of Oologah Lake in Kansas and collected in 1970, with evidence of Wildlife Refuge (NWR) north of the Oklahoma. This population is population recruitment (Butler 2005, p. Arkansas and Louisiana State line. Call categorized as marginal due to its 83). Twelve specimens were found in (1895, p. 15) considered the rabbitsfoot restricted distribution. 1983 at a site in Sevier County, ‘‘abundant’’ in the Saline River. Two Arkansas (AGFC mussel database 2011). fresh dead and one live specimen were Red River Basin In 2004, four live specimens were found documented in 1993 and 2006, Streams within the Red River basin at one site (AGFC mussel database respectively, in Grant County (AGFC primarily drain the Ouachita Mountains 2011). Viability of the population is Mussel database 2011). Davidson (1997) in southeastern Oklahoma and doubtful, based on its small size and surveyed the Saline River from the southwestern Arkansas, but extant isolated location, and the population is northern boundary of Felsenthal NWR populations still occur in three stream categorized as marginal. However, no to its confluence with the Ouachita
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63455
River and was unable to locate any live Fisheries Society also consider the combination. Each of these factors is rabbitsfoot. Davidson and Clem (2002, rabbitsfoot to be threatened (in Butler discussed below. p. 17; 2004, p. 16) collected 26 live 2005, p. 21). It is presently extant in 51 A. The Present or Threatened rabbitsfoot specimens from 13 of 230 of the 140 streams of historical Destruction, Modification, or sites from near Tull, Arkansas, to the occurrence, a 64 percent decline. Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range northern boundary of Felsenthal NWR. Further, in the streams where it is Rabbitsfoot comprised 0.2 percent of the extant, populations with few exceptions The habitats of freshwater mussels are total mussel community. In 2005, Harris are highly fragmented and restricted to vulnerable to water quality degradation (2006, Appendix 1b–1d) quantitatively short reaches. In addition, the species and habitat modification from a number sampled three of the sites sampled by has been extirpated from West Virginia of activities associated with modern Davidson and Clem in 2004. He and Georgia. The extirpation of this civilization. The decline, extirpation, collected 24 live rabbitsfoot, species from numerous streams and and extinction of mussel species are representing 0.1 to 0.8 percent of the stream reaches within its historical often attributed to habitat alteration and total mussel community per site. These range signifies that substantial destruction (Neves et al. 1997, pp. 51– sites were resampled in 2011 and four population losses have regularly 52). Bogan (1993, pp. 599–600 and 603– live rabbitsfoot were collected, occurred in each of the past several 605) linked the decline and extinction representing zero to 0.1 percent of the decades. Seventeen streams (33 percent of mussels to a wide variety of threats total mussel community (Davidson of extant populations or 12 percent of including siltation, industrial and 2012, pers. comm.). In 2011, the AGFC historical populations) have small municipal effluents, modification of and Service collected 33 live rabbitsfoot, populations with limited levels of stream channels, impoundments, representing 0.1 to 0.3 percent of the recruitment and are generally highly pesticides, heavy metals, invasive total mussel community. Numerous restricted in distribution, making their species, and the loss of host fish. Chief dead rabbitsfoot were observed near the viability unlikely and making them among the causes of decline in shoreline, apparently having succumbed extremely susceptible to extirpation in distribution and abundance of the to desiccation caused by severe drought the near future. In addition, 15 of those Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, and in conditions (Davidson 2012, pers. 17 streams (88 percent) have no particular order of ranking, are comm.). The rabbitsfoot population is populations that are declining. In many impoundment, channelization, categorized as small due to its ‘‘patchy’’ of these streams, rabbitsfoot is only sedimentation, chemical contaminants, distribution, but there is evidence of known from one or two documented mining, and oil and natural gas recent recruitment (Davidson and Clem individuals in the past decade. Its development (Mather 1990, pp. 18–19; 2004, p. 16; Davidson 2011, pers. viability in these streams is doubtful Obermeyer et al. 1997b, pp. 113–115; comm.). and additional extirpations may occur if Neves et al. 1997, pp. 63–72; Davidson Bayou Bartholomew: Bayou this downward population trend is not 2011, pers. comm.). Neosho mucket and Bartholomew originates in southeast eliminated. Eleven populations located rabbitsfoot are both found within Arkansas and flows south into in historical streams (22 percent of medium to large river drainages exposed Louisiana before converging with the extant populations or 8 percent of to a variety of landscape uses. These Ouachita River. The first record of historical populations; Ohio, Green, threats to mussels in general (and rabbitsfoot in Bayou Bartholomew is Tippecanoe, Tennessee, Paint Rock, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot where from 1992 in Louisiana (Butler 2005, p. Duck, White, Black, Strawberry, and specifically known) are individually 87). One live specimen was found in Little Rivers and French Creek) are discussed below. Louisiana between 2000 and 2001 considered viable (Butler 2005, p. 88; Impoundments (Alley 2005, p. 75). From 2004 to 2005, Service 2010, p. 16). Given this two sites yielded five live and six dead compilation of current distribution, Dams eliminate and alter river flow specimens. A 2004 survey at 50 sites in abundance, and status trend within impounded areas, trap silt the Arkansas portion of Bayou information, the rabbitsfoot exhibits leading to increased sediment Bartholomew did not yield any live, range reductions and population deposition, alter water quality, change dead, or relict rabbitsfoot specimens declines throughout its range. hydrology and channel geomorphology, (Brooks et al. 2008, pp. 9–10). All decrease habitat heterogeneity, affect records since 2000 are from three sites Summary of Factors Affecting the normal flood patterns, and block in Louisiana, two in the middle Species upstream and downstream movement of Louisiana reach and one near the Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) mussels and fish (Layzer et al. 1993, pp. Arkansas state line (Butler 2005, p. 87). and its implementing regulations at 50 68–69; Neves et al. 1997, pp. 63–64; This population is categorized as CFR part 424 set forth the procedures Watters 2000, pp. 261–264). Within marginal. for adding species to the Federal Lists impounded waters, decline of mussels of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife has been attributed to direct loss of Summary of Rabbitsfoot Rangewide and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the supporting habitat, sedimentation, Population Status Act, we may list a species based on any decreased dissolved oxygen, Based on historical and current data, of the following five factors: (A) The temperature levels, and alteration in the rabbitsfoot is declining rangewide. present or threatened destruction, resident fish populations (Neves et al. In ten of the 15 States comprising the modification, or curtailment of its 1997, pp. 63–64; Pringle et al. 2000, pp. rabbitsfoot’s historical range, the species habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 810–815; Watters 2000, pp. 261–264). is considered by State law to be commercial, recreational, scientific, or Downstream of dams, mussel declines endangered (Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, educational purposes; (C) disease or are associated with changes and Mississippi, Ohio, and Pennsylvania); predation; (D) the inadequacy of fluctuation in flow regime, channel threatened (Kentucky and Tennessee); existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) scouring and bank erosion, reduced of special concern (Arkansas); or it is other natural or manmade factors dissolved oxygen levels and water assigned an uncategorized conservation affecting its continued existence. Listing temperatures, and changes in resident status (Alabama). The American actions may be warranted based on any fish assemblages (Williams et al. 1992, Malacological Union and American of the above threat factors, singly or in p. 7; Layzer et al. 1993, p. 69; Neves et
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63456 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
al. 1997, pp. 63–64; Watters 2000, pp. affected by cold tail water releases from watershed lakes have eliminated 265–266; Pringle et al. 2000, pp. 810– dams. Rabbitsfoot and its fish hosts are suitable mussel habitat in several larger 815). Dams that are low to the water warm water species and the change in Neosho River tributaries in Kansas and surface, or have water passing over them temperature to cold water below the Missouri (Spring, Elk and Cottonwood (small low head or mill dams) can have dams further reduces suitable habitat for Rivers and Shoal Creek). The Verdigris some of these same effects on mussels the species and may eliminate fish hosts River (Kansas and Oklahoma) has two and their fish hosts, particularly that cannot adapt to colder water large reservoirs with regulated flows, reducing species richness and evenness temperatures (see the Temperature and the lower section has been and blocking fish host movements section below for more information). channelized as part of the McClellan– (Watters 2000, pp. 261–264; Dean et al. Other tributary impoundments that Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. 2002, pp. 235–238). The decline of adversely affected rabbitsfoot and its All the major Verdigris River tributaries mussels within the Arkansas, Red, fish hosts within the Ohio River basin in Kansas and Oklahoma have been White, Tennessee, Cumberland, include, but are not limited to, the partially inundated by reservoirs with Mississippi, and Ohio River basins has Walhonding, Barren, Rough, and Eel regulated flows and numerous flood been directly attributed to construction Rivers and two rivers with viable control watershed lakes (Obermeyer et of numerous impoundments (Miller et populations, Green and Tippecanoe al. 1995, pp. 7–21). Construction of Lake al. 1984, p. 109; Williams and Schuster Rivers. The majority (7 of 11 Tenkiller eliminated Neosho mucket 1989, pp. 7–10; Layzer et al. 1993, pp. populations or 64 percent) of viable populations and habitat in the lower 68–69; Neves et al. 1997, pp. 63–64; rabbitsfoot populations (Ohio, Green, portion of the Illinois River, Oklahoma Obermeyer et al. 1997b, pp. 113–115; Tippecanoe, Tennessee, Duck, White, (Davidson 2011, pers. comm.). Watters 2000, pp. 262–263; Sickel et al. and Little Rivers) occur downstream of Dam construction has a secondary 2007, pp. 71–78; Hanlon et al. 2009, pp. main stem impoundments that make effect of fragmenting the ranges of 11–12; Watters and Flaute 2010, pp. 3– these populations more susceptible to mussel species by leaving relict habitats 7). Population losses due to altered habitat quality and quantity and populations isolated upstream or impoundments have likely contributed associated with the impoundment or between structures as well as creating more to the decline of the Neosho dam operation, which may be extensive areas of deep uninhabitable, mucket and rabbitsfoot than any other exacerbated during stochastic events impounded waters. These isolated factor. River habitat throughout the such as droughts and floods. populations are unable to naturally ranges of the Neosho mucket and Navigational improvements on the recolonize suitable habitat downstream rabbitsfoot has been impounded, leaving Ohio River began in 1830, and now and become more prone to further short, isolated patches of suitable include 21 lock and dam structures extirpation from stochastic events, such habitat that sometimes lacks suitable stretching from Pittsburgh, as severe drought, chemical spills, or fish hosts. Neither Neosho mucket nor Pennsylvania, to Olmsted, Illinois, near unauthorized discharges (Layzer et al. rabbitsfoot occur in reservoirs lacking its confluence with the Mississippi 1993, pp. 68–69; Cope et al. 1997, pp. riverine characteristics. They are unable River. Lock and dam structures convert 235–237; Neves et al. 1997, pp. 63–75; to successfully reproduce and recruit riverine habitat to unsuitable static Watters 2000, pp. 264–265, 268; Miller under these conditions (Obermeyer et habitat for the mussel and prevent and Payne 2001, pp. 14–15; Pringle et al. 1997b, p. 114; Butler 2005, p. 96). On movement of their fish hosts. Numerous al. 2000, pp. 810–815; Watters and Ohio River tributaries also have been Flaute 2010, pp. 3–7). We conclude that the other hand, rabbitsfoot may persist altered by lock and dam structures. For habitat effects due to impoundment are and even exhibit some level of example, a 116-rkm (72-rmi) stretch of a significant and ongoing threat to the recruitment in some large rivers with the Allegheny River in Pennsylvania has Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. locks and dams where appropriate been altered with nine locks and dams habitat quality and quantity remain Channelization from Armstrong County to Pittsburgh. A (Ohio and Tennessee Rivers in riverine series of six locks and dams were Dredging and channelization reaches between a few locks and dams) constructed on the lower half of the activities have profoundly altered (Butler 2005, p. 96). Green River decades ago that extend riverine habitats nationwide. Hartfield The majority of the main stem Ohio, upstream to the western boundary of (1993, pp. 131–139), Neves et al. (1997, Cumberland, Tennessee, and White Mammoth Cave National Park, pp. 71–72), and Watters (2000, pp. 268– Rivers and many of their largest Kentucky. The declines of rabbitsfoot 269) reviewed the specific upstream and tributaries are impounded, in many populations are attributable to downstream effects of channelization on cases resulting in tail water navigational locks and dams on the freshwater mussels. Channelization (downstream of dam) conditions Ohio, Allegheny, Monongahela, affects a stream physically (accelerates unsuitable for rabbitsfoot (Butler 2005, Muskingum, Kentucky, Green, Barren, erosion, increases sediment bed load, p. 96). There are 36 major dams within and White Rivers, and are widespread reduces water depth, decreases habitat the Tennessee River basin (Holston, throughout the species range. diversity, creates geomorphic (natural Little Tennessee, Clinch, Elk, Flint, and Impoundments have eliminated a channel dimensions) instability, Sequatchie Rivers, and Bear Creek) that large portion of the Neosho mucket eliminates riparian canopy) and have resulted in the impoundment of population and habitat in the Arkansas biologically (decreases fish and mussel 3,680 rkm (2,300 rmi) of the Tennessee River basin. For example, mussel habitat diversity, changes species composition River and its largest tributaries (Butler in the Neosho River in Kansas has been and abundance, decreases biomass, and 2005, p. 95). Only three of these rivers adversely affected by at least 15 city reduces growth rates) (Hartfield 1993, support viable populations—Tennessee, dams and 2 Federal dams, both with pp. 131–139). Channel modification for Paint Rock, and Duck Rivers. Ninety regulated flows. Almost the entire navigation has been shown to increase percent of the Cumberland River length of the river in Oklahoma is now flood heights (Belt 1975, p. 684), partly downstream of Cumberland Falls (rkm impounded or adversely affected by tail as a result of an increase in stream bed 866, rmi 550) as well as numerous water releases from three major dams slope (Hubbard et al. 1993, p. 137). tributaries are either directly (Matthews et al. 2005, p. 308). Several Flood events are exacerbated, conveying impounded or otherwise adversely reservoirs and numerous small large quantities of sediment, potentially
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63457
with adsorbed contaminants, into 212; Brim Box and Mosa 1999, p. 99; Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot streams. Channel maintenance often Fraley and Ahlstedt 2000, pp. 193–194; reproductive strategies depend on clear results in increased turbidity and Poole and Downing 2004, pp. 119–122). water (enables fish hosts to see mussel sedimentation that often smothers Specific biological effects include lures) during critical reproductive mussels (Stansbery 1970, p. 10). reduced feeding and respiratory periods. Channel maintenance operations for efficiency from clogged gills, disrupted Agricultural activities are responsible commercial navigation have affected metabolic processes, reduced growth for much of the sediment affecting rivers habitat for the rabbitsfoot in many large rates, limited burrowing activity, in the United States (Waters 1995, p. rivers rangewide. Periodic navigation physical smothering, and disrupted host 170). Sedimentation associated with maintenance activities (such as dredging fish attraction mechanisms (Ellis 1936, agricultural land use is cited as one of and snag removal) may continue to pp. 39–40; Marking and Bills 1979, p. the primary threats to 7 of the 11 (64 adversely affect this species in the lower 210; Vannote and Minshall 1982, pp. percent) viable rabbitsfoot populations portions of the Ohio, Tennessee, and 4105–4106; Waters 1995, pp. 173–175; (French Creek, Tippecanoe, Paint Rock, White Rivers, which represent 44 Hartfield and Hartfield 1996, p. 373). In Duck, White, Black, and Strawberry percent of the viable rabbitsfoot addition, mussels may be indirectly Rivers; Smith et al. 2009, Table 1; populations. In the Tennessee River, a affected if high turbidity levels USACE 2011, pp. 21–22; Indiana plan to deepen the navigation channel significantly reduce the amount of light Department of Environmental has been proposed (Hubbs 2009, pers. available for photosynthesis, and thus, Management (IDEM) 2001, pp. 11–12; comm.). Some rabbitsfoot streams were the production of certain food items EPA 2001, p. 10; Brueggen 2010, pp. 1– ‘‘straightened’’ to decrease distances (Kanehl and Lyons 1992, p. 7). 2; MDC 2012, http://mdc.mo.gov/ traversed by barge traffic (for example, Studies tend to indicate that the landwater-care/stream-and-watershed- Verdigris River). Hundreds of miles of primary effects of excess sediment management/; EPA Water Quality many midwestern (Eel, North Fork levels on mussels are sublethal, with Assessment Tool, http:// Vermilion, and Embarras Rivers) and detrimental effects not immediately ofmpub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_ southeastern (Paint Rock and St. Francis apparent (Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T). In Rivers and Bear Creek) streams with 101). The physical effects of sediment addition, numerous stream segments in rabbitsfoot populations were on mussel habitat appear to be the Duck, White, Black, Little, and channelized decades ago to reduce the multifold, and include changes in Strawberry River watersheds are listed probability and frequency of flood suspended and bed material load; bed events. Because mussels are relatively sediment composition associated with as impaired waters under section 303(d) immobile they require a stable substrate increased sediment production and of the Clean Water Act (CWA) by EPA to survive and reproduce and are runoff in the watershed; channel due to sedimentation associated with particularly susceptible to channel changes in form, position, and degree of agriculture (USACE 2011, p. 21; EPA instability (Neves et al. 1997, p. 23) and stability; changes in depth or the width Water Quality Assessment Tool, http:// ofmpub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_ alteration. Channel and bank and depth ratio that affects light _ _ _ degradation have led to the loss of stable penetration and flow regime; actively nation cy.control?p report type=T). An substrates in numerous rivers with aggrading (filling) or degrading impaired water is a water body (i.e., commercial navigation throughout the (scouring) channels; and changes in stream reaches, lakes, water body range of rabbitsfoot. While dredging and channel position. These effects to segments) with chronic or recurring channelization have had a greater effect habitat may dislodge, transport monitored violations of the applicable on rabbitsfoot, the Neosho mucket has downstream, or leave mussels stranded numeric or narrative water quality been affected by these activities in the (Vannote and Minshall 1982, p. 4106; criteria. An impaired water cannot Verdigris River. We conclude that Kanehl and Lyons 1992, pp. 4–5; Brim support one or more of its designated habitat effects due to channelization are Box and Mossa 1999, pp. 109–112). For uses (e.g., swimming, the protection and a significant and ongoing threat to the example, many Kansas streams (such as propagation of aquatic life, drinking, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. Verdigris and Neosho Rivers) industrial supply, etc.). Once a stream supporting mussels have become segment is listed as an impaired water, Sedimentation increasingly silted in over the past the State must complete a plan to Excessive sediments are believed to century, reducing habitat for the Neosho address the issue causing the adversely affect riverine mussel mucket and rabbitsfoot (Obermeyer et impairment; this plan is called a Total populations requiring clean, stable al. 1997a, pp. 113–114). Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). A TMDL streams (Ellis 1936, pp. 39–40; Brim Box Increased sedimentation and siltation is a calculation of the maximum amount and Mossa 1999, p. 99). Adverse effects may explain in part why Neosho mucket of a pollutant that a water body can resulting from sediments have been and rabbitsfoot are experiencing receive and still safely meet water noted for many components of aquatic recruitment failure in some streams. quality standards (WQS). Completion of communities. Potential sediment Interstitial spaces in the substrate the plan is generally all that is required sources within a watershed include provide crucial habitat (shelter and to remove the stream segment from the virtually all activities that disturb the nutrient uptake) for juvenile mussel 303(d) impaired water list and does not land surface. Most localities occupied survival. When interstitial spaces are mean that water quality has changed. by the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, clogged, interstitial flow rates and Once the TMDL is completed, the including viable populations, are spaces are reduced (Brim Box and stream segment may be placed on the currently being affected to varying Mossa 1999, p. 100), and this decreases 305(b) list of impaired streams with a degrees by sedimentation. habitat for juvenile mussels. completed TMDL (http://water.epa.gov/ Sedimentation has been implicated in Furthermore, sediment may act as a lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/ the decline of mussel populations vector for delivering contaminants, such intro.cfm). For example, some stream nationwide, and remains a threat to as nutrients and pesticides, to streams, segments within the White, Barren, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot (Ellis and juvenile mussels may ingest Little River Mountain Fork, and Wabash 1936, pp. 39–40; Vannote and Minshall contaminants adsorbed to silt particles Rivers, and French Creek have 1982, pp. 4105–4106; Dennis 1984, p. during normal feeding activities. completed TMDL plans and have
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63458 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
attained WQS for low dissolved oxygen, compounds, heavy metals, nutrients, and rabbitsfoot are surface water, pathogens, nutrients, polychlorinated pesticides, and a wide variety of newly sediment, interstitial (pore) water, and biphenyls (PCBs), and siltation. emerging contaminants such as diet; adults can be exposed when either However, some of these same stream pharmaceuticals to the aquatic partially or completely burrowed in the segments still have not attained WQS environment. As a result, water and substrate (Cope et al. 2008, p. 453). for lead (Little River Mountain Fork) sediment quality can be degraded to the Adult mussels have the ability to detect and mercury (Wabash River). extent that results in adverse effects to toxicants in the water and close their Impaired streams in the Duck River mussel populations. valves to avoid exposure (Van Hassel watershed (approximately 483 rkm (300 Cope et al. (2008, p. 451) evaluated and Farris 2007, p. 6). Adult mussel rmi)) are losing 5 to 55 percent more soil the pathways of exposure to toxicity and relative sensitivity per year than the natural streams environmental pollutants for all four (exposure and uptake of toxicants) may (USACE 2011, pp. 21–22). Unrestricted freshwater mollusk life stages (free be reduced at high rather than at low livestock access occurs on many streams glochidia, encysted glochidia, juveniles, toxicant concentrations because uptake and potentially threatens associated adults) and found that each life stage is affected by the prolonged or periodic mussel populations (Fraley and has both common and unique toxicant avoidance responses (when the Ahlstedt 2000, pp. 193–194). Grazing characteristics that contribute to avoidance behavior of keeping their may reduce water infiltration rates and observed differences in exposure and valves closed can no longer be sustained increase runoff; trampling and sensitivity. Almost nothing is known of for physiological reasons (respiration vegetation removal increases the the potential mechanisms and and ability to feed) (Cope et al. 2008, p. probability of erosion (Armour et al. consequences of waterborne toxicants 454). Toxicity results based on low-level 1991, pp. 8–10; Brim Box and Mossa on sperm viability. In the female exposure of adults are similar to 1999, p. 103). mollusk, the marsupial region of the gill estimates for glochidia and juveniles for As discussed above, specific impacts is thought to be physiologically isolated some toxicants (for example, copper). on mussels from sediments include from respiratory functions, and this The duration of any toxicant avoidance reduced feeding and respiratory isolation may provide some level of response by an adult mussel is likely to efficiency, disrupted metabolic protection from contaminant vary due to several variables, such as processes, reduced growth rates, interference with a female’s ability to species, age, shell thickness and gape, increased substrata instability, and the achieve fertilization or brood glochidia properties of the toxicant, and water physical smothering of mussels. (Cope et al. 2008, p. 454). A major temperature. There is a lack of Increased turbidity levels due to exception to this assertion is with information on toxicant response(s) for siltation can be a limiting factor that chemicals that act directly on the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, but impedes the ability of sight-feeding neuroendocrine pathways controlling results of tests using glochidia and fishes to forage. Turbidity within the reproduction (see discussion below). juveniles may be valuable for protecting rivers and streams during the times that Nutritional and ionic exchange is adults (Cope et al. 2008, p. 454). the mussels attempt to attract host fishes possible between a brooding female and may have contributed and may continue her glochidia, providing a route for Mussels are very intolerant of heavy to contribute to the decline of the chemicals (accumulated or waterborne) metals (such as lead, zinc, cadmium, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot by to disrupt biochemical and and copper) compared to commonly reducing their efficiency at attracting physiological pathways (such as tested aquatic organisms. Metals occur the fish hosts necessary for maternal calcium transport for in industrial and wastewater effluents reproduction. In addition, sediment can construction of the glochidial shell). and are often a result of atmospheric eliminate or reduce the recruitment of Glochidia can be exposed to waterborne deposition from industrial processes juvenile mussels, interfere with feeding contaminants for up to 36 hours until and incinerators, but also are associated activity, and act as a vector in delivering encystment occurs; between 2 and 36 with mine water runoff (for example, contaminants to streams. Because the hours, and then from fish host tissue Tri-State Mining Area in southwest Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot are burdens (for example, atrazine), that last Missouri) and have been attributed to filter-feeders and may bury themselves from weeks to months and could affect mussel declines in streams such as in the substrate, they are exposed to transformation success of glochidia into Shoal, Center, and Turkey Creeks and these contaminants contained within juveniles (Ingersoll et al. 2007, pp. 101– Spring River in the Arkansas River basin suspended particles and deposited in 104). (Angelo et al. 2007, pp. 485–489), which bottom substrates. We conclude that Juvenile mussels typically remain are streams with historical and extant biological and habitat effects due to burrowed beneath the sediment surface Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot sedimentation are a significant and for 2 to 4 years. Residence beneath the populations. Heavy metals can cause ongoing threat to the Neosho mucket sediment surface necessitates deposit mortality and affect biological and rabbitsfoot. (pedal) feeding and a reliance on processes, for instance, disrupting interstitial water for dissolved oxygen enzyme efficiency, altering filtration Chemical Contaminants (Watters 2007, p. 56). The relative rates, reducing growth, and changing Chemical contaminants are importance of exposure of juvenile behavior of freshwater mussels (Keller ubiquitous in the environment and are Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot to and Zam 1991, p. 543; Naimo 1995, pp. considered a major threat in the decline contaminants in overlying surface 351–355; Jacobson et al. 1997, p. 2390; of mussel species (Richter et al. 1997, p. water, interstitial water, whole Valenti et al. 2005, p. 1244; Wang et al. 1081; Strayer et al. 2004, p. 436; Wang sediment, or food has not been 2007b, pp. 2039–2046; Wang et al. et al. 2007a, p. 2029; Cope et al. 2008, adequately assessed. Exposure to 2007c, pp. 2052–2055; Wang et al. 2010, p. 451). Chemicals enter the contaminants from each of these routes p. 2053). Mussel recruitment may be environment through point and varies with certain periods and reduced in habitats with low but nonpoint discharges including spills, environmental conditions (Cope et al. chronic heavy metal and other toxicant industrial and municipal effluents, and 2008, pp. 453 and 457). inputs (Yeager et al. 1994, p. 217; Naimo residential and agricultural runoff. The primary routes of exposure to 1995, pp. 347 and 351–352; Ahlstedt These sources contribute organic contaminants for adult Neosho mucket and Tuberville 1997, p. 75). Newly
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63459
transformed juveniles (age at 5 days) are addition, studies have shown that mussel population-wide effects, more sensitive to acute toxicity than ammonia concentrations increase with including reduced fecundity and glochidia or older juveniles (age at 2 to increasing temperature, pH, and low chronic maladies due to PCB exposure 6 months) (Wang et al. 2010, p. 2062). flow conditions (Cherry et al. 2005, p. (Lehmann et al. 2007, p. 363). Two of Mercury is another heavy metal that 378; Cooper et al. 2005, p. 381; Wang et the 11 viable rabbitsfoot populations (18 has the potential to negatively affect al. 2007, p. 2045), which may be percent) inhabit waters listed as mussel populations. Mercury has been exacerbated by the effects of climate impaired due to PCBs under section detected throughout aquatic change, and may cause ammonia (un- 303(d) of the CWA. environments as a product of municipal ionized and ionized) to become more Agriculture, timber harvest, and lawn and industrial waste and atmospheric problematic for juvenile mussels (Wang management practices utilize nutrients deposition from coal-burning plants. et al. 2007, p. 2045). Sublethal effects and pesticides. These are two broad One study on rainbow mussel (Villosa include, but may not be limited to, categories of chemical contaminants iris) concluded that glochidia were more reduced time the valves are held open that have the potential to adversely sensitive to mercury than were juvenile for respiration and feeding; impaired impact mussel species. Nutrients, such mussels, with a median lethal secretion of the byssal thread (used for as nitrogen and phosphorus, primarily concentration value of 14 ug/L for substrate attachment), reduced ciliary occur in runoff from livestock farms, glochidia and 114 ug/L for juvenile action impairing feeding, depleted lipid, feedlots, heavily fertilized row crops mussels (Valenti et al. 2005, p. 1242). glycogen, and other carbohydrate stores, and pastures (Peterjohn and Correll The chronic toxicity is a test which and altered metabolism (Goodreau et al. 1984, p. 1471), post timber management usually measures sublethal effects (e.g., 1993, pp. 216–227; Augspurger et al. activities, and urban and suburban reduced growth or reproduction) in 2003, pp. 2571–2574; Mummert et al. runoff, including leaking septic tanks, addition to lethality. These tests are 2003, pp. 2548–2552). and residential lawns. usually longer in duration or conducted Studies have shown that excessive Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are during some sensitive period of an nitrogen concentrations can be lethal to ubiquitous contaminants in the organism’s life cycle. For this species, the adult freshwater pearl mussel environment due to their widespread the chronic toxicity test showed that (Margaritifera margaritifera) and reduce use from the 1920s to 1970s as juveniles exposed to mercury greater the lifespan and size of other mussel insulating material in electric than or equal to 8 ug/L exhibited species (Bauer 1988, p. 244; Bauer 1992, equipment, such as transformers and reduced growth (Valenti et al. 2005, p. p. 425). Nutrient enrichment can result 1245). Mercury also affects oxygen capacitors, as well as in heat transfer in an increase in primary productivity, consumption, byssal thread production, fluids and in lubricants. PCBs have also and the associated algae respiration and filtration rates (Naimo 1995, been used in a wide range of products, depletes dissolved oxygen levels. This Jacobsen et al. 1997, and Nelson and such as plasticizers, surface coatings, may be particularly detrimental to Calabrese 1988 in Valenti et al. 2005, p. inks, adhesives, flame retardants, paints, juvenile mussels that inhabit the 1245). Effects to mussels from mercury and carbonless duplicating paper. PCBs interstitial spaces in the substrate where toxicity may be occurring in some were still being introduced into the lower dissolved oxygen concentrations streams due to illegal dumping, spills, environment at many sites (such as are more likely than on the sediment and permit violations. For example, landfills and incinerators) until the surface where adults tend to live acute mercury toxicity was determined 1990s. The inherent stability and (Sparks and Strayer 1998, pp. 132–133). to be the cause of extirpation of diverse toxicity of PCBs have resulted in them For example, Galbraith et al. (2008, pp. mussel fauna for a 112-rkm (70-rmi) being a persistent environmental 48–49) reported a massive die-off of reach of the North Fork Holston River problem (Safe 1994 in Lehmann et al. greater than 160 rabbitsfoot specimens (Brown et al. 2005, pp. 1455–1457). Of 2007, p. 356). PCBs are lipophilic at a long-term monitoring site in the the 11 viable rabbitsfoot populations, 4 (affinity to combine with fats or lipids), Little River, Oklahoma. While the exact populations (French Creek, Duck River, adsorb easily to soil and sediment, and cause for the die-off is unknown, the Green River, and Ohio River) currently are present in the sediment and water authors speculate that the 2005 inhabit river reaches that are impaired column in aquatic environments, Oklahoma drought coupled with high by mercury and are listed as impaired making them available to bioaccumulate water temperature and extensive blooms waters under section 303(d) of the CWA. and induce negative effects in living of filamentous algae may have resulted One chemical that is particularly toxic organisms (Livingstone 2001 in in extreme physiological stress. Over- to early life stages of mussels is Lehmann et al. 2007, p. 356). Studies enriched conditions are exacerbated by ammonia. Sources of ammonia include have demonstrated increased PCB low flow conditions, such as those agricultural wastes (animal feedlots and concentrations in native freshwater experienced during a typical summer nitrogenous fertilizers), municipal mussels (Ruessler et al. 2011, pp. 1, 7), season and that may occur with greater wastewater treatment plants, and marine bivalves (Krishnakumar et al. frequency and severity as a result of industrial waste (Augspurger et al. 2007, 1994, p. 249), and nonnative, invasive climate change. Three of the 11 viable p. 2026) as well as precipitation and mollusks (zebra mussels and Asian rabbitsfoot populations (French Creek, natural processes (decomposition of clams) (Gossiaux et al. 1996, p. 379; Duck River, and Tippecanoe River) are organic nitrogen) (Goudreau et al. 1993, Lehmann et al. 2007, p. 363) in areas listed as impaired waters under section p. 212; Hickey and Martin 1999, p. 44; with high levels of PCBs. Oxidative 303(d) of the CWA due to nutrient Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2569; Newton stress (imbalance in the normal redox enrichment. 2003, p. 1243). Therefore, ammonia is state of cells that causes toxic effects Elevated concentrations of pesticide considered a limiting factor for survival that damage all components of the cell, frequently occur in streams due to and recovery of some mussel species including proteins, lipids, and DNA) is residential or commercial pesticide due to its ubiquity in aquatic a direct consequence of exposure to runoff, overspray application to row environments and high level of toxicity, PCBs. Relevant changes, whether crops, and lack of adequate riparian and because the highest concentrations directly or indirectly due to oxidative buffers. Agricultural pesticide typically occur in mussel microhabitats stress, may occur at the organ and applications often coincide with the (Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2574). In organism levels and will likely result in reproductive and early life stages of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63460 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
mussels, and effects to mussels may be development and livestock production gravel mining has been implicated in increased during a critical time period areas (Kolpin et al. 2002, pp. 1208– the destruction of mussel populations (Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2094). Recent 1210). Another study in northwestern (Hartfield 1993, pp. 136–138; Brim Box studies tested the toxicity of glyphosate, Arkansas found pharmaceuticals or and Mossa 1999, pp. 103–104). Negative its formulations, and a surfactant (MON other organic wastewater constituents at effects associated with gravel mining 0818) used in several glyphosate 16 of 17 sites in seven streams surveyed include stream channel modifications formulations, to early life stages of the in 2004 (Galloway et al. 2005, pp. 4–22). (altered habitat, disrupted flow patterns, fatmucket (Lampsilis siliquoidea), a U.S. Toxic levels of exposure to chemicals sediment transport), water quality native freshwater mussel (Bringolf et al. that act directly on the neuroendocrine modifications (increased turbidity, 2007a, p. 2094). Studies conducted with pathways controlling reproduction can reduced light penetration, increased juvenile mussels and glochidia cause premature release of viable or temperature), macroinvertebrate determined that the surfactant (MON nonviable glochidia. For example, the population changes (elimination), and 0818) was the most toxic of the active ingredient in many human changes in fish populations, resulting compounds tested and that L. prescription antidepressant drugs from adverse effects to spawning and siliquoidea glochidia were the most belonging to the class of selective nursery habitat and food web sensitive organism tested to date serotonin reuptake inhibitors may exert disruptions (Kanehl and Lyons 1992, (Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2094). negative reproductive effects on mussels pp. 4–10). Gravel mining activities Roundup®, technical grade glyphosate because of the drug’s action on continue to be a localized threat in isopropylamine salt, and serotonin and other neuroendocrine several streams with viable rabbitsfoot isopropylamine were also acutely toxic pathways (Cope et al. 2008, p. 455). populations (Ohio, Tennessee, White, to juveniles and glochidia (Bringolf et Pharmaceuticals or organic wastewater Strawberry, and Little Rivers). In the al. 2007a, p. 2097). The study of other constituents are generally greater lower Tennessee River, instream mining pesticides, including atrazine, downstream of wastewater treatment occurs in 18 reaches totaling 77.1 rkm chlorpyrifos, and permethrin, on facilities (Galloway et al. 2005, p. 28). (47.9 rmi) between the Duck River glochidia and juvenile life stages Pharmaceuticals that alter mussel confluence and Pickwick Landing Dam determined that chlorpyrifos was toxic behavior and influence successful (Hubbs 2010, pers. comm.). to both L. siliquoidea glochidia and attachment of glochidia on fish hosts Coal mining activities, resulting in juveniles (Bringolf et al. 2007b, pp. 2101 may have population-level implications heavy metal-rich drainage, and and 2104). The above results indicate for the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. associated sedimentation has adversely the potential toxicity of commonly The information presented in this affected many drainages with rabbitsfoot applied pesticides and the threat to section represents some of the threats populations, including portions of the mussel species as a result of the from chemical contaminants that have upper Ohio River system in Kentucky, widespread use of these pesticides. been documented both in the laboratory Pennsylvania, and West Virginia; the There are instances where chemical and field and demonstrates that lower Ohio River system in eastern spills have resulted in the loss of high chemical contaminants pose a Illinois; the Rough River drainage in numbers of mussels (Jones et al. 2001, substantial threat to Neosho mucket and western Kentucky; and the upper p. 20; Brown et al. 2005, p. 1457; rabbitsfoot. A cursory examination of Cumberland River system in Kentucky Schmerfeld 2006, pp. 12–13), and are land use trends, non-point and point and Tennessee (Ortmann 1909 in Butler considered a serious threat to mussel source discharges, and the list of 2005, p. 102; Gordon 1991, pp. 4 and 5; species. The Neosho mucket and impaired waters under section 303(d) of Layzer and Anderson 1992 in Butler rabbitsfoot are especially threatened by the CWA suggests that all 11 rabbitsfoot 2005, p. 102). Numerous mussel chemical spills because these spills can populations currently considered viable toxicants, such as polycyclic aromatic occur anywhere that highways with may be subjected to the subtle, hydrocarbons and heavy metals (copper, tanker trucks, industries, or mines pervasive effects of chronic, low-level manganese, and zinc) from coal mining overlap with their distribution. contamination that is ubiquitous in contaminate sediments when released Other examples of the influence of these watersheds. For example, 8 of the into streams (Ahlstedt and Tuberville point and nonpoint-source pollutants on 11 (73 percent) streams with viable 1997, p. 75). Low pH commonly streams throughout the range of the rabbitsfoot populations are listed as associated with mine runoff can reduce Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot include impaired waters under section 303(d) of glochidial attachment rates on host fish two documented mussel kills in Fish the CWA. Reasons for impairment (Huebner and Pynnonen 1990, pp. Creek (circa 1988) as a result of manure include mercury, nutrients, organic 2350–2353). Thus, acid mine runoff may runoff from a hog farm and a diesel spill enrichment and dissolved oxygen have local effects on mussel recruitment (Watters 1988, p. 18). Twelve point- depletion, pathogens, turbidity and may lead to mortality due to source discharges occur on the Green (sediment), and PCBs. Potential effects improper shell development or erosion. River (Kentucky State Nature Preserves from contaminant exposure may result Metal mining (lead, cadmium, and Commission and The Nature in death, reduced growth, altered zinc) in the Tri-State Mining Area Conservancy 1998, pp. 15–19). The metabolic processes, or reduced (15,000 km2; 5,800 mi2 in Kansas, Illinois River, a tributary of the reproduction. We conclude that Missouri, and Oklahoma) has adversely Arkansas River, is subject to nonpoint- biological and habitat effects due to affected Center and Shoal Creeks and source organic runoff from poultry chemical contaminants are a significant the Spring River. It has been implicated farming and municipal wastewater. and ongoing threat contributing to the in the loss of Neosho mucket and Pharmaceutical chemicals used in decline of Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot from portions of these commonly consumed drugs are rabbitsfoot populations. streams (Obermeyer et al. 1997b, p. increasingly found in surface waters. A 114). A study by Kansas Department of recent nationwide study sampling 139 Mining Health and Environment documented a stream sites in 30 States detected the Gravel, coal, and metal mining are strong negative correlation between the presence of numerous pharmaceuticals, activities negatively affecting water distribution and abundance of native hormones, and other organic wastewater quality in Neosho mucket and mussels, including Neosho mucket, and contaminants downstream from urban rabbitsfoot habitat. Instream and alluvial sediment concentrations of lead, zinc
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63461
and cadmium in the Spring River Arkansas, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and during stochastic events such as system (Angelo et al. 2007, pp. 477– West Virginia. Although oil and natural droughts and floods. Sedimentation 493). Sediment and water quality gas extraction generally occurs away resulting from a variety of sources such samples exceeded EPA 2006 threshold from the river, extensive road and as channelization, agricultural and effect concentrations for cadmium, lead, pipeline networks are required to silvicultural practices, and construction and zinc at numerous sampling construct and maintain wells and activities has degraded Neosho mucket locations within the Tri-State Mining transport the extracted resources. These and rabbitsfoot habitat and altered Area (Gunter 2007, pers. comm.). These road and pipeline networks frequently biological processes essential to their physical habitat threats combined with cross or occur near tributaries, survival. For example, sedimentation poor water quality and agricultural contributing sediment to the receiving associated with agricultural land use is nonpoint-source pollution are serious waterway. In addition, the construction cited as one of the primary threats to 7 threats to all existing mussel fauna in and operation of wells may result in the the basin. discharge of chemical contaminants and of the 11 (64 percent) streams with In the St. Francis River basin, past subsurface minerals. Several of the viable rabbitsfoot populations. Land use metal mining and smelting (early viable rabbitsfoot populations occur in conversion, particularly urbanization eighteenth century through the 1940s) active shale basins (areas of shale gas that increases impervious surfaces in have resulted in continuing heavy metal formations) (http://www.eia.gov/ watersheds (impervious surface (lead, iron, nickel, copper, cobalt, zinc, analysis/studies/worldshalegas/). In increases flood intensity and duration), cadmium, chromium) contamination of 2006, more than 3,700 permits were channelization, and instream gravel and surface waters in the area upstream of issued for oil and gas wells by the sand mining alter natural hydrology and the extant rabbitsfoot population. Pennsylvania Department of stream geomorphology characteristics Recent and historical metals mining and Environmental Protection, which also that also degrade mussel habitat in smelting produced large volumes of issued 98 citations for permit violations streams that support the Neosho mucket contaminated wastes. Most of these at 54 wells (Hopey 2007; adapted from and rabbitsfoot. Contaminants mining wastes are stored behind poorly Service 2008, p. 13). A natural gas associated with industrial and constructed dams and impoundments pipeline company pled guilty to three municipal effluents, agricultural (Roberts 2008, pers. comm.). violations of the Act in 2011 for practices, and mining degrade water and Wappapello Reservoir and the unauthorized take of a federally sediment quality leading to confluence with Big Creek (with habitat endangered mussel in Arkansas as a environmental conditions that have degradation primarily from mining result of a large amount of sediment lethal and sublethal effects to Neosho activities) may effectively limit the being transported from pipeline right-of- mucket and rabbitsfoot, particularly the distribution of the rabbitsfoot in the St. ways to tributary streams in the affected highly sensitive early life stages. Eight Francis River. We conclude that watershed (Department of Justice 2011, biological and habitat effects due to pers. comm.). Where oil and natural gas of the 11 (73 percent) streams with mining activities are a significant and development occurs within the range of viable rabbitsfoot populations are listed ongoing threat contributing to declining extant Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot as impaired waters under section 303(d) Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot populations, we conclude that the of the CWA, which means that the populations. resulting biological and habitat effects rabbitsfoot may be subjected to the subtle, pervasive effects of chronic, low- Oil and Natural Gas Development are a significant and ongoing threat contributing to the decline of both level contamination that is ubiquitous Oil and natural gas resources are species. in these watersheds. Chronic present in some of the watersheds that contamination can affect the mussels in Summary of Factor A are known to support rabbitsfoot, a variety of ways including sublethal including the Allegheny and Middle The decline of mussels in the eastern effects (such as suppressed immune Fork Little Red Rivers and two United States is primarily the result of systems and effects to reproduction and watersheds with viable populations long-lasting direct and secondary effects fecundity from neuroendocrine (White River and French Creek). of habitat alterations such as disrupters) and lethal effects (such as Exploration and extraction of these impoundments, channelization, sediment smothers and disruption of energy resources can result in increased sedimentation, chemical contaminants, other metabolic processes). siltation, a changed hydrograph (graph oil and gas development, and mining showing changes in the discharge of a and it is reasonable to conclude that the In summary, we have determined that river over a period of time), and altered changes in the river basins historically impoundments, channelization, water quantity and quality even at and currently occupied by the species sedimentation, chemical contaminants, considerable distances from the mine or are the cause of population level (river mining, and oil and natural gas well field because effects are carried basin) effects. Historical population development are significant, ongoing downstream from the original source. losses due to impoundments have threats to the Neosho mucket and Rabbitsfoot habitat in streams can be probably contributed more to the rabbitsfoot that are expected to continue threatened by the cumulative effects of decline and range reductions of the into the future. Although efforts have multiple mines and well fields (adapted Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot than any been made to restore habitat in some from Service 2008, p. 11). other single factor. Seven of the 11 (64 areas, these threats are still ongoing, as Recently, oil and gas exploration has percent) viable rabbitsfoot populations evidenced by population declines and been able to expand in areas of shale (Ohio, Green, Tippecanoe, Tennessee, range reduction. Thus, these changes in due to new technologies (i.e., hydraulic Duck, White, and Little Rivers) occur the species’ historical or current range fracturing and horizontal drilling), downstream of main stem are not expected to be ameliorated in making access possible to oil and gas impoundments that make these the future; therefore, we find it reserves in areas that were previously populations more susceptible to altered inaccessible. Extraction of these habitat quality and quantity associated reasonably likely that the effects of these resources, particularly natural gas, has with the impoundment and dam threats on both species will continue at increased dramatically in recent years in operation, which may be exacerbated current levels or potentially increase.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63462 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
B. Overutilization for Commercial, parasites include water mites, nonbiting midge larvae, dragonfly Recreational, Scientific, or Educational trematodes, oligochaetes, leeches, larvae, and crayfish, feed on juvenile Purposes copepods, bacteria, and protozoa mussels (Zimmerman et al. 2003, p. 28). The Neosho mucket was valuable in (Grizzle and Brunner 2007, p. 4). Although predation by naturally the pearl button industry (1800s to early Generally, parasites are not suspected of occurring predators is a normal aspect being a major limiting factor in the of the population dynamics of a healthy 1940s), and historical episodes of species’ survival (Oesch 1984, p. 6). mussel population, predation may overharvest in the Neosho River may However, mite and trematode burdens amplify declines in small populations of have contributed to its decline can affect reproductive output and this species. In addition, the potential (Obermeyer et al. 1997b, p. 115). The physiological condition, respectively, in now exists for black carp rabbitsfoot was never a valuable shell mussels (Gangloff et al. 2008, pp. 28– (Mylopharyngodon piceus), a mollusk- for the commercial pearl button 30). Stressors that reduce fitness may eating Asian fish recently introduced industry (Meek and Clark 1912, p. 15; make mussels more susceptible to into the waters of the United States Murray and Leonard 1962, p. 65), nor parasites (Butler 2007, p. 90). (Strayer 1999b, p. 89), to eventually the cultured pearl industry (Williams Furthermore, nonnative mussels may disperse throughout the range of the and Schuster 1989, p. 23), and hence carry diseases and parasites that are Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. these activities were probably not potentially devastating to the native However, we have no evidence that the significant factors in its decline. mussel fauna on an individual or severity of predation has reached levels However, it was noted occasionally in population level basis (river basin), where populations (river basin) of either commercial harvests as evidenced from including Neosho mucket and mussel have been historically or mussel cull piles (Isely 1924; Parmalee rabbitsfoot (Strayer 1999b, p. 88). recently impacted or should be et al. 1980, p. 101). Currently, Neosho However, while individual mussels or impacted in the future based on current mucket and rabbitsfoot are not beds of mussels historically or currently information. commercially valuable species but may may have been affected by disease or The life cycle of freshwater mussels is be increasingly sought by collectors as parasites, we have no evidence that the intimately related to that of the they become rarer. Although scientific severity of disease or parasite freshwater fish they use as hosts for collecting is not thought to represent a infestations impact either mussel on a their parasitic glochidia. For this reason, significant threat, unregulated collecting population level (river basin). diseases that affect populations of could adversely affect localized Neosho The muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) is freshwater fishes also pose a significant mucket and rabbitsfoot populations. cited as the most prevalent mussel threat to mussels in general. Viral Commercial mussel harvest is illegal predator (Kunz 1898, p. 328; Convey et hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) disease in some States (for example, Indiana al. 1989, p. 654–655; Hanson et al. 1989, has been confirmed from much of the and Ohio), but regulated in others (for pp. 15–16). Muskrat predation may limit Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River example, Arkansas, Alabama, Kentucky, the recovery potential of endangered or system. If the VHS virus successfully and Tennessee). These species may be threatened mussels or contribute to migrates out of Clearfork Reservoir or inadvertently harvested by local extirpations of previously stressed the Great Lakes and into the Ohio and inexperienced commercial harvesters populations, according to Neves and Mississippi River basins, it could spread unfamiliar with species identification. Odom (1989, p. 940), who consider it, rapidly and cause fish kills throughout Although illegal harvest of protected however, primarily a seasonal or the river basins. Few Neosho mucket mussel beds occurs (Watters and Dunn localized threat. Galbraith et al. (2008, and rabbitsfoot populations are 1995, pp. 225 and 247–250), commercial p. 49) hypothesized that predation may currently recruiting at sustainable harvest is not known to have a have exacerbated rabbitsfoot mortality levels, and fish kills, particularly if VHS significant effect on the Neosho mucket in the Little River, Oklahoma, during infects suitable fish hosts, could further and rabbitsfoot. the 2005 drought. Harris et al. (2007, p. reduce glochidia encounters with fish Summary of Factor B 31) reported numerous dead rabbitsfoot hosts and exacerbate mussel recruitment from muskrat middens (mound or reductions. However, we have no Though it is possible that the deposit containing shells) in the Spring evidence that fish kills affecting intensity of inadvertent or illegal River, Arkansas. Other mammals (for potential fish hosts of these two mussel harvest may increase in the future, there example, raccoon, mink, otter, hogs, and species have had population affects is no evidence that this stressor is rats), turtles, and aquatic birds also historically or recently. currently increasing in severity. On the occasionally feed on mussels (Kunz Summary of Factor C basis of this analysis, we find that 1898, p. 328; Neck 1986, pp. 64–65). overutilization for commercial, Recently, predation of Neosho mucket Disease in mussels is poorly known recreational, scientific, or educational by reintroduced otters has been and not currently considered a threat purposes is not a current threat to the documented in a mussel bed also rising to a level such that it would have Neosho mucket or rabbitsfoot in any supporting rabbitsfoot in the Spring an effect on the Neosho mucket, nor the portion of their range at this time nor is River, Kansas (Barnhart 2003, pp. 16– rabbitsfoot, as a whole. Studies indicate likely to become so in the future. 17), and likely occurs elsewhere. that, in some localized areas, disease Muskrat predation has been and predation may have negative effects C. Disease or Predation documented for Neosho mucket and on mussel populations. Though it is Little is known about diseases in rabbitsfoot, but the overall threat is possible that the intensity of disease or freshwater mussels (Grizzle and generally considered insignificant. predation may increase in the future, Brunner 2007, p. 6). However, mussel Some species of fish feed on mussels there is no evidence that this stressor is die-offs have been documented in (for example, common carp (Cyprinus currently increasing in severity. Based streams inhabited by rabbitsfoot (Neves carpio), freshwater drum (Aplodinotus on our analysis of the best available 1986, pp. 8–11), and some researchers grunniens), and redear sunfish (Lepomis scientific and commercial data believe that disease may be a factor microlophus)) and potentially on young available, we find that neither disease contributing to the die-offs (Buchanan Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. Various nor predation is a significant threat to 1986, p. 53; Neves 1986, p. 11). Mussel invertebrates, such as flatworms, hydra, the overall status of Neosho mucket and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63463
rabbitsfoot, nor is either likely to (USACE 2011, pp. 21–22). Currently, the on this matter, and solicit information become so in the future. CWA may not adequately protect especially regarding water quality data Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot habitat that may be helpful in determining the D. The Inadequacy of Existing from NPS pollution. The Service has no water quality parameters necessary for Regulatory Mechanisms information concerning the these species’ survival (see Information The objective of the Federal Water implementation of the CWA regarding Requested, item #4). Pollution Control Act, commonly NPS pollution specific to protection of Summary of Factor D referred to as the Clean Water Act both mussels. However, insufficient (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), is to implementation could become a threat In summary, the CWA has a stated restore and maintain the chemical, to both mussel species if they continue goal to establish water quality standards physical, and biological integrity of the to decline in numbers or if new that protect aquatic species, including nation’s waters by preventing point and information becomes available. the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. nonpoint pollution sources. The CWA Point-source discharges within the However, the CWA has generally been has a stated goal that ‘‘* * *wherever range of the Neosho mucket and insufficient at protecting mussels, and attainable, an interim goal of water rabbitsfoot have been reduced since the adequate water quality criteria that are quality which provides for the enactment of the CWA. Despite some protective of all life stages, particularly protection and propagation of fish, reductions in point source discharges, glochidia and juveniles, may not be shellfish, and wildlife and provides for adequate protection may not be established. Little information is known recreation in and on the water be about specific sensitivities of mussels to achieved by July 1, 1983.’’ States are provided by the CWA for filter-feeding organisms that can be affected by various pollutants, but both species responsible for setting and continue to decline due to the effects of implementing water quality standards extremely low levels of contaminants (see Chemical Contaminants discussion habitat destruction, poor water quality, that align with the requirements of the contaminants, and other factors. Based CWA. Overall, implementation of the under Factor A). The Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot continue to decline due on our analysis of the best available CWA could benefit both mussel species scientific and commercial data, we through the point and nonpoint to the effects of habitat destruction, poor water quality, contaminants, and other conclude that the CWA is inadequate to programs. reduce or remove threats to the Neosho Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution factors. Eight of the 11 (73 percent) streams with viable rabbitsfoot mucket and rabbitsfoot throughout all of comes from many diffuse sources, their range. unlike pollution from industrial and populations are listed as impaired sewage treatment plants. NPS pollution waters under section 303(d) of the CWA. E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors is caused by rainfall or snowmelt Reasons for impairment include Affecting Its Continued Existence mercury, nutrients, organic enrichment, moving over and through the ground. As Population Fragmentation and Isolation the runoff moves, it transports natural dissolved oxygen depletion, pathogens, and human-made pollutants. While turbidity (sediment), and PCBs. In Population fragmentation and some pollutants may be ‘‘deposited’’, addition, numerous tributaries within isolation prohibit the natural some may remain in suspension watersheds supporting viable Neosho interchange of genetic material between (dissolved) as they are transported mucket and rabbitsfoot populations also populations. Most of the remaining through various waterbodies. States are listed as impaired waters under Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot report that nonpoint source pollution is section 303(d) of the CWA, which populations are small and the leading remaining cause of water means that both species may be geographically isolated, and, thus, are quality problems. The effects of subjected to greater, albeit subtle, susceptible to genetic drift, inbreeding nonpoint source pollutants on specific pervasive effects of chronic, low-level depression, and stochastic changes to waters vary and may not always be fully contamination that is ubiquitous in the environment, such as toxic chemical assessed. However, these pollutants these watersheds. However, there is no spills (Smith 1990, pp. 311–321; Watters have harmful effects on fisheries and specific information known about the and Dunn 1995, pp. 257–258; Avise and wildlife (http://www.epa.gov/ sensitivity of the Neosho mucket and Hamrick 1996, pp. 463–466). For owow_keep/NPS/whatis.html.) rabbitsfoot to common point source example, the Spring River (White River Sources of NPS pollution within the pollutants like industrial and municipal basin) and Muddy Creek (Ohio River watersheds occupied by both mussels pollutants and very little information on basin) rabbitsfoot populations are the include timber clearcutting, clearing of other freshwater mussels. Because there only small populations not isolated riparian vegetation, urbanization, road is very little information known about from a viable population. Three construction, and other practices that water quality parameters necessary to marginal populations (Alleghany River allow bare earth to enter streams (The fully protect freshwater mussels, such as and LeBoeuf and Conneauttee Creeks), Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 13). the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, it is considered metapopulations with Numerous stream segments in the Duck, difficult to determine whether the CWA French Creek, also are not isolated from White, Black, Little, and Strawberry is adequately addressing the threats to a viable rabbitsfoot population (French River watersheds are listed as impaired these species. However, given that a Creek). However, 41 of 51 extant waters under section 303(d) of the CWA goal of the CWA is to establish water rabbitsfoot populations (80 percent) are by EPA due to sedimentation associated quality standards that protect shellfish isolated from other extant populations, with agriculture (USACE 2011, p. 21; and given that documented declines of excluding those discussed above and EPA Water Quality Assessment Tool, these mussel species still continue due the Strawberry, Tennessee, and Ohio http://ofmpub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/ to poor water quality and other factors, Rivers, which are viable populations attains_nation_ we take a conservative approach in that are not isolated from another viable cy.control?p_report_type=T). For favor of the species and conclude that population (Black River) or each other example, impaired streams in the Duck the CWA has been insufficient to (lower Tennessee and Ohio Rivers). River watershed (483 rkm (300 rmi)) are significantly reduce or remove the Inbreeding depression can result in losing 5 to 55 percent more soil per year threats to the Neosho mucket and early mortality, decreased fertility, than streams not labeled as impaired rabbitsfoot. We invite public comment smaller body size, loss of vigor, reduced
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63464 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
fitness, and various chromosome suspect. These populations may be and rabbitsfoot through filtering and abnormalities (Smith 1990, pp. 311– experiencing the bottleneck effect of not removing their sperm and possibly 321). A species’ vulnerability to attaining the EPS. Small, isolated, below glochidia from the water column, thus extinction is increased when they are the EPS-threshold populations of short- reducing reproductive potential. Habitat patchily distributed due to habitat loss lived species (most fish hosts) for native mussels also may be degraded and degradation (Noss and Cooperrider theoretically die out within a decade or by large deposits of zebra mussel 1994, pp. 58–62; Thomas 1994, p. 373). so, while below-threshold populations pseudofeces (undigested waste material Although changes in the environment of long-lived species, such as the passed out of the incurrent siphon) may cause populations to fluctuate Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, might (Vaughan 1997, p. 11). naturally, small and low-density take decades to die out even given years Overlapping much of the current populations are more likely to fluctuate of total recruitment failure. Without range of the Neosho mucket and below a minimum viable population genetic interchange, small, isolated rabbitsfoot, zebra mussels have been size (the minimum or threshold number populations could be slowly expiring, a detected or are established in Neosho of individuals needed in a population to phenomenon termed the extinction debt mucket (Neosho and Verdigris Rivers) persist in a viable state for a given (Tilman et al. 1994, pp. 65–66). Even and rabbitsfoot streams (Ohio, interval) (Shaffer 1981, p. 131; Shaffer given the absence of existing or new Allegheny, Green, Tennessee, White, and Samson 1985, pp. 148–150; Gilpin anthropogenic threats, disjunct and Verdigris Rivers, and French and and Soule´ 1986, pp. 25–33). populations may be lost as a result of Bear Creeks). Zebra mussel populations Furthermore, this level of isolation current below-threshold effective appear to be maintained primarily in makes natural repopulation of any population size. Additionally, evidence streams with barge navigation (Stoeckel extirpated population unlikely without indicates that general habitat et al. 2003, p. 334). As zebra mussels human intervention. Population degradation continues to decrease may maintain high densities in big isolation prohibits the natural habitat patch size, further contributing rivers, large tributaries, and below interchange of genetic material between to the decline of Neosho mucket and infested reservoirs, rabbitsfoot populations, and small population size rabbitsfoot populations. populations in these affected areas have reduces the reservoir of genetic diversity We find that fragmentation and the potential to be significantly affected. within populations, which can lead to isolation of small remaining populations In addition, there is long-term potential inbreeding depression (Avise and of the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot for zebra mussel invasions into other Hambrick 1996, p. 461). are current and ongoing threats to both systems that currently harbor Neosho Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot were species throughout all of their ranges mucket and rabbitsfoot populations. once widespread throughout their and will continue into the future. However, evidence is mounting in some respective ranges with few natural Further, stochastic events may play a northern streams where there is no barriers to prevent migration (via fish magnified role in population extirpation barge navigation (French Creek and host species) among suitable habitats. when small, isolated populations are Tippecanoe River) and southern ones However, construction of dams involved. with barge traffic (Tennessee River) that extirpated many Neosho mucket and the zebra mussel threat to native Invasive Nonindigenous Species rabbitsfoot populations and isolated mussels may be minimal because native others. Recruitment reduction or failure Various invasive or nonnative species freshwater mussel populations are able is a potential problem for many small of aquatic organisms are firmly to survive when zebra mussel Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot established in the range of the Neosho abundance is low (Butler 2005, p. 116; populations rangewide, a potential mucket and rabbitsfoot. The nonnative, Fisher 2009, pers. comm.). condition exacerbated by their reduced invasive species that poses the most The Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea) range, increasingly small populations, significant threat is the zebra mussel, has spread throughout the range of and increasingly isolated populations. If Dreissena polymorpha, introduced from Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot since its these trends continue, further Europe. Its invasion poses a threat to introduction in the early twentieth significant declines in total population mussel faunas in many regions, and century. It competes with native size and subsequent reduction in long- species extinctions are expected as a mussels, particularly juveniles, for term survivability may be observed in result of its continued spread in the resources such as food, nutrients, and the future. eastern United States (Ricciardi et al. space (Neves and Widlak 1987, p. 6; Leff The likelihood is high that some 1998, p. 613). Strayer (1999b, pp. 75–80) et al. 1990, p. 414), and may ingest rabbitsfoot and Neosho mucket reviewed in detail the mechanisms by sperm, glochidia, and newly populations are below the effective which zebra mussels affect native metamorphosed juveniles of native population size (EPS—the number of mussels. Zebra mussels attach in large mussels (Strayer 1999b, p. 82; Yeager et individuals in a population who numbers to the shells of live native al. 2000, p. 255). Periodic die-offs of contribute offspring to the next mussels and are implicated in the loss Asian clams may produce enough generation), based on restricted of entire native mussel beds. Fouling ammonia and consume enough distribution and populations only effects include impeding locomotion dissolved oxygen to kill native mussels represented by a few individuals, and (both laterally and vertically), (Strayer 1999b, p. 82). Yeager et al. achieving the EPS is necessary for a interfering with normal valve (2000, pp. 257–258) determined that population to adapt to environmental movements, deforming valve margins, high densities of Asian clams negatively change and maintain long-term and locally depleting food resources and affect the survival and growth of newly viability. Isolated populations increasing waste products. Heavy metamorphosed juvenile mussels and eventually are extirpated when infestations of zebra mussels on native thus reduced recruitment. Dense Asian population size drops below the EPS or mussels may overly stress the animals clam populations actively disturb threshold level of sustainability (Soule´ by reducing their energy stores. They sediments that may reduce habitat for 1980, pp. 162–164). Evidence of may also reduce food concentrations to juveniles of native mussels (Strayer recruitment in many populations of levels too low to support reproduction, 1999b, p. 82). these two species is scant, making or even survival in extreme cases. Zebra Asian clam densities vary widely in recruitment reduction or outright failure mussels also may affect Neosho mucket the absence of native mussels or in
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63465
patches with sparse mussel Nonnative, invasive species, such as Intergovernmental Panel on Climate concentrations, but Asian clam density those described above, are an ongoing Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the is never high in dense mussel beds, threat to the Neosho mucket and mean and variability of different types indicating that the clam is unable to rabbitsfoot. This threat is likely to of weather conditions over time, with 30 successfully invade small-scale habitat increase as these and potentially other years being a typical period for such patches with high unionid biomass invasive species expand their measurements, although shorter or (Vaughn and Spooner 2006, pp. 334– occupancy within the ranges of the longer periods also may be used (IPCC 335). The invading clam therefore Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot through 2007, p. 78). The term ‘‘climate change’’ appears to preferentially invade sites displacement, recruitment interference, thus refers to a change in the mean or where mussels are already in decline and direct predation of the mussels and variability of one or more measures of (Strayer 1999b, pp. 82–83; Vaughn and their fish hosts. climate (e.g., temperature or Spooner 2006, pp. 332–336) and does precipitation) that persists for an Temperature not appear to be a causative factor in the extended period, typically decades or decline of mussels in dense beds. Natural temperature regimes can be longer, whether the change is due to However, an Asian clam population that altered by impoundments, tail water natural variability, human activity, or thrives in previously stressed, sparse releases from dams, industrial and both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types mussel populations might exacerbate municipal effluents, and changes in of changes in climate can have direct or mussel decline through competition and riparian habitat. Exact critical thermal indirect effects on species. These effects by impeding mussel population limits for survival and normal may be positive, neutral, or negative and expansion (Vaughn and Spooner 2006, functioning of many freshwater mussel they may change over time, depending pp. 335–336). species are unknown. However, high on the species and other relevant A molluscivore (mollusk eater), the temperatures can reduce dissolved considerations, such as the effects of introduced black carp oxygen concentrations in the water, interactions of climate with other (Mylopharyngodon piceus), is a which slows growth, reduces glycogen variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) potential threat to Neosho mucket and stores, impairs respiration, and may (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). In our rabbitsfoot (Strayer 1999b, p. 89). It has inhibit reproduction (Fuller 1974, pp. analyses, we use our expert judgment to been proposed for widespread use by 240–241). Low temperatures can weigh relevant information, including aquaculturists to control snails, the significantly delay or prevent uncertainty, in our consideration of intermediate host of a trematode metamorphosis (Watters and O’Dee various aspects of climate change. (flatworm) parasite affecting catfish in 1999, pp. 454–455). Water temperature Projected changes in climate and ponds in the southeast and lower increases have been documented to related effects can vary substantially midwest. They are known to feed on shorten the period of glochidial across and within different regions of various mollusks, including mussels encystment, reduce righting speed the world (e.g., IPCC 2007a, pp. 8–12). and snails, in China. They are the (various reflexes that tend to bring the Thus, although global climate largest of the Asiatic carp species, body into normal position in space and projections are informative and in some reaching more than 1.2 m (4 ft) in length resist forces acting to displace it out of cases are the only or the best scientific (Nico and Williams 1996, p. 6). Foraging normal position), increase oxygen information available, to the extent rates for a 4-year-old fish average 1.4– consumption, and slow burrowing and possible we use ‘‘downscaled’’ climate 1.8 kg (3 or 4 pounds) a day, indicating movement responses (Fuller 1974, pp. projections which provide higher that a single individual could consume 240–241; Bartsch et al. 2000, p. 237; resolution information that is more 9,072 kg (10 tons) of native mollusks Watters et al. 2001, p. 546; Schwalb and relevant to the spatial scales used to during its lifetime (MICRA 2005, p. 1). Pusch 2007, pp. 264–265). Several assess effects to a given species (see In 1994, 30 black carp escaped from an studies have documented the influence Glick et al. 2011, pp. 58–61 for a aquaculture facility in Missouri during of temperature on the timing aspects of discussion of downscaling). With regard a flood. The escape of nonsterile black mussel reproduction (Gray et al. 2002, to our analysis for the Neosho mucket carp is considered imminent by p. 156; Allen et al. 2007, p. 85; and the rabbitsfoot, downscaled conservation biologists (Butler 2007, pp. Steingraeber et al. 2007, pp. 303–309). projections of climate change are 95–96). The black carp was officially Peak glochidial releases are associated available, but projecting precise effects added to the Federal list of injurious with water temperature thresholds that on these two species from downscaled wildlife species on October 18, 2007 (72 can be thermal minimums or models is difficult because of the large FR 59019). maximums, depending on the species geographic areas inhabited by both The round goby (Neogobius (Watters and O’Dee 2000, p. 136). species. However, projections for the melanostomus) is another nonnative, Alterations in temperature regimes in change in annual air temperature by the invasive fish species released in the streams, such as those described above, year 2080 for the Neosho mucket ranges 1980s that is well established and likely are an ongoing threat to the Neosho between an increase of 7 to 8 degrees F to spread through the Mississippi River mucket and rabbitsfoot. This threat is and, for the rabbitsfoot, an increase of system (Strayer 1999b, pp. 87–88). This likely to continue and increase in the 4.5 to 8 degrees F in annual air species is an aggressive competitor of future due to additional navigation or temperature (Maura et al. 2007, as similar-sized benthic fishes (sculpins water supply projects and as land use displayed on http:// and darters), as well as a voracious conversion to urban uses increases www.climatewizard.org/# 2012). carnivore, despite its size (less than 25.4 within the entire ranges of the Neosho Ficke et al. (2005, pp. 67–69; 2007, cm (10 in.) in length), preying on a mucket and rabbitsfoot. pp. 603–605) described the general variety of foods, including small potential effects of climate change on mussels and fishes that could serve as Climate Change freshwater fish populations worldwide. glochidial hosts (Strayer 1999b, p. 88; Our analyses under the Endangered Overall, the distribution of fish species Janssen and Jude 2001, p. 325). Round Species Act include consideration of is expected to change, including range gobies may, therefore, pose a threat to ongoing and projected changes in shifts and local extirpations. Because Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ and freshwater mussels are entirely reproduction. ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the dependent upon a fish host for
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63466 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
successful reproduction and dispersal, 252). Chief among the causes of decline, threats that are significantly impacting any changes in local fish populations but in no particular ranking order, are the species. would also affect freshwater mussel impoundments, sedimentation, Proposed Determination populations. Therefore, mussel channelization, chemical contaminants, populations will reflect local oil and natural gas development, and We have carefully assessed the best extirpations or decreases in abundance mining (Neves 1991, p. 252; Neves 1993, scientific and commercial information of fish species. pp. 4–6; Williams et al. 1993, pp. 7–9; available regarding the past, present, and future threats to the Neosho mucket Summary of Factor E Neves et al. 1997, pp. 60 and 63–75; Watters 2000, pp. 262–267). These and the rabbitsfoot. Section 3(6) of the In summary, a variety of natural and stressors have had profound adverse Act defines an endangered species as manmade factors threatens the effects on Neosho mucket and ‘‘any species that is in danger of continued existence of Neosho mucket rabbitsfoot populations, their habitats, extinction throughout all or a significant and rabbitsfoot. Forty-one of the 51 (80 and fish hosts. portion of its range’’ and defines a percent) extant rabbitsfoot populations Regulations at the Federal level may threatened species as ‘‘any species that are isolated from viable populations. A not be providing the protection needed is likely to become endangered lack of recruitment and genetic isolation for the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. throughout all or a significant portion of pose a threat to the continued existence For example, 8 of the 11 (73 percent) its range within the foreseeable future.’’ of these species. Invasive, viable rabbitsfoot populations are As described in detail above, these two species are currently at risk throughout nonindigenous species, such as zebra located in waters listed as impaired mussel, black carp, and Asian clam, all of their respective ranges due to the under section 303(d) of the CWA. In have potentially adversely affected immediacy, severity, and scope of addition, numerous tributaries within populations of the Neosho mucket and threats from habitat destruction and watersheds with viable Neosho mucket rabbitsfoot and their fish hosts, and modification (Factor A), inadequacy of and rabbitsfoot populations also are these effects are expected to persist into existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor listed as impaired waters under section the future. Based on the best available D), and other natural or manmade 303(d) of the CWA. The CWA has a information, we are unable to predict factors affecting their continued stated goal to establish water quality the timing and scope of any changes to existence (Factor E). Although there are standards that protect aquatic species, these mussel species that may occur as ongoing actions to alleviate some including mussel species. However, the a result of climate change effects. threats, there appear to be no CWA has generally been insufficient at populations without current threats. Cumulative Effects of Threats protecting mussels, and adequate water These isolated species have a limited The life-history traits and habitat quality criteria that are protective of all ability to recolonize historically requirements of the Neosho mucket and mussel life stages, particularly glochidia occupied stream and river reaches and rabbitsfoot, and other freshwater and juveniles, may not be established. are vulnerable to natural or human- mussels in general, make them Little information is known about caused changes in their stream and river extremely susceptible to environmental specific sensitivities of mussels to habitats. change. Unlike other aquatic organisms various pollutants, but both species Their range curtailment, small (e.g., aquatic insects and fish), mussels continue to decline due to the effects of population size, and isolation make the have limited refugia from stream poor water quality, contaminants, and Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot more disturbances (e.g., droughts, other factors. vulnerable to threats such as sedimentation, chemical contaminants). The majority of extant Neosho mucket sedimentation, disturbance of riparian Mechanisms leading to the decline of populations are small and isolated, with corridors, changes in channel Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, as only one viable population remaining. morphology, point- and nonpoint- discussed above, range from local (e.g., The majority of extant rabbitsfoot source contaminants, urbanization, riparian clearing, chemical populations are marginal and small (78 invasive species, and to stochastic contaminants, etc.), to regional percent) and isolated (80 percent), with events (such as chemical spills). influences (e.g., altered flow regimes, only two small (5 percent) and 4 viable Neosho mucket channelization, etc.), to global climate populations (36 percent) not isolated change. The synergistic (interaction of from another viable population (Butler The Neosho mucket has been two or more components) effects of 2005, p. 22; Service 2010, pp. 3–8). The extirpated (no longer in existence) from threats are often complex in aquatic patchy distributional pattern of approximately 62 percent of its environments, making it difficult to populations in short river reaches makes historical range with only 9 of the 16 predict changes in mussel and fish them more susceptible to extirpation historical populations remaining host(s) distribution, abundance, and from single catastrophic events, such as (extant). This mussel is declining habitat availability that may result from toxic chemical spills (Watters and Dunn rangewide (eight of the nine extant these effects. While these stressors may 1995, p. 257). Furthermore, this level of populations), with only one remaining act in isolation, it is more probable that isolation makes natural recolonization large, viable population. Based on the many stressors are acting of extirpated populations virtually best available scientific and commercial simultaneously (or in combination) impossible without human intervention. information, we have determined that (Galbraith et al. 2010, p. 1176) on Various nonnative species of aquatic the Neosho mucket is in danger of Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot organisms are firmly established in the extinction throughout all of its range. populations. range of the Neosho mucket and Therefore, we are proposing to list it as rabbitsfoot. The nonnative species that an endangered species. In other words, Summary of Threats poses the most significant threat to the we find that a threatened species status The decline of the Neosho mucket Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot is the is not appropriate for the Neosho and rabbitsfoot (described by Butler zebra mussel. Although there are mucket due to its contracted range (nine 2005, entire; described by Service 2010, ongoing attempts to alleviate some of extant river populations within three entire) is primarily the result of habitat these threats at some locations, there river basins) and only one remaining loss and degradation (Neves 1991, p. appear to be no populations without stable and viable population.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63467
Rabbitsfoot list it as a threatened species. In other portion of a species’ range is The rabbitsfoot has been extirpated words, we find that endangered status is inconsistent with the Act’s definition of from approximately 64 percent of its not appropriate for the rabbitsfoot ‘‘species.’’ The courts concluded that historical range. While this species is because 8 percent of the historical once a determination is made that a declining rangewide, it sustains populations or 22 percent of extant species (i.e., species, subspecies, or recruitment and population viability populations remaining in its historical DPS) meets the definition of consistently in 11 (8 percent of streams can be considered viable, but ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened historical or 22 percent of extant are facing subtle, pervasive threats that species,’’ it must be placed on the list distribution) large, extant river are ubiquitous in each watershed. in its entirety and the Act’s protections applied consistently to all members of populations and, while reduced in Significant Portion of Its Range that species (subject to modification of numbers, it also sustains limited Under the Act and our implementing recruitment and distribution in another protections through special rules under regulations, a species may warrant sections 4(d) and 10(j) of the Act). 17 river populations. Of the 17 river listing if it is endangered or threatened Consistent with that interpretation, populations with limited recruitment throughout all or a significant portion of and for the purposes of this finding, we and distribution, 15 of these its range. The Act defines ‘‘endangered interpret the phrase ‘‘significant portion populations (88 percent) are declining. species’’ as any species which is ‘‘in of its range’’ in the Act’s definitions of All remaining rabbitsfoot populations danger of extinction throughout all or a ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened continue to be reduced in size or quality significant portion of its range,’’ and species’’ to provide an independent by habitat degradation as a result of ‘‘threatened species’’ as any species basis for listing; thus there are two impoundments and dams, navigation which is ‘‘likely to become an situations (or factual bases) under which projects, commercial and residential endangered species within the a species would qualify for listing: A development, agriculture, chemical foreseeable future throughout all or a species may be endangered or contaminants, mining, and oil and significant portion of its range.’’ The threatened throughout all of its range; or natural gas development. Climate definition of ‘‘species’’ is also relevant a species may be endangered or change could affect in-stream water to this discussion. The Act defines threatened in only a significant portion temperatures, seasonal water flows, and ‘‘species’’ as follows: ‘‘The term of its range. If a species is in danger of mussel and fish host reproductive ‘species’ includes any subspecies of fish extinction throughout a significant activities, including the availability of or wildlife or plants, and any distinct portion of its range, the species is an mussel fish host species. Invasive population segment [DPS] of any ‘‘endangered species.’’ The same species occupying rabbitsfoot habitat species of vertebrate fish or wildlife analysis applies to ‘‘threatened species.’’ cause displacement and recruitment which interbreeds when mature.’’ The Based on this interpretation and interference. Eight of the 11 (73 percent) phrase ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ supported by existing case law, the viable rabbitsfoot populations are in (SPR) is not defined by the statute, and consequence of finding that a species is waters and have numerous tributaries in we have never addressed in our endangered or threatened in only a their watersheds that are listed as regulations: (1) The consequences of a significant portion of its range is that the impaired waters under section 303(d) of determination that a species is either entire species shall be listed as the CWA. Regulatory mechanisms such endangered or likely to become so endangered or threatened, respectively, as the CWA have been insufficient to throughout a significant portion of its and the Act’s protections shall be significantly reduce or remove these range, but not throughout all of its applied across the species’ entire range. types of threats to rabbitsfoot. The range; or (2) what qualifies a portion of We conclude, for the purposes of this synergistic effects of threats such as a range as ‘‘significant.’’ finding, that interpreting the significant these are often complex in aquatic Two recent district court decisions portion of its range phrase as providing environments and, while making it have addressed whether the SPR an independent basis for listing is the difficult to predict changes in mussel language allows the Service to list or best interpretation of the Act because it and fish host(s) distribution, abundance, protect less than all members of a is consistent with the purposes and the and habitat availability, it is probable defined ‘‘species’’: Defenders of Wildlife plain meaning of the key definitions of that these threats are acting v. Salazar, 729 F. Supp. 2d 1207 (D. the Act; it does not conflict with simultaneously on the remaining Mont. 2010), concerning the Service’s established past agency practice (i.e., rabbitsfoot populations with negative delisting of the Northern Rocky prior to the 2007 Solicitor’s Opinion), as results and are expected to continue to Mountain gray wolf (74 FR 15123, April no consistent, long-term agency practice do so. Thus, while rabbitsfoot sustains 2, 2009); and WildEarth Guardians v. has been established; and it is consistent 11 viable populations, these populations Salazar, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105253 with the judicial opinions that have continue to be at risk, and the (D. Ariz. September 30, 2010), most closely examined this issue. rabbitsfoot’s other extant populations concerning the Service’s 2008 finding Having concluded that the phrase are affected by isolation, fragmentation, on a petition to list the Gunnison’s ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ limited recruitment and distribution, prairie dog (73 FR 6660, February 5, provides an independent basis for and population declines, which make 2008). The Service had asserted in both listing and protecting the entire species, the species particularly susceptible to of these determinations that it had we next turn to the meaning of extinction in the near future if threats authority, in effect, to protect only some ‘‘significant’’ to determine the threshold continue or increase. members of a ‘‘species,’’ as defined by for when such an independent basis for While we have determined that the the Act (i.e., species, subspecies, or listing exists. rabbitsfoot is not currently in danger of DPS), under the Act. Both courts ruled Although there are potentially many extinction, because of the threats facing that the determinations were arbitrary ways to determine whether a portion of the species and impacts to its life and capricious on the grounds that this a species’ range is ‘‘significant,’’ we history, we find that the species is likely approach violated the plain and conclude, for the purposes of this to become in danger of extinction in the unambiguous language of the Act. The finding, that the significance of the foreseeable future throughout all of its courts concluded that reading the SPR portion of the range should be range. Therefore, we are proposing to language to allow protecting only a determined based on its biological
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63468 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
contribution to the conservation of the range that the species would not be in everywhere. Under the definition of species. For this reason, we describe the danger of extinction throughout its ‘‘significant’’ used in this finding, the threshold for ‘‘significant’’ in terms of range if the population in that portion portion of the range need not rise to an increase in the risk of extinction for of the range in question became such an exceptionally high level of the species. We conclude that a extirpated (extinct locally). biological significance. (We recognize biologically based definition of We recognize that this definition of that if the species is imperiled in a ‘‘significant’’ best conforms to the ‘‘significant’’ (a portion of the range of portion that rises to that level of purposes of the Act, is consistent with a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its biological significance, then we should judicial interpretations, and best contribution to the viability of the conclude that the species is in fact ensures species’ conservation. Thus, for species is so important that, without imperiled throughout all of its range, the purposes of this finding, and as that portion, the species would be in and that we would not need to rely on explained further below, a portion of the danger of extinction) establishes a the significant portion of its range range of a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its threshold that is relatively high. On the language for such a listing.) Rather, contribution to the viability of the one hand, given that the consequences under this interpretation we ask species is so important that without that of finding a species to be endangered or whether the species would be portion, the species would be in danger threatened in a significant portion of its endangered everywhere without that of extinction. range would be listing the species portion, i.e., if that portion were We evaluate biological significance throughout its entire range, it is completely extirpated. In other words, based on the principles of conservation important to use a threshold for the portion of the range need not be so biology using the concepts of ‘‘significant’’ that is robust. It would not important that even the species being in redundancy, resiliency, and be meaningful or appropriate to danger of extinction in that portion representation. Resiliency describes the establish a very low threshold whereby would be sufficient to cause the species characteristics of a species and its a portion of the range can be considered in the remainder of the range to be habitat that allow it to recover from ‘‘significant’’ even if only a negligible endangered; rather, the complete periodic disturbance. Redundancy increase in extinction risk would result extirpation (in a hypothetical future) of (having multiple populations from its loss. Because nearly any portion the species in that portion would be distributed across the landscape) may be of a species’ range can be said to required to cause the species in the needed to provide a margin of safety for contribute some increment to a species’ remainder of the range to be the species to withstand catastrophic viability, use of such a low threshold endangered. events. Representation (the range of would require us to impose restrictions variation found in a species) ensures and expend conservation resources The range of a species can that the species’ adaptive capabilities disproportionately to conservation theoretically be divided into portions in are conserved. Redundancy, resiliency, benefit: Listing would be rangewide, an infinite number of ways. However, and representation are not independent even if only a portion of the range of there is no purpose to analyzing of each other, and some characteristic of minor conservation importance to the portions of the range that have no a species or area may contribute to all species is imperiled. On the other hand, reasonable potential to be significant or three. For example, distribution across a it would be inappropriate to establish a to analyzing portions of the range in wide variety of habitat types is an threshold for ‘‘significant’’ that is too which there is no reasonable potential indicator of representation, but it may high. This would be the case if the for the species to be endangered or also indicate a broad geographic standard were, for example, that a threatened. To identify only those distribution contributing to redundancy portion of the range can be considered portions that warrant further (decreasing the chance that any one ‘‘significant’’ only if threats in that consideration, we determine whether event affects the entire species), and the portion result in the entire species’ there is substantial information likelihood that some habitat types are being currently endangered or indicating that: (1) The portions may be less susceptible to certain threats, threatened. Such a high bar would not ‘‘significant,’’ and (2) the species may be contributing to resiliency (the ability of give the significant portion of its range in danger of extinction there or likely to the species to recover from disturbance). phrase independent meaning, as the become so within the foreseeable future. None of these concepts is intended to be Ninth Circuit held in Defenders of Depending on the biology of the species, mutually exclusive, and a portion of a Wildlife v. Norton, 258 F.3d 1136 (9th its range, and the threats it faces, it species’ range may be determined to be Cir. 2001). might be more efficient for us to address ‘‘significant’’ due to its contributions The definition of ‘‘significant’’ used in the significance question first or the under any one or more of these this finding carefully balances these status question first. Thus, if we concepts. concerns. By setting a relatively high determine that a portion of the range is For the purposes of this finding, we threshold, we minimize the degree to not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to determine if a portion’s biological which restrictions will be imposed or determine whether the species is contribution is so important that the resources expended that do not endangered or threatened there; if we portion qualifies as ‘‘significant’’ by contribute substantially to species determine that the species is not asking whether without that portion, the conservation. But we have not set the endangered or threatened in a portion of representation, redundancy, or threshold so high that the phrase ‘‘in a its range, we do not need to determine resiliency of the species would be so significant portion of its range’’ loses if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ In impaired that the species would have an independent meaning. Specifically, we practice, a key part of the determination increased vulnerability to threats to the have not set the threshold as high as it that a species is in danger of extinction point that the overall species would be was under the interpretation presented in a significant portion of its range is in danger of extinction (i.e., would be by the Service in the Defenders whether the threats are geographically ‘‘endangered’’). Conversely, we would litigation. Under that interpretation, the concentrated in some way. If the threats not consider the portion of the range at portion of the range would have to be to the species are essentially uniform issue to be ‘‘significant’’ if there is so important that current imperilment throughout its range, no portion is likely sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and there would mean that the species to warrant further consideration. representation elsewhere in the species’ would be currently imperiled Moreover, if any concentration of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63469
threats to the species occurs only in The primary purpose of the Act is the because their range may occur primarily portions of the species’ range that conservation of endangered and or solely on non-Federal lands. clearly would not meet the biologically threatened species and the ecosystems Achieving recovery of these species based definition of ‘‘significant,’’ such upon which they depend. The ultimate requires cooperative conservation efforts portions will not warrant further goal of such conservation efforts is the on private, State, and Tribal lands. consideration. recovery of these listed species, so that If these species are listed, funding for We evaluated the current range of the they no longer need the protective recovery actions will be available from Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot to measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of a variety of sources, including Federal determine if there is any apparent the Act requires the Service to develop budgets, State programs, and cost share geographic concentration of potential and implement recovery plans for the grants for non-Federal landowners, the threats for either species. The Neosho conservation of endangered and academic community, and mucket and rabbitsfoot are highly threatened species, unless such a plan nongovernmental organizations. In restricted in their ranges, and the threats will not promote the conservation of the addition, pursuant to section 6 of the occur throughout their ranges. We species. The recovery planning process Act, the States of Alabama, Arkansas, considered the potential threats due to involves the identification of actions Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, impoundments, sedimentation, that are necessary to halt or reverse the Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, channelization, chemical contaminants, species’ decline by addressing the Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and oil and gas development, mining, and threats to its survival and recovery. The Tennessee would be eligible for Federal climate change. We found no goal of this process is to restore listed funds to implement management concentration of threats because of the species to a point where they are secure, actions that promote the protection or species limited and curtailed ranges, self-sustaining, and functioning recovery of the Neosho mucket and and uniformity of the threats throughout components of their ecosystems. rabbitsfoot. Information on our grant its entire range. Having determined that Recovery planning includes the programs that are available to aid the Neosho mucket is endangered development of a recovery outline species recovery can be found at: throughout its entire range, it is not shortly after a species is listed and after http://www.fws.gov/grants. Although the Neosho mucket and necessary to evaluate whether there are preparation of a draft and final recovery rabbitsfoot are only proposed for listing any significant portions of its range. plan. The recovery outline guides the under the Act at this time, please let us Having determined that the rabbitsfoot immediate implementation of urgent recovery actions and describes the know if you are interested in is threatened throughout its entire process to be used to develop a recovery participating in recovery efforts for range, we must next consider whether plan. Revisions of the plan may be done these species. Additionally, we invite there are any significant portions of the to address continuing or new threats to you to submit any new information on range where the rabbitsfoot is in danger the species, as new substantive these species whenever it becomes of extinction or is likely to become information becomes available. The available and any information you may endangered in the foreseeable future. recovery plan identifies site–specific have for recovery planning purposes We found no portion of the management actions that set a trigger for (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). rabbitsfoot’s range where potential review of the five factors that control Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, threats are significantly concentrated or whether a species remains endangered requires Federal agencies to evaluate substantially greater than in other or may be downlisted or delisted, and their actions with respect to any species portions of their range. Therefore, we methods for monitoring recovery that is proposed or listed as endangered find that factors affecting the species are progress. Recovery plans also establish or threatened and with respect to its essentially uniform throughout its a framework for agencies to coordinate critical habitat, if any is designated. range, indicating no portion of the range their recovery efforts and provide Regulations implementing this of the species warrants further estimates of the cost of implementing interagency cooperation provision of the consideration of possible endangered or recovery tasks. Recovery teams Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. threatened status under the Act. (comprising species experts, Federal Federal agencies are required to confer Therefore, we find there is no and State agencies, nongovernmental with us informally on any action that is significant portion of the rabbitsfoot organizations, and stakeholders) are likely to jeopardize the continued range that may warrant a different often established to develop recovery existence of a proposed species. Section status. plans. When completed, the recovery 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to Available Conservation Measures outline, draft recovery plan, and the confer with the Service on any action final recovery plan will be available on that is likely to jeopardize the continued Conservation measures provided to our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ existence of a species proposed for species listed as endangered or endangered), or from our Arkansas listing or result in destruction or threatened under the Act include Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR adverse modification of proposed recognition, recovery actions, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). critical habitat. If a species is listed requirements for Federal protection, and Implementation of recovery actions subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires prohibitions against certain practices. generally requires the participation of a Federal agencies to ensure that activities Recognition through listing encourages broad range of partners, including other they authorize, fund, or carry out are not and results in public awareness and Federal agencies, States, Tribes, likely to jeopardize the continued conservation by Federal, State, and local nongovernmental organizations, existence of the species or destroy or agencies, private organizations, and businesses, and private landowners. adversely modify its critical habitat. If a individuals. The Act encourages Examples of recovery actions include Federal action may adversely affect a cooperation with the States and requires habitat restoration (restoration of native listed species or its critical habitat, the that recovery actions be carried out for vegetation), research, captive responsible Federal agency must enter all listed species. The protection propagation and reintroduction, and into formal consultation with the required of Federal agencies and the outreach and education. The recovery of Service. prohibitions against take and harm are many listed species cannot be Federal agency actions within these discussed, in part, below. accomplished solely on Federal lands species’ habitat that may require
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63470 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
conference or consultation or both as the effect of a proposed listing on management, enhancement, or described in the preceding paragraph proposed and ongoing activities within protection of endangered species. Funds include, but are not limited to, the the range of species proposed for listing. for these activities could be made funding of, carrying out, or the issuance The following activities could available under section 6 of the Act of permits for reservoir construction, potentially result in a violation of (Cooperation with the States). Thus, the navigation, natural gas extraction, section 9 of the Act; this list is not Federal protection afforded to these stream alterations, discharges, comprehensive: species by listing them as endangered wastewater facility development, water (1) Collecting, handling, possessing, and threatened species will be withdrawal projects, pesticide selling, delivering, carrying, or reinforced and supplemented by registration, mining, and road and transporting of the species, including protection under State law. bridge construction. This may include, import or export across State lines and but is not limited to, management and international boundaries that are Critical Habitat Designation for Neosho any other landscape-altering activities unauthorized, except for properly Mucket and Rabbitsfoot on Federal lands administered by the documented antique specimens of these Background Department of Defense, and USDA taxa at least 100 years old, as defined by It is our intent to discuss below only Forest Service; issuance of Clean Water section 10(h)(1) of the Act; those topics directly relevant to the Act permits by the Army Corps of (2) Introduction of nonnative species designation of critical habitat for Engineers and Environmental Protection that compete with or prey upon the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot in this Agency; construction and maintenance Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, such as of interstate power and natural gas the introduction of a predator of section of the proposed rule. Critical habitat is defined in section 3 transmission line right-of-ways by the mussels, the nonnative black carp to a of the Act as: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; water body (White River) in the State of (1) The specific areas within the and construction and maintenance of Arkansas; geographical area occupied by the roads or highways by the Federal (3) The release of biological control species, at the time it is listed in Highway Administration. agents that attack any life stage of The Act and its implementing Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot that is accordance with the Act, on which are regulations set forth a series of general unauthorized; found those physical or biological prohibitions and exceptions that apply (4) Modification of the channel or features: to all endangered wildlife. The water flow of any stream in which the (a) Essential to the conservation of the prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot are species and codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for endangered known to occur that are unauthorized or (b) Which may require special wildlife, in part, make it illegal for any not covered under the Act for impacts management considerations or person subject to the jurisdiction of the to these species; and protection; and United States to take (includes harass, (5) Discharge of chemicals or fill (2) Specific areas outside the harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, material into any waters supporting the geographical area occupied by the trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot that are species at the time it is listed, upon a any of these), import, export, ship in unauthorized or not covered under the determination that such areas are interstate commerce in the course of Act for impacts to these species. essential for the conservation of the commercial activity, or sell or offer for Questions regarding whether specific species. sale in interstate or foreign commerce activities would constitute a violation of Conservation, as defined under any listed species. Under the Lacey Act section 9 of the Act should be directed section 3 of the Act, means to use and (18 U.S.C. 42–43; 16 U.S.C. 3371–3378), to the Service’s Field Office in the State the use of all methods and procedures it is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, where the proposed activities will that are necessary to bring an carry, transport, or ship any such occur. Requests for copies of the endangered or threatened species to the wildlife that has been taken illegally. regulations concerning listed animals point at which the measures provided Certain exceptions apply to agents of the and general inquiries regarding pursuant to the Act are no longer Service and State conservation agencies. prohibitions and permits may be necessary. Such methods and We may issue permits to carry out addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife procedures include, but are not limited otherwise prohibited activities Service, Endangered Species Permits, to, all activities associated with involving endangered and threatened 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, scientific resources management such as wildlife species under certain Atlanta, GA 30345; telephone: 404–679– research, census, law enforcement, circumstances. Regulations governing 7140; facsimile: 404–679–7081. habitat acquisition and maintenance, permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for If the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot propagation, live trapping, and endangered species, and at 17.32 for are listed under the Act, the States of transplantation, and, in the threatened species. With regard to Kansas and Oklahoma’s Endangered extraordinary case where population endangered wildlife, a permit must be Species Act (Kansas Nongame and pressures within a given ecosystem issued for the following purposes: for Endangered Species Conservation Act of cannot be otherwise relieved, may scientific purposes, to enhance the 1975, Chapter 32. Wildlife, Parks and include regulated taking. propagation or survival of the species, Recreation and Oklahoma Wildlife Critical habitat receives protection and for incidental take in connection Conservation Code, Title 29, Game and under section 7 of the Act through the with otherwise lawful activities. Fish, Chapter 1, Article V. Game, Part 4, requirement that Federal agencies It is our policy, as published in the Protected Game, respectively) are ensure, in consultation with the Service, Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR automatically invoked, which would that any action they authorize, fund, or 34272), to identify to the maximum also prohibit take of these species and carry out is not likely to result in the extent practicable at the time a species encourage conservation by State destruction or adverse modification of is listed, those activities that would or government agencies. Further, the State critical habitat. The designation of would not constitute a violation of may enter into agreements with Federal critical habitat does not affect land section 9 of the Act. The intent of this agencies to administer and manage any ownership or establish a refuge, policy is to increase public awareness of area required for the conservation, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63471
conservation area. Such designation to ensure the conservation of the habitat areas that we may later does not allow the government or public species. determine are necessary for the recovery to access private lands. Such Section 4 of the Act requires that we of the species. For these reasons, a designation does not require designate critical habitat on the basis of critical habitat designation does not implementation of restoration, recovery, the best scientific data available. signal that habitat outside the or enhancement measures by non- Further, our Policy on Information designated area is unimportant or may Federal landowners. Where a landowner Standards Under the Endangered not be needed for recovery of the requests Federal agency funding or Species Act (published in the Federal species. Areas that are important to the authorization for an action that may Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), conservation of the species, both inside affect a listed species or critical habitat, the Information Quality Act (section 515 and outside the critical habitat the consultation requirements of section of the Treasury and General designation, will continue to be subject 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even Government Appropriations Act for to: (1) Conservation actions in the event of a destruction or adverse Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. implemented under section 7(a)(1) of modification finding, the obligation of 5658)), and our associated Information the Act, (2) regulatory protections the Federal action agency and the Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, afforded by the requirement in section landowner is not to restore or recover establish procedures, and provide 7(a)(2) of the Act for Federal agencies to the species, but to implement guidance to ensure that our decisions ensure their actions are not likely to reasonable and prudent alternatives to are based on the best scientific data jeopardize the continued existence of avoid destruction or adverse available. They require our biologists, to any endangered or threatened species, modification of critical habitat. the extent consistent with the Act and and (3) section 9 of the Act’s Under the first prong of the Act’s with the use of the best scientific data prohibitions on taking any individual of definition of critical habitat, areas available, to use primary and original the species, including taking caused by within the geographic area occupied by sources of information as the basis for actions that affect habitat. Federally the species at the time it was listed are recommendations to designate critical funded or permitted projects affecting included in a critical habitat designation habitat. listed species outside their designated if they contain physical or biological When we are determining which areas critical habitat areas may still result in features (1) which are essential to the should be designated as critical habitat, jeopardy findings in some cases. These conservation of the species and (2) our primary source of information is protections and conservation tools will which may require special management generally the information developed continue to contribute to recovery of considerations or protection. For these during the listing process for the these species. Similarly, critical habitat areas, critical habitat designations species. Additional information sources designations made on the basis of the identify, to the extent known using the may include the recovery plan for the best available information at the time of best scientific and commercial data species, articles in peer-reviewed designation will not control the available, those physical or biological journals, conservation plans developed direction and substance of future features that are essential to the by States and counties, scientific status recovery plans, habitat conservation conservation of the species (such as surveys and studies, biological plans (HCPs), or other species space, food, cover, and protected assessments, other unpublished conservation planning efforts if new habitat). In identifying those physical materials, or experts’ opinions or information available at the time of and biological features within an area, personal knowledge. these planning efforts calls for a we focus on the principal biological or Habitat is dynamic, and species may different outcome. physical constituent elements (primary move from one area to another over constituent elements such as roost sites, time. Climate change will be a particular Prudency Determination nesting grounds, seasonal wetlands, challenge for biodiversity because the Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as water quality, tide, soil type) that are interaction of additional stressors amended, and implementing regulations essential to the conservation of the associated with climate change and (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the species. Primary constituent elements current stressors may push species maximum extent prudent and are the elements of physical or beyond their ability to survive (Lovejoy determinable, the Secretary designate biological features that, when laid out in 2005, pp. 325–326). The synergistic critical habitat at the time the species is the appropriate quantity and spatial implications of climate change and determined to be endangered or arrangement to provide for a species’ habitat fragmentation are the most threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR life-history processes, are essential to threatening facet of climate change for 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation the conservation of the species. biodiversity (Hannah and Lovejoy 2005, of critical habitat is not prudent when Under the second prong of the Act’s p. 4). Current climate change one or both of the following situations definition of critical habitat, we can predictions for terrestrial areas in the exist: (1) The species is threatened by designate critical habitat in areas Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer taking or other human activity, and outside the geographic area occupied by air temperatures, more intense identification of critical habitat can be the species at the time it is listed, upon precipitation events, and increased expected to increase the degree of threat a determination that such areas are summer continental drying (Field et al. to the species, or (2) such designation of essential for the conservation of the 1999, pp. 1–3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. critical habitat would not be beneficial species. For example, an area currently 12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p. 6; to the species. occupied by the species but that was not Intergovernmental Panel on Climate There is currently no impending occupied at the time of listing may be Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181). Climate threat of take attributed to collection or essential to the conservation of the change may lead to increased frequency vandalism under Factor B for either of species and may be included in the and duration of severe storms and these species, and identification and critical habitat designation. We droughts (Golladay et al. 2004, p. 504; mapping of critical habitat is not designate critical habitat in areas McLaughlin et al. 2002, p. 6074; Cook expected to initiate any such threat. In outside the geographic area occupied by et al. 2004, p. 1015). We recognize that the absence of finding that the a species only when a designation critical habitat designated at a particular designation of critical habitat would limited to its range would be inadequate point in time may not include all of the increase threats to a species, if there are
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63472 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
any benefits to a critical habitat considerations or protection. These (Barnhart 2003, p. 17), the rabbitsfoot designation, then a prudent finding is include, but are not limited to: seldom burrows in the substrate, but lies warranted. Here, the potential benefits (1) Space for individual and on its side (Watters 1988, p. 13; Fobian of designation include: (1) Triggering population growth and for normal 2007, p. 24). behavior; consultation under section 7 of the Act Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, in new areas for actions in which there (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological similar to other mussels, are dependent may be a Federal nexus where it would on areas with flow refuges where shear not otherwise occur because, for requirements; (3) Cover or shelter; stress (the stream’s ability to entrain and example, it is or has become transport bed material created by the unoccupied or the occupancy is in (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development) of offspring; flow acting on the bed material) is low question; (2) focusing conservation and sediments remain stable during activities on the most essential features and (5) Habitats that are protected from flood events (Layzer and Madison 1995, and areas; (3) providing educational p. 341; Strayer 1999a, pp. 468 and 472; benefits to State or county governments disturbance or are representative of the historical, geographic, and ecological Hastie et al. 2001, pp. 111–114). Flow or private entities; and (4) preventing refuges conceivably allow relatively people from causing inadvertent harm distributions of a species. We derive the specific physical or immobile mussels such as the Neosho to the species. Therefore, because we biological features required for Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot to remain in the have determined that the designation of mucket and rabbitsfoot from studies of same general location throughout their critical habitat will not likely increase these species’ habitat, ecology, and life entire lives. These patches of stable the degree of threat to the species and history as described below. Additional habitat may be highly important for the may provide some measure of benefit, information can be found in the rabbitsfoot since it typically does not we find that designation of critical STATUS ASSESSMENT FOR NEOSHO burrow, making it more susceptible to habitat is prudent for the Neosho MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT section displacement into unsuitable habitat. mucket and rabbitsfoot. of this proposed rule. We have However, flow refuges are not created Critical Habitat Determinability determined that the following physical equally and there are likely other habitat or biological features are essential for Having determined that designation of variables that are important, but poorly Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. critical habitat is prudent, under section understood (Roberts 2008, pers. comm.). 4(a)(3) of the Act, we must find whether Space for Individual and Population Natural river and creek channel critical habitat is determinable for the Growth and for Normal Behavior stability are achieved by allowing the two species. Our regulations at 50 CFR The Neosho mucket is historically river or creek to develop a stable 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is associated with the Illinois, Neosho, and dimension, pattern, and profile, such not determinable when one or both of Verdigris Rivers and their larger that, over time, channel features are the following situations exist: tributaries (Arkansas River basin). maintained and the river or creek (i) Information sufficient to perform Generally, the Neosho mucket is found system neither aggrades nor degrades. required analyses of the impacts of the embedded in stable substrates Channel instability occurs when the designation is lacking, or associated with shallow riffles (areas scouring (flushing) process leads to (ii) The biological needs of the species where shallow, generally less than 1 m degradation or excessive sediment are not sufficiently well known to (3.3 ft) in depth, turbulent water passes deposition results in aggradation. Stable permit identification of an area as through and over stones or gravel of rivers and creeks consistently transport critical habitat. somewhat similar size) and runs their sediment load, both in size and When critical habitat is not (intermediate areas between pools and type, associated with local deposition determinable, the Act allows the Service riffles with moderate current) with and scour (Rosgen 1996, pp. 1–3). an additional year to publish a critical gravel and sand substrate and moderate Habitat conditions described above habitat designation (16 U.S.C. to swift currents (Oesch 1984, p. 221; provide space, cover, shelter, and sites 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). Harris 1998, p. 5; Obermeyer 2000, pp. for breeding, reproduction, and growth We reviewed the available 15–16). However, in Shoal Creek and of offspring for the Neosho mucket and information pertaining to the biological the Illinois River, the Neosho mucket rabbitsfoot. These habitats are formed needs of the species and habitat prefers near-shore areas or areas out of and maintained by water quantity, characteristics where these species are the main current (Harris 1998, p. 5). channel features (dimension, pattern, located. This and other information These habitats are formed and and profile), and sediment input to the represent the best scientific data maintained by water quantity, channel system through periodic flooding, available and led us to conclude that the slope, and normal sediment input to the which maintains connectivity and designation of critical habitat is system. interaction with the flood plain, and are determinable for the Neosho mucket The rabbitsfoot is historically dynamic. Changes in one or more of and rabbitsfoot. associated with small- to medium-sized these parameters can result in channel streams and some larger rivers in the degradation or aggradation, with serious Physical or Biological Features Lower Great Lakes and Lower effects to mussels. Therefore, we In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) Mississippi River sub-basins and Ohio, identify adequate water quantity, stream and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations Cumberland, Tennessee, White, channel stability, and floodplain at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which Arkansas, and Red River basins. The connectivity to be physical and areas within the geographic area rabbitsfoot usually occurs in shallow biological features for Neosho mucket occupied by the species at the time of areas along the bank and adjacent runs and rabbitsfoot that are essential in listing to designate as critical habitat, and riffles with gravel and sand accommodating feeding, breeding, we consider the physical or biological substrates where the water velocity is growth, and other normal behaviors of features that are essential to the reduced, but it also may occur in deep these species and in promoting gene conservation of the species and which runs (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, pp. flow within each species’ populations may require special management 211–212). Unlike the Neosho mucket and movement of their fish hosts.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63473
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or and adults) and differences in exposure sediments). Adequate water flow, water Other Nutritional or Physiological and sensitivity were previously quality, and sediment quality (as Requirements discussed (Factor A). Environmental defined above) are essential for normal The Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot contamination is a causal (contributing) behavior, growth, and viability during are riverine-adapted species that depend factor in the decline of mussel all life stages of the Neosho mucket and upon adequate water flow and are not populations. We estimate that most rabbitsfoot and their potential larva fish found in ponds or lakes. Continuously numeric standards for pollutants and hosts. Therefore, based on the flowing water is a habitat feature water quality parameters (for example, information above, we identify water associated with all surviving dissolved oxygen, pH, heavy metals) flow, water quality, and sediment populations of these species. Flowing that have been adopted by the States quality to be physical or biological water maintains the river and creek under the Clean Water Act represent features for both these species. bottoms and flow refuge habitats in levels that are essential to the Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or riffles and runs where these species are conservation of these mussels. However, Rearing some regulatory mechanisms may not found, transports food items to the Mussels require a fish host for sedentary juvenile and adult life stages, adequately protect mollusks in some reaches (see Factor D). The Service is transformation of larval mussels removes wastes, and provides oxygen (glochidia) to juvenile mussels for respiration of the Neosho mucket currently in consultation with the EPA to evaluate the protectiveness of criteria (Williams et al. 2008, p. 68); therefore, and rabbitsfoot. A natural flow regime presence of the appropriate fish host(s) that includes periodic flooding and approved in EPA’s water quality standards for endangered and is essential to the conservation of the maintains connectivity and interaction Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot (see with the floodplain is critical for the threatened species and their critical habitat as described in the STATUS ASSESSMENT FOR NEOSHO exchange of nutrients, movement of and MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT). spawning activities for potential fish Memorandum of Agreement that our agencies signed in 2001 (66 FR 11201, Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot hosts, and maintenance of flow refuges juveniles require stable habitats with in riffle and run habitats. February 22, 2001). Other factors that can potentially alter water quality are adequate water quantity and quality as Mussels, such as the Neosho mucket previously described for growth and and rabbitsfoot, filter algae, detritus, droughts and periods of low flow, nonpoint-source runoff from adjacent survival. Excessive sediments or dense microscopic animals, and bacteria from growth of filamentous algae can expose land surfaces (excessive amounts of the water column (Fuller 1974, p. 221; juvenile mussels to entrainment or sediments, nutrients, and pesticides), Silverman et al. 1997, pp. 1862–1865; predation and be detrimental to the point-source discharges from municipal Nichols and Garling 2000, pp. 874–876; survival of juvenile mussels (Hartfield and industrial wastewater treatment Strayer et al. 2004, pp. 430–431). and Hartfield 1996, pp. 372–374). facilities (excessive amounts of Encysted glochidia are nourished by Geomorphic instability can result in the ammonia, chlorine, and metals), and their fish hosts and feed for a period of loss of interstitial habitats and juvenile random spills or unregulated discharge one week to several months. Nutrient mussels due to scouring or deposition events. This could be particularly uptake by glochidia is not well (Hartfield 1993, pp. 372–373). Water harmful during drought conditions understood, but probably occurs quality, sediment quality, stable habitat, through the microvillae of the mantle when flows are depressed and health of fish hosts, and diet (of all life (Watters 2007, p. 55). For the first pollutants are more concentrated. stages) all influence survival of each life several months, juvenile mussels As relatively sedentary animals, stage and subsequent reproduction and partially employ pedal (foot) feeding, mussels must tolerate the full range of recruitment (Cope et al. 2008, p. 452). extracting bacteria, algae, and detritus environmental stressors that occur Connections between the rivers and from the sediment, although they also within the streams where they persist. adjacent flood plains occur periodically may filter interstitial (pore) water Both the amount (flow) and the physical during wet years and provide habitat for (Yeager et al. 1994, pp. 217–221). and chemical conditions (sediment and spawning and foraging fish hosts that However, their gills are rudimentary water quality) where these species require flood plain habitats for and generally incapable of filtering currently exist vary widely according to successful reproduction and recruitment particles (Watters 2007, p. 56). Adult season, precipitation events, and to adulthood. Barko et al. (2006, pp. mussels also can obtain their food by seasonal human activities within the 252–256) found that several fish host or deposit feeding, siphoning in food from various watersheds. Conditions across potential host species benefited from the sediment and its interstitial (pore) their historical ranges vary even more exploiting the resources of flood plain water and pedal feeding directly from due to geology, geography, and habitats that were not typically available the sediment (Yeager et al. 1994, pp. differences in human population for use during normal hydrology years. 217–221; Vaughn and Hakenkamp 2001, densities and land uses. In general, Furthermore, Kwak (1988, pp. 243–247) pp. 1432–1438). Food availability and these species survive in areas where the and Slipke et al. (2005, p. 289) indicated quality for the Neosho mucket and severity, frequency, duration, and that periodic inundation of floodplain rabbitsfoot in their habitats are affected seasonality of water flow is adequate to habitats increased successful fish by habitat stability, floodplain maintain stable flow refuges in riffle and reproduction, which leads to increased connectivity, flow, and water and run habitats (sufficient flow to remove availability of native host fishes for sediment quality. fine particles and sediments without mussel reproduction. However, Rypel et The ranges of many water quality causing degradation), and where al. (2009, p. 502) indicated that mussels parameters that define suitable habitat sediment and water quality is adequate tended to exhibit minimal growth conditions for the Neosho mucket and for year-round survival (moderate to during high flow years. Therefore, rabbitsfoot have not been investigated or high levels of dissolved oxygen; low to optimal flooding of these habitats would are poorly understood. The pathways of moderate exposure to environmental not be too frequent and should occur at exposure to a variety of environmental pollutants such as nutrients, dissolved similar frequencies to that of the natural pollutants for all four mussel life stages metals, and pharmaceuticals; and hydrologic regime of the rivers and (free and encysted glochidia, juveniles, relatively unpolluted water and creeks inhabited by the Neosho mucket
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63474 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
and rabbitsfoot. Based on the or degrading bed elevation) with PBFs in all the proposed critical habitat information above, we identify water habitats that support a diversity of units may require special management quality, sediment quality, stable habitat, freshwater mussel and native fish (such due to threats posed by channelization health of fish hosts, diet (of all life as, stable riffles, sometimes with runs, and other navigation related projects, stages), and periodic flooding of and mid-channel island habitats that dams, impoundments, land use runoff, floodplain habitat to be physical or provide flow refuges consisting of gravel and point or nonpoint-source water biological features for these species. and sand substrates with low to pollution, or both (see Factors A and D). moderate amounts of fine sediment and Other activities that may affect the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for attached filamentous algae). features and their component PCEs in the Neosho Mucket and Rabbitsfoot (2) A hydrologic flow regime (the the proposed critical habitat units Under the Act and its implementing severity, frequency, duration, and include those listed in the ‘‘Effects of regulations, we are required to identify seasonality of discharge over time) Critical Habitat Designation’’ section the physical or biological features necessary to maintain benthic habitats below. (PBFs) essential to the conservation of where the species are found and to In summary, we find that the areas we Neosho mucket and the rabbitsfoot in maintain connectivity of rivers with the are proposing as critical habitat that are areas occupied at the time of listing, floodplain, allowing the exchange of occupied at the time of listing contain focusing on the features’ primary nutrients and sediment for maintenance the features essential to the conservation constituent elements. We consider of the mussel’s and fish host’s habitat, of the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot, primary constituent elements (PCEs) to food availability, spawning habitat for and that these features may require be the elements of physical or biological native fishes, and the ability for newly special management considerations or features that, when laid out in the transformed juveniles to settle and protections. Special management appropriate quantity and spatial become established in their habitats. considerations or protections may be arrangement to provide for a species’ (3) Water and sediment quality required to eliminate, or to reduce to life-history processes, are essential to (including, but not limited to, negligible levels, the threats affecting the conservation of the species. conductivity, hardness, turbidity, each unit and to preserve and maintain In addition to the physical and temperature, pH, ammonia, heavy the essential physical and biological biological features just described, we metals, and chemical constituents) features that the proposed critical derive the PCEs from the biological necessary to sustain natural habitat units provide to the Neosho needs of these species as described in physiological processes for normal mucket and rabbitsfoot. Additional the STATUS ASSESSMENT FOR behavior, growth, and viability of all life discussions of threats facing individual NEOSHO MUCKET AND stages. sites are provided in the individual unit RABBITSFOOT section of this proposed (4) The presence and abundance descriptions. rule. Little is known of the specific (currently unknown) of fish hosts Criteria Used To Identify Proposed habitat requirements for the Neosho necessary for recruitment of the Neosho Critical Habitat mucket and rabbitsfoot other than that mucket and rabbitsfoot. The occurrence they require flowing water, stable river of natural fish assemblages, reflected by As required by section 4(b)(2) of the channels, adequate food, suitable fish species richness, relative Act, we use the best scientific data substrate, and adequate water and abundance, and community available to designate critical habitat. sediment quality. Neosho mucket and composition, for each inhabited river or We review available information rabbitsfoot mussel larvae also require creek will serve as an indication of pertaining to the habitat requirements of fish hosts for development to juvenile appropriate presence and abundance of the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. In mussels (see STATUS ASSESSMENT fish hosts until appropriate host fish can accordance with the Act and its FOR NEOSHO MUCKET AND be identified. implementing regulation at 50 CFR RABBITSFOOT section). To identify the (5) Either no competitive or 424.12(e), we consider whether physical and biological needs of these predaceous invasive (nonnative) designating additional areas—outside species, we have relied on current species, or such species in quantities those currently occupied as well as conditions at locations where the low enough to have minimal effect on those occupied at the time of listing— species survive, the limited information survival of freshwater mussels. are necessary to ensure the conservation available on these species and their of the species. We are not currently close relatives, and factors associated Special Management Considerations or proposing to designate any areas outside with the decline and extirpation of these Protection the geographic area occupied by the and other aquatic mollusks from When designating critical habitat, we species because occupied areas are extensive portions of the Lower Great assess whether the specific areas within sufficient for the conservation of the Lakes and Lower Mississippi River the geographic area occupied by the species. subbasins and Ohio, Cumberland, species at the time of listing contain When determining proposed critical Tennessee, White, Arkansas, and Red features which are essential to the habitat boundaries, we made every River Basins. conservation of the species and which effort to avoid including developed Based on the above needs and our may require special management areas such as lands covered by current knowledge of the physical and considerations or protection. buildings, pavement, and other biological features and habitat Various activities in or adjacent to structures because such lands usually characteristics required to sustain the each critical habitat unit described in lack physical or biological features for species’ life-history processes, we this proposed rule may affect one or the species. Areas proposed as critical determine that the PCEs specific to the more of the physical or biological habitat for the Neosho mucket and Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot are: features and may require special rabbitsfoot include only stream (1) Geomorphically stable river management considerations or channels within the ordinary high-water channels and banks (channels that protection. Some of these activities line, and do not contain any developed maintain lateral dimensions, include, but are not limited to, those areas, structures, or areas inundated by longitudinal profiles, and sinuosity previously discussed in the ‘‘Summary lakes and reservoirs. The ordinary high- patterns over time without an aggrading of Factors Affecting the Species.’’ The water line defines the stream channel
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63475
and is the point on the stream bank respective basins (Great Lakes and proposed for designation based on where water is continuous and leaves Cumberland) and a metapopulation. sufficient elements of physical or some evidence, such as erosion or No unoccupied stream, as defined in biological features being present to aquatic vegetation. The scale of the this proposed rule, is proposed as support Neosho mucket (8 units) and maps we prepared under the parameters critical habitat for Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot (35 units) life-history for publication within the Code of rabbitsfoot. We find that unoccupied processes. Some units contained all of Federal Regulations may not reflect the stream reaches are not essential for the the identified elements of physical or exclusion of structures or other conservation of either species for one or biological features and supported developed areas. Any such areas more of the following reasons: multiple life-history processes. Some inadvertently left inside critical habitat (1) Unoccupied habitats are isolated units contained only some elements of from occupied habitats due to reservoir boundaries shown on the maps of this the physical or biological features construction and dam operations (dam proposed rule have been excluded by necessary to support the Neosho mucket water releases have altered natural text in the proposed rule and are not and rabbitsfoot particular use of that stream hydrology, geomorphology, habitat. proposed for designation as critical water temperature, and native mollusk habitat. Therefore, if the critical habitat and fish communities); Proposed Critical Habitat Designation is finalized as proposed, a Federal (2) Unoccupied areas exhibit limited When designating critical habitat, we action involving these areas would not habitat availability, degraded habitat, or assess whether the areas within the trigger section 7 consultation with low potential value for management geographical area occupied by the respect to critical habitat and the (Muskingum, Elk, Scioto, Little Miami, species at the time of listing contain requirement of no adverse modification Licking, East Fork White, Cumberland, features that are essential to the unless the specific action would affect Holston, Clinch, Sequatchie, and conservation of the species and whether the physical or biological features in the Buffalo (Duck River system) Rivers); adjacent critical habitat. (3) Collection records for these those features may require special species indicate that these species have management considerations or We are proposing for designation of protection. Three critical habitat units critical habitat areas that we have been extirpated from unoccupied areas for several decades or more; or proposed for the Neosho mucket and determined are occupied at the time of rabbitsfoot are currently designated listing, as defined in this proposed rule, (4) There are no historical records of occurrence within the stream reach for under the Act for the oyster mussel and contain sufficient elements of (Epioblasma capsaeformis) and physical or biological features to Neosho mucket, rabbitsfoot, or both. Our analysis concludes that inclusion Cumberlandian combshell (Epioblasma support life-history processes essential of unoccupied habitats is not essential brevidens) encompassing the Duck for the conservation of the Neosho to conserve these species. While we River, Tennessee (74 rkm, 46 rmi) and mucket and the rabbitsfoot. The Neosho recognize the importance to recovery of Bear Creek, Alabama and Mississippi mucket and rabbitsfoot persist in unoccupied habitat, in this case, (40 rkm, 25 rmi) (50 CFR 17.95(f)) or scattered portions of 38 rivers and unoccupied habitat also does not proposed as critical habitat under the creeks. Distribution and status provide habitat for reintroduction, Act for the yellowcheek darter information pertaining to the Neosho reduce the level of stochastic and (Etheostoma moorei) in the Middle Fork mucket and rabbitsfoot was previously human-induced threats, or decrease the Little Red River, Arkansas (23.2 rkm, discussed in the STATUS risk of extinction: 14.5 rmi; 76 FR 63360, October 12, ASSESSMENT FOR NEOSHO MUCKET (1) Unoccupied habitat does not 2011; Table 3). The existing critical AND RABBITSFOOT section. River currently contain sufficient physical habitat for the oyster mussel and habitats are highly dependent upon and biological features or have the Cumberlandian combshell completely upstream and downstream channel ability to be restored to support life- overlaps Unit RF16 (Bear Creek), but the habitat conditions for their history functions of the Neosho mucket exact unit descriptions (length) differ maintenance. Therefore, where one and rabbitsfoot (such characteristics as due to mapping refinement since the occurrence record was known from a geomorphically stable channels, earlier designation. In addition, five river reach, we considered the entire perennial water flows, adequate water critical habitat units proposed for the reach between the uppermost and quality, and appropriate benthic Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot are lowermost locations as occupied substrates); currently designated by the State of habitat, except lakes and reservoirs. We (2) Unoccupied habitat does not Kansas as critical habitat for both have defined occupied habitat for the support the once diverse mollusk species in the Fall, Spring, Neosho, Neosho mucket as those stream reaches communities, including the presence of Cottonwood River, and Verdigris Rivers known to be currently extant. For the closely related species requiring and Neosho mucket in Shoal Creek rabbitsfoot, we have defined occupied physical or biological features similar to (K.S.A. 32–959; Table 3) and are habitat as those stream reaches that are the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot; or afforded similar state-level protections sizeable and small populations as (3) Unoccupied habitat is not adjacent as those provided under the Act. No defined by Butler (2005), and the to currently occupied areas where there other critical habitat units proposed for marginal populations of Fish Creek, Red is potential for natural dispersal and these species have been designated or River and Allegheny River that are the reoccupation by the Neosho mucket and proposed as critical habitat for other last extant populations in their rabbitsfoot. A total of 43 units are species under the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63476 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS PROPOSED FOR THE NEOSHO MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT THAT ARE CURRENTLY DESIGNATED OR PROPOSED AS CRITICAL HABITAT FOR OTHER FEDERALLY AND STATE LISTED SPECIES
Length of Unit Species present in unit Federal reference State reference overlap (Unit #) (rkm/rmi)
Shoal Creek (NM3)...... Neosho mucket, fluted shell, Ouachita ...... K.S.A. 32–959 9.7/6.0 kidneyshell, Western fanshell, redspot chub. Spring River (NM4 and RF1) Neosho mucket, rabbitsfoot, elktoe, ellipse ...... K.S.A. 32–959 11.6/7.2 shell, Neosho madtom, fluted shell, Ouachita kidneyshell, Western fanshell, redspot chub. Fall River (NM6) ...... Neosho mucket, Western fanshell ...... K.S.A. 32–959 90.4/56.2 Verdigris River (NM6 and Neosho mucket, rabbitsfoot, Ouachita ...... K.S.A. 32–959 80.6/50.1 RF2). kidneyshell, western fanshell, butterfly. Neosho River (NM7 and Neosho mucket, rabbitsfoot, butterfly, Neo- ...... K.S.A. 32–959 245.9/152.8 RF3). sho madtom, Ouachita kidneyshell, west- ern fanshell. Cottonwood River (NM8)...... Neosho mucket, rabbitsfoot, butterfly, ...... K.S.A. 32–959 2.6/1.6 Ouachita kidneyshell, western fanshell. Middle Fork Little Red River Yellowcheek darter ...... 76 FR 63360, October 12, ...... 23.3/14.5 (RF7). 2011. Bear Creek (RF16) ...... Oyster mussel, Cumberland combshell ...... 50 CFR 17.95(f) ...... 49.7/30.9 Duck River (RF19) ...... Oyster mussel, Cumberland Combshell ...... 50 CFR 17.95(f) ...... 74.0/46.0
Total ...... 587.9/365.3
We are proposing eight units, totaling Sparrowhawk Wildlife Management • Unit RF18: Fern Cave NWR, 0.5 rkm approximately 779 rkm (484 rmi), in Area (WMA), 2.2 rkm (1.4 rmi); (0.3 rmi); four states (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, • Units NM4 and RF1: Spring River • Unit RF19: Yanahli WMA, 38.9 rkm and Oklahoma) as critical habitat for the Wildlife Area, 1.4 rkm (0.9 rmi); (24.3 rmi) and Santa Fe County Park, 1.4 Neosho mucket (Table 4). We are • Unit RF2: Corps’ Oologah Lake rkm (0.9 rmi); proposing 35 units, totaling Project, 0.6 rkm (0.4 rmi) and Corps’ • Unit RF20a: Shiloh National approximately 2,662 rkm (1,653.8 rmi), McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Military Park, 2.6 rkm (1.6 rmi); in 12 states (Alabama, Arkansas, Navigation System Project, 3.4 rkm (2.1 • Unit RF20b: Kentucky Dam Village Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, rmi); State Resort Park, 0.6 rkm (0.4 rmi) and Missouri, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Ohio, • Unit NM7: Neosho Wildlife Area unnamed TVA land downstream of Pennsylvania, and Tennessee) as critical 6.1 rkm (3.8 rmi); Kentucky Lake Dam, 2.4 rkm (1.5 rmi); habitat for the rabbitsfoot (Table 4). Four • Unit RF4a: Ouachita National • Unit RF21: Massac Forest Nature of the 43 units, Units NM4, NM7, RF1, Forest, 21.8 rkm (13.6 rmi); Preserve, 2.2 rkm (1.4 rmi), West and RF3 are occupied by both Neosho • Unit RF5: Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, Kentucky WMA, 5.6 rkm (3.5 rmi), mucket and rabbitsfoot. Table 5 22.2 rkm (13.9 rmi); Ballard WMA, 2.6 rkm (1.6 rmi) and summarizes primary adjacent riparian • Unit RF6: Little River NWR, 37.6 Chestnut Hills Nature Preserve, 2.4 rkm landowners in each of the proposed rkm (23.5 rmi), Ouachita National Forest (1.5 rmi); Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot critical 16.0 rkm (10.0 rmi), and Cossatot NWR, • Unit RF22: Mammoth Cave habitat units by private, State, Tribal 11.5 rkm (7.2 rmi); National Park, 17.0 rkm (10.6 rmi); (jurisdictional not ownership), or • Unit RF8a: Jacksonport State Park, • Unit RF23: Pennsylvania State Federal ownership. One Neosho mucket 2.9 rkm (1.8 rmi) and Henry Gray- Game Land 277, 2.9 rkm (1.8 rmi) and and two rabbitsfoot proposed critical Hurricane Lake WMA, 7.8 rkm (4.9 rmi); Pennsylvania State Game Land 85, 0.6 • habitat units, respectively, are located Unit RF8b: White River NWR, 57.6 rkm (0.4 rmi); • within Tribal jurisdictional areas, Unit rkm (36.0 rmi); Unit RF24: Clear Creek State Forest, • NM1 (Illinois River, Oklahoma; 103.0 Unit RF9: Shirey Bay Rainey Brake 9.9 rkm (6.2 rmi); • rkm (64.0 rmi)), Unit RF2 (Verdigris WMA, 10.1 rkm (6.3 rmi); Unit RF25: Erie NWR, 16.2 rkm • River; 45.5 rkm (28.3 rmi)), and Unit Unit RF10: Harold Alexander (10.1 rmi) in; • RF6 (Little River, Oklahoma; 41.4 rkm WMA, 1.1 rkm (0.7 rmi); Unit RF26: Prophetstown State • (25.7 rmi)). Unit RF13: Buffalo National River, Park, 2.1 rkm (1.3 rmi); 113.6 rkm (70.6 rmi); • Unit RF27: Muskingum Watershed Public lands adjacent to Neosho • Unit RF14: Sam A. Baker State Park Conservancy Land, 5.0 rkm (3.1 rmi); mucket and rabbitsfoot critical habitat 1.0 rkm (0.6 rmi) and Corps’ • Unit RF28: Little Darby State Scenic units consist of approximately 505.3 Wappapello Lake Project 25.1 rkm (15.7 Waterway–River Lands, 8.7 rkm (5.4 rkm (314.0 rmi) of riparian lands in the rmi); rmi); following units. • Unit RF16: Tishomingo State Park, • Unit RF30: Fish Creek Wildlife • Unit NM1: Ozark National Forest, 6.1 rkm (3.8 rmi), NPS Natchez Trace Area, 1.6 rkm (1.0 rmi); and 20.3 rkm (12.7 rmi) Corps’ Lake Parkway, 4.5 rkm (2.8 rmi), and TVA • Unit RF32: Corps’ Shenango River Tenkiller Project, 9.0 rkm (5.6 rmi), and Pickwick Lake Project, 7.4 rkm (4.6 rmi); Lake Project, 8.8 rkm (5.5 rmi).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63477
TABLE 4—OCCUPANCY OF NEOSHO MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT BY PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS
Approximate river distances currently occupied by the Species species River km River miles
Neosho mucket ...... 779.1 484.1 Rabbitsfoot ...... 2,661.5 1,653.8
Total ...... 3,440.6 2,137.9
Species, stream (unit), and State Currently occupied
Neosho mucket: Unit NM1, Illinois River AR, OK ...... 146.1 90.8 Unit NM2, Elk River, MO, OK ...... 20.3 12.6 Unit NM3, Shoal Creek, KS, MO ...... 75.8 47.1 Unit NM4, Spring River, KS, MO ...... 102.3 63.6 Unit NM5, North Fork Spring River, MO ...... 16.4 10.2 Unit NM6, Fall and Verdigris Rivers, KS ...... 171.1 106.3 Unit NM7, Neosho River, KS ...... 244.5 151.9 Unit NM8, Cottonwood River, KS ...... 2.6 1.6
Total ...... 779.1 484.1
Rabbitsfoot: Unit RF1, Spring River, MO, KS ...... 56.5 35.1 Unit RF2, Verdigris River, OK ...... 45.5 28.3 Unit RF3, Neosho River, KS ...... 26.6 16.5 Unit RF4a, Ouachita River, AR ...... 21.9 13.6 Unit RF4b, Ouachita River, AR ...... 157.9 98.1 Unit RF5, Saline River, AR ...... 288.4 179.2 Unit RF6, Little River, OK, AR ...... 139.7 86.8 Unit RF7, Middle Fork Little Red River, AR ...... 23.3 14.5 Unit RF8a, White River, AR ...... 188.3 117.0 Unit RF8b, White River, AR ...... 68.9 42.8 Unit RF9, Black River, AR ...... 92.2 57.3 Unit RF10, Spring River, AR ...... 62.8 39.0 Unit RF11, South Fork Spring River, AR ...... 16.4 10.2 Unit RF12, Strawberry River, AR ...... 123.8 76.9 Unit RF13, Buffalo River, AR ...... 113.6 70.6 Unit RF14, St. Francis River, MO ...... 64.3 40.0 Unit RF15, Big Sunflower River, MS ...... 51.5 32.0 Unit RF16, Bear Creek, AL, MS ...... 49.7 30.9 Unit RF17, Big Black River, MS ...... 43.3 26.9 Unit RF18, Paint Rock River, AL ...... 81.0 50.3 Unit RF19, Duck River, TN ...... 235.3 146.2 Unit RF20a, Tennessee River, TN ...... 26.7 16.6 Unit RF20b, Tennessee River, KY ...... 35.6 22.1 Unit RF21, Ohio River, KY, IL ...... 45.9 28.5 Unit RF22, Green River, KY ...... 175.6 109.1 Unit RF23, French Creek, PA ...... 120.4 74.8 Unit RF24, Allegheny River, PA ...... 57.3 35.6 Unit RF25, Muddy Creek, PA ...... 20.1 12.5 Unit RF26, Tippecanoe River, IN ...... 75.6 47.0 Unit RF27, Walhonding River, OH ...... 17.5 10.9 Unit RF28, Little Darby Creek, OH ...... 33.3 20.7 Unit RF29, North Fork Vermilion River and Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion River, IL ...... 28.5 17.7 Unit RF30, Fish Creek, OH ...... 7.7 4.8 Unit RF31, Red River, KY, TN ...... 50.2 31.2 Unit RF32, Shenango River, PA ...... 16.3 10.1
Total ...... 2,661.5 1,653.8
States were granted ownership of have made grants to private parties that proposed rule are owned by the States. lands beneath navigable waters up to included lands below the ordinary high- Riparian lands along the waters are the ordinary high-water line upon water mark of some navigable waters either in private ownership, or owned achieving statehood (Pollard v. Hagan, that are included in this proposal. by municipalities, States, or Federal 44 U.S. (3 How.) 212 (1845)). Prior to However, most, if not all, lands beneath entities (Table 5). statehood, the American colonies may the navigable waters included in this
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63478 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR NEOSHO MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT AND OWNERSHIP OF RIPARIAN LANDS
Tribal * Federal State & local Private (subset of Critical habitat units rkm; rmi government rkm; rmi private) rkm; rmi rkm; rmi
Neosho Mucket
Unit NM1: Illinois River ...... 29.4; 18.3 2.3; 1.4 114.4; 71.1 103.0; 64.0 Unit NM2: Elk River ...... 0 0 20.3; 12.6 0 Unit NM3: Shoal Creek ...... 0 0 75.8; 47.1 0 Unit NM4: Spring River ...... 0 1.4; 0.9 100.9; 62.7 0 Unit NM5: North Fork Spring River ...... 0 0 16.4; 10.2 0 Unit NM6: Fall River ...... 0 0 90.4; 56.2 0 Unit NM6: Verdigris River ...... 0 0 80.6; 50.1 0 Unit NM7: Neosho River ...... 0 6.1; 3.8 238.3; 148.1 0 Unit NM8: Cottonwood River ...... 0 0 2.6; 1.6 0
Total ...... 29.4; 18.3 9.8; 6.1 739.8; 459.7 103.0; 64.0
Rabbitsfoot
Unit RF1: Spring River ...... 0 1.4; 0.9 55.0; 34.2 0 Unit RF2: Verdigris River ...... 4.0; 2.5 0 41.5; 25.8 41.5; 25.8 Unit RF3: Neosho River ...... 0 0 26.6; 16.5 0 Unit RF4a: Ouachita River ...... 3.9; 2.4 0 18.0; 11.2 0 Unit RF4b: Ouachita River ...... 0 0 157.9; 98.1 0 Unit RF5: Saline River ...... 0 22.3; 13.9 266.0; 165.3 0 Unit RF6: Little River ...... 63.9; 39.7 0 75.8; 47.1 41.4; 25.7 Unit RF7: Middle Fork Little Red River ...... 0 0 23.3; 14.5 0 Unit RF8a: White River ...... 0 10.8; 6.7 177.5; 110.3 0 Unit RF8b: White River ...... 57.9; 36.0 0 10.9; 6.8 0 Unit RF9: Black River ...... 0 10.1; 6.3 82.1; 51.0 0 Unit RF10: Spring River ...... 0 1.1; 0.7 61.6; 38.3 0 Unit RF11: South Fork Spring River ...... 0 0 16.4; 10.2 0 Unit RF12: Strawberry River ...... 0 0 123.8; 76.9 0 Unit RF13: Buffalo River ...... 113.6; 70.6 0 0 0 Unit RF14: St. Francis River ...... 25.2; 15.7 1.0; 0.6 38.1; 23.7 0 Unit RF15: Big Sunflower River ...... 0 0 51.5; 32.0 0 Unit RF16: Bear Creek ...... 11.9; 7.4 6.1; 3.8 31.7; 19.7 0 Unit RF17: Big Black River ...... 0 0 43.3; 26.9 0 Unit RF18: Paint Rock River ...... 0.5; 0.3 0 80.5; 50.0 0 Unit RF19: Duck River ...... 0 40.5; 25.2 194.7; 121.0 0 Unit RF20a: Tennessee River ...... 2.6; 1.6 0 24.1; 15.0 0 Unit RF20b: Tennessee River ...... 2.4; 1.5 0.6; 0.4 32.5; 20.2 0 Unit RF21: Ohio River ...... 0 12.9; 8.0 33.0; 20.5 0 Unit RF22: Green River ...... 17.0; 10.6 0 158.5; 98.5 0 Unit RF23: French Creek ...... 0 3.5; 2.2 116.8; 72.6 0 Unit RF24: Allegheny River ...... 0 10.0; 6.2 47.3; 29.4 0 Unit RF25: Muddy Creek ...... 16.3; 10.1 0 3.9; 2.4 0 Unit RF26: Tippecanoe River ...... 0 2.1; 1.3 73.5; 45.7 0 Unit RF27: Walhonding River ...... 0 5.0; 3.1 12.6; 7.8 0 Unit RF28: Little Darby Creek ...... 0 8.7; 5.4 24.6; 15.3 0 Unit RF29: North Fork Vermilion River and Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion River ...... 0 0 28.5; 17.7 0 Unit RF30: Fish Creek ...... 0 1.6; 1.0 6.1; 3.8 0 Unit RF31: Red River ...... 0 0 50.2; 31.2 0 Unit RF32: Shenango River ...... 8.8; 5.5 0 7.4; 4.6 0
Total ...... 328.1; 203.9 137.9; 85.7 2,195.7; 1,364.4 86.9; 54.0
Total for both species ...... 357.6; 222.2 147.7; 91.8 2,935.6; 1,824.1 189.9; 118.0 Note: Distances may not sum due to rounding. * Tribal Jurisdictional Area only, does not represent riparian land ownership by any tribe and is a subset of the private lands category.
We present brief descriptions of all Federal; State and local government; ordinary high-water mark on nontidal units and reasons why they meet the and private lands (Tribal lands are a rivers is the line on the shore definition of critical habitat for the subset of private lands). Proposed established by the fluctuations of water Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. River- critical habitat units include the river and indicated by physical kilometer totals presented in the Unit channels within the ordinary high-water characteristics, such as a clear, natural descriptions below are the sums of line. As defined in 33 CFR 329.11, the line impressed on the bank; shelving;
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63479
changes in the character of soil; activities as impoundment, water occupied at the time of listing and destruction of terrestrial vegetation; the diversion, or water withdrawal; contains all or some components of all presence of litter and debris; or other alteration of water chemistry or water four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. appropriate means that consider the quality; and changes in stream bed The PBFs in this unit may require characteristics of the surrounding areas. material composition and sediment special management considerations or For each stream reach proposed as a quality from activities that would protections to address changes to the critical habitat unit, the upstream and release sediments or nutrients into the same activities as discussed in Unit downstream boundaries are described water, such as urban development and NM2 above. All adjacent riparian lands generally below. associated construction projects, in this unit are in private ownership livestock grazing, confined animal (Table 5). Neosho Mucket operations (turkey and chicken), timber Unit NM6: Fall River—Elk, Greenwood, Neosho mucket status and harvesting, and mining (see Factor A). and Wilson Counties, Kansas; Verdigris distribution for each critical habitat unit All the adjacent riparian lands in this River—Montgomery and Wilson was previously described in the unit are in private ownership (Table 5). STATUS ASSESSMENT FOR NEOSHO Counties, Kansas MUCKET AND RABBITSFOOT section. Unit NM3: Shoal Creek—Cherokee Unit NM6 includes a total of 171.1 County, Kansas; and Newton County, rkm (106.3 rmi) including 90.4 rkm Unit NM1: Illinois River—Benton and Missouri (56.2 rmi) of the Fall River from Fall Washington Counties, Arkansas; and Unit NM3 includes approximately River Lake dam northwest of Fall River, Adair, Cherokee, and Delaware 75.8 rkm (47.1 rmi) of Shoal Creek from Greenwood County, Kansas, Counties, Oklahoma Missouri Highway W near Ritchey, downstream to its confluence with the Unit NM1 includes 146.1 rkm (90.8 Newton County, Missouri, to Empire Verdigris River near Neodesha, Wilson rmi) of the Illinois River from the Lake where inundation begins in County, Kansas. Unit NM6 also includes Muddy Fork Illinois River confluence Cherokee County, Kansas. This unit was 80.6 rkm (50.1 rmi) of the Verdigris with the Illinois River south of Savoy, occupied at the time of listing and River from Kansas Highway 39 near Washington County, Arkansas, contains all or some components of all Benedict, Wilson County, Kansas downstream to the Baron Creek four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. downstream to the Elk River confluence confluence southeast of Tahlequah, The PBFs in this unit may require near Independence, Montgomery Cherokee County, Oklahoma. This unit special management considerations or County, Kansas. This unit was occupied was occupied at the time of listing and protections to address changes to the at the time of listing and contains all or contains all or some components of all same activities as discussed in Unit some components of all four PBFs and four PBFs and contains PCEs 2, 3, 4, and NM2 above and releases of chemical contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this 5. The PBFs in this unit may require contaminants from industrial and unit may require special management special management considerations or municipal effluents (see Factor A). All considerations or protections to address protection to address changes in stream adjacent riparian lands in this unit are changes to the same activities as channel stability associated with urban in private ownership (Table 5). discussed in Unit NM2 above. All development and clearing of riparian adjacent riparian lands in this unit are Unit NM4: Spring River—Jasper and areas due to land use conversion in the in private ownership (Table 5). watershed; alteration of water chemistry Lawrence Counties, Missouri; and or water and sediment quality; and Cherokee County, Kansas Unit NM7: Neosho River—Allen, changes in stream bed material Unit NM4 includes 102.3 rkm (63.6 Cherokee, Coffey, Labette, Neosho, and composition and quality from activities rmi) of the Spring River from Missouri Woodson Counties, Kansas that would release sediments or Highway 97 north of Stotts City, Unit NM7 includes 244.5 rkm (151.9 nutrients into the water, such as urban Lawrence County, Missouri, rmi) of the Neosho River from Kansas development and associated downstream to the confluence of Turkey Highway 58 west of LeRoy, Coffey construction projects, livestock grazing, Creek north of Empire, Cherokee County, Kansas, downstream to the confined animal operations, and timber County, Kansas. This unit was occupied Kansas and Oklahoma State line, harvesting (see Factor A). The majority at the time of listing and contains all or Cherokee County, Kansas. This unit was of the adjacent riparian lands in this some components of all four PBFs and occupied at the time of listing and unit are in private ownership or private contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this contains all or some components of all lands under tribal jurisdiction (Table 5). unit may require special management four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. considerations or protections to address The PBFs in this unit may require Unit NM2: Elk River—McDonald changes to the same activities as special management considerations or County, Missouri; and Delaware County, discussed in Unit NM2 above and protections to address changes Oklahoma releases of chemical contaminants from previously to the same activities as Unit NM2 includes a total of 20.3 rkm industrial and municipal effluents. discussed in Unit NM2 above and (12.6 rmi) of the Elk River from Missouri Almost all (99 percent) of the adjacent releases of chemical contaminants from Highway 59 at Noel, McDonald County, riparian lands in this unit are in private industrial and municipal effluents and Missouri, to the confluence of Buffalo ownership (Table 5). tail water releases downstream of John Creek immediately downstream of the Redmond Reservoir. All adjacent Unit NM5: North Fork Spring River— Oklahoma and Missouri State line, riparian lands in this unit are in private Jasper County, Missouri Delaware County, Oklahoma. This unit ownership (Table 5). was occupied at the time of listing and Unit NM5 includes 16.4 rkm (10.2 contains all or some components of all rmi) of the North Fork Spring River from Unit NM8: Cottonwood River—Chase four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. the confluence of Buck Branch County, Kansas The PBFs in this unit may require southwest of Jasper, Missouri, Unit NM8 includes 2.6 rkm (1.6 rmi) special management considerations or downstream to its confluence with the of the Cottonwood River from the South protections to address changes in the Spring River near Purcell, Jasper Fork Cottonwood River confluence existing flow regime due to such County, Missouri. This unit was downstream to the Kansas Road 140
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63480 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(also known as Heins Road), east of private lands under tribal jurisdiction components of all four PBFs and Cottonwood Falls, Chase County, (Table 5). contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this Kansas. This unit was occupied at the unit may require special management Unit RF2: Verdigris River—Rogers time of listing and contains all or some considerations or protections to address County, Oklahoma components of all four PBFs and changes described above. contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this Unit RF2 includes 45.5 rkm (28.3 rmi) Approximately 82 percent of the unit may require special management of the Verdigris River from Oologah adjacent riparian lands in this unit are considerations or protection to address Lake dam north of Claremore, in private ownership and the remaining changes in stream channel stability Oklahoma, downstream to Interstate 44 18 percent are in Federal ownership associated with clearing of riparian (Will Rogers Turnpike) west of Catoosa, (Table 5). areas due to land use conversion in the Rogers County, Oklahoma. This unit Unit RF4b: Ouachita River—Clark, Hot watershed; alteration of water chemistry was occupied at the time of listing and Spring, and Ouachita Counties, or water and sediment quality; and contains all or some components of all Arkansas changes in stream bed material four PBFs and in part, contains all five composition and quality from activities PCEs. It is possible that PCEs 1 and 2 Unit RF4b includes 157.9 rkm (98.1 that would release sediments or are limiting factors for rabbitsfoot rmi) of the Ouachita River from nutrients into the water, such as urban distribution and abundance from Interstate 30 at Malvern, Hot Spring development and associated Oologah Lake dam downstream to the County, Arkansas, downstream to U.S. construction projects, livestock grazing, confluence of the Caney River; thus we Highway 79 at Camden, Ouachita and release of contaminants from are unable to determine at this time County, Arkansas. This unit was municipal effluents (see Factor A). All whether this reach contains PCEs 1 and occupied at the time of listing and adjacent riparian lands in this unit are 2. The PBFs in this unit may require contains all or some components of all in private ownership (Table 5). special management considerations or four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. protections as described above and The PBFs in this unit may require Rabbitsfoot changes in the existing flow regime due special management considerations or Rabbitsfoot status and distribution for to such activities as impoundment, tail protections to address changes each critical habitat unit was previously water releases from Oologah Lake dam, described above. All the adjacent described in the STATUS and channelization associated with the riparian lands in this unit are in private ASSESSMENT FOR NEOSHO MUCKET McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River ownership (Table 5). AND RABBITSFOOT section. Navigation System. The majority of the Unit RF5: Saline River—Ashley, The PBFs in units RF1 through RF32 adjacent riparian lands in this unit are Bradley, Cleveland, Dallas, Drew, Grant, may require special management in private ownership or private lands and Saline Counties, Arkansas considerations to address changes in the under tribal jurisdiction (Table 5). existing flow regime due to such Unit RF5 includes 288.4 rkm (179.2 activities as impoundment, water Unit RF3: Neosho River—Allen County, rmi) of the Saline River from Interstate diversion, or water withdrawal; Kansas 30 near Benton, Saline County, alteration of water chemistry or water Unit RF3 includes 26.6 rkm (16.5 rmi) Arkansas, to the Snake Creek confluence quality; and changes in stream bed of the Neosho River from the Deer Creek north of the northern boundary of material composition and sediment confluence northwest of Iola, Kansas, Felsenthal NWR northwest of Crossett, quality from activities that would downstream to the confluence of Owl Ashley, and Bradley Counties, release sediments or nutrients into the Creek southwest of Humboldt, Allen Arkansas. This unit was occupied at the water, such as urban development and County, Kansas. This unit was occupied time of listing and contains all or some associated construction projects, at the time of listing and contains all or components of all four PBFs and livestock grazing, confined animal some components of all four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this operations (turkey and chicken), timber contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this unit may require special management harvesting, and mining, and releases of unit may require special management considerations or protections to address chemical contaminants from industrial considerations or protections to address changes described above. and municipal effluents (see Factor A). changes described above except for Approximately 92 percent of the Where there are other activities in releases of chemical contaminants from adjacent riparian lands in this unit are individual units requiring special industrial and municipal effluents. in private ownership and 8 percent are management considerations, they are set Approximately 97 percent of the in State or local ownership (Table 5). forth in the individual unit descriptions. adjacent riparian lands in this unit are Unit RF6: Little River—McCurtain in private ownership and the remaining Unit RF1: Spring River—Jasper County, County, Oklahoma; and Little River and lands in State or local ownership (Table Missouri; and Cherokee County, Kansas Sevier Counties, Arkansas 5). Unit RF1 includes 56.5 rkm (35.1 rmi) Unit RF6 includes 139.7 rkm (86.8 of the Spring River from Missouri Unit RF4a: Ouachita River— rmi) of the Little River from the Glover Highway 96 at Carthage, Jasper County, Montgomery County, Arkansas River confluence northwest of Idabel, Missouri, downstream to the confluence Unit RF4a includes 21.9 rkm (13.6 McCurtain County, Oklahoma, of Turkey Creek north of Empire, rmi) of the Ouachita River from downstream to U.S. Highway 71 north Cherokee County, Kansas. This unit was Arkansas Highway 379 south of Oden, of Wilton, Little River and Sevier occupied at the time of listing and Montgomery County, Arkansas, Counties, Arkansas. This unit was contains all or some components of all downstream to Arkansas Highway 298 occupied at the time of listing and four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. east of Pencil Bluff, Montgomery contains all or some components of all The PBFs in this unit may require County, Arkansas. Units RF4a and RF4b four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. special management considerations or are separated by three reservoirs (Lakes The PBFs in this unit may require protections described above. The Ouachita, Hamilton, and Catherine). special management considerations or majority of the adjacent riparian lands This unit was occupied at the time of protections to address changes in this unit are in private ownership or listing and contains all or some described above. Adjacent riparian
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63481
lands in this unit are in private Highway 79 at Clarendon, Monroe this unit are in private ownership and ownership (42 percent), Federal (35 County, Arkansas, downstream to almost 1 percent is in State or local percent), and private land under tribal Arkansas Highway 1 near St. Charles, ownership (Table 5). jurisdiction (23 percent) (Table 5). Arkansas County, Arkansas. This unit Unit RF11: South Fork Spring River— was occupied at the time of listing and Unit RF7: Middle Fork Little River—Van Fulton County, Arkansas contains all or some components of all Buren County, Arkansas four PBFs and contains PCEs 2, 3, 4, and Unit RF11 includes 16.4 rkm (10.2 Unit RF7 includes 23.3 rkm (14.5 rmi) 5. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers rmi) of the South Fork Spring River of the Middle Fork Little Red River from maintains a navigation channel, which from Fulton County Road 198 north of the confluence of Little Tick Creek north involves routine dredging and snag Heart, Arkansas, downstream to of Shirley, Arkansas, downstream to removal, from Newport, Arkansas, to its Arkansas Highway 289 at Saddle, Greers Ferry Reservoir where confluence with the Mississippi River. Fulton County, Arkansas. This unit was inundation begins, Van Buren County, The PBFs in this unit may require occupied at the time of listing and Arkansas. This unit was occupied at the special management considerations or contains all or some components of all time of listing and contains all or some protections described above except for four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. components of all four PBFs and releases of chemical contaminants from The PBFs in this unit may require contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this industrial and municipal effluents and special management considerations or unit may require special management including tail water releases from a protections to address changes considerations or protections to address series of reservoirs on the upper White described above. All of the adjacent changes described above and natural gas River, row crop agriculture, increasing riparian lands in this unit are in private development and hillside rock demand for instream sand from the ownership (Table 5). harvesting. All adjacent riparian lands White River upstream of Newport, Unit RF12: Strawberry River—Izard, in this unit are in private ownership Arkansas, to support natural gas Lawrence, and Sharp Counties, (Table 5). development needs, natural gas Arkansas Unit RF8a: White River—Independence, development, and channelization. Unit RF12 includes 123.8 rkm (76.9 Jackson, White, and Woodruff Counties, Approximately 84 percent of the rmi) of the Strawberry River from Arkansas adjacent riparian lands in this unit are in Federal ownership and 16 percent are Arkansas Highway 56 south of Unit RF8a includes 188.3 rkm (117.0 in private ownership (Table 5). Horseshoe Bend, Izard County, rmi) of the White River from the Arkansas, downstream to its confluence Batesville Dam at Batesville, Unit RF9: Black River—Lawrence and with the Black River southeast of Independence County, Arkansas, Randolph Counties, Arkansas Strawberry, Lawrence County, downstream to the Little Red River Unit RF9 includes 92.2 rkm (57.3 rmi) Arkansas. This unit was occupied at the confluence north of Georgetown, White, of the Black River from U.S. Highway 67 time of listing and contains all or some and Woodruff Counties, Arkansas. at Pocahontas, Randolph County, components of all four PBFs and There are no records of rabbitsfoot from Arkansas, downstream to the Strawberry contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this the 160 rkm (100 rmi) reach separating River confluence southeast of unit may require special management Unit RF8a from Unit RF8b (Butler 2005, Strawberry, Lawrence County, considerations or protections to address p. 66). This unit was occupied at the Arkansas. This unit was occupied at the changes described above. All of the time of listing and contains all or some time of listing and contains all or some adjacent riparian lands in this unit are components of all four PBFs and components of all four PBFs and in private ownership (Table 5). contains PCEs 2, 3, 4, and 5. The U.S. contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this Army Corps of Engineers maintains a unit may require special management Unit RF13: Buffalo River—Newton and navigation channel, which involves considerations or protections to address Searcy Counties, Arkansas routine dredging and snag removal, changes described above and including Unit RF13 includes 113.6 rkm (70.6 from Newport, Arkansas to its row crop agriculture. Approximately 89 rmi) of the Buffalo River from the Cove confluence with the Mississippi River. percent of the adjacent riparian lands in Creek confluence southeast of Erbie, The PBFs in this unit may require this unit are in private ownership and Newton County, Arkansas, downstream special management considerations or 11 percent are in State or local to U.S. Highway 65 west of Gilbert, protections described above except for ownership (Table 5). Searcy County, Arkansas, and Arkansas releases of chemical contaminants from Highway 14 southeast of Mull, Unit RF10: Spring River—Lawrence, industrial and municipal effluents and Arkansas, downstream to the Randolph, and Sharp Counties, including tail water releases from a Leatherwood Creek confluence in the Arkansas series of reservoirs on the upper White Lower Buffalo Wilderness Area, River, row crop agriculture, increasing Unit RF10 includes 62.8 rkm (39.0 Arkansas. This unit was occupied at the demand for instream sand from the rmi) of the Spring River from U.S. time of listing and contains all or some White River upstream of Newport, Highway 412 and 62 at Hardy in Sharp components of all four PBFs and Arkansas, to support natural gas County, Arkansas, downstream to its contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this development needs, natural gas confluence with the Black River east of unit may require special management development, and channelization. Black Rock, Lawrence, and Randolph considerations or protections to address Adjacent riparian lands in this unit are Counties, Arkansas. This unit was changes described above. All of the in private ownership (94 percent) and occupied at the time of listing and adjacent riparian lands in this unit are State and local ownership (6 percent) contains all or some components of all in Federal ownership (Table 5). (Table 5). four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this unit may require Unit RF14: St. Francis River—Madison Unit RF8b: White River—Arkansas and special management considerations or and Wayne Counties, Missouri Monroe Counties, Arkansas protections to address changes Unit RF14 includes 64.3 rkm (40.0 Unit RF8b includes 68.9 rkm (42.8 described above. Approximately 99 rmi) of the St. Francis River from the rmi) of the White River from U.S. percent of the adjacent riparian lands in Twelvemile Creek confluence west of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63482 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Saco, Madison County, Missouri, Unit RF17: Big Black River—Hinds and in private ownership and 17 percent are downstream to Lake Wappepello where Warren Counties, Mississippi in State or local ownership (Table 5). inundation begins, Wayne County, Unit RF17 includes 43.3 rkm (26.9 Unit RF20a: Tennessee River—Hardin Missouri. This unit was occupied at the rmi) of Big Black River from Porter County, Tennessee time of listing and contains all or some Creek confluence west of Lynchburg, components of all four PBFs and Hinds County, Mississippi, downstream Unit RF20a includes 26.7 rkm (16.6 contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this to Mississippi Highway 27 west of rmi) of Tennessee River from Pickwick unit may require special management Newman, Warren County, Mississippi. Lake Dam downstream to U.S. Highway considerations or protections to address This unit was occupied at the time of 64 near Adamsville, Hardin County, changes described above. Adjacent listing and contains all or some Tennessee. This unit was occupied at riparian lands in this unit are in private components of all four PBFs and the time of listing and contains all or (59 percent), Federal (39 percent), and contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this some components of all four PBFs and less than 2 percent in State or local unit may require special management contains PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 5. The PBFs ownership (Table 5). considerations or protections to address in this unit may require special Unit RF15: Big Sunflower River— changes described above, as well as row management considerations or Sunflower County, Mississippi crop agriculture and channelization. All protections to address changes riparian lands in this unit are in private described above as well as row crop Unit RF15 includes 51.5 rkm (32.0 ownership (Table 5). agriculture, channelization, and channel stability associated with tail water rmi) of the Big Sunflower River from Unit RF18: Paint Rock River—Jackson, Mississippi Highway 442 west of Madison, and Marshall Counties, releases. Approximately 90 percent of Doddsville, Mississippi, downstream to Alabama the adjacent riparian lands in this unit the Quiver River confluence east of are in private ownership and 10 percent Indianola, Sunflower County, Unit RF18 includes 81.0 rkm (50.3 are in State or local ownership (Table 5). Mississippi. This unit was occupied at rmi) of the Paint Rock River from the Unit RF20b: Tennessee River— the time of listing and contains all or convergence of Estill Fork and Livingston, Marshall, and McCracken some components of all four PBFs and Hurricane Creek north of Skyline, Counties, Kentucky contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this Jackson County, Alabama, downstream to U.S. Highway 431 south of New unit may require special management Unit RF20b includes 35.6 rkm (22.1 Hope, Madison and Marshall Counties, considerations or protections to address rmi) of Tennessee River from Kentucky Alabama. This unit was occupied at the changes described above and row crop Lake Dam downstream to its confluence time of listing and contains all or some agriculture and channelization. All of with the Ohio River, McCracken and components of all four PBFs and the adjacent riparian lands in this unit Livingston Counties, Kentucky. This are in private ownership (Table 5). contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this unit may require special management unit was occupied at the time of listing Unit RF16: Bear Creek—Tishomingo considerations or protections to address and contains all or some components of County, Mississippi; and Colbert changes described above as well as row all four PBFs and contains PCEs 1, 3, 4, County, Alabama crop agriculture and channelization. and 5. The PBFs in this unit may require Approximately 99 percent of the special management considerations or Unit RF16 includes 49.7 rkm (30.9 adjacent riparian lands in this unit are protection to address changes described rmi) of Bear Creek from the Alabama in private ownership and one percent is above. Approximately 93 percent of the and Mississippi State line east of in Federal ownership (Table 5). adjacent riparian lands in this unit are Golden, Tishomingo County, in private ownership, 7 percent are in Mississippi, downstream to Alabama Unit RF19: Duck River—Hickman, Federal ownership, and less than 1 County Road 4 southwest of Sutton Hill, Marshall, and Maury Counties, percent is in State or local ownership Colbert County, Alabama (just upstream Tennessee (Table 5). of Pickwick Lake). Unit RF16 in its Unit RF19 includes 235.3 rkm (146.2 Unit RF21: Ohio River—Ballard, entirety is currently designated as rmi) of the Duck River from Lillard Mill Livingston, and McCracken Counties, critical habitat for the oyster mussel (RKM 288; rmi 179) west of Tennessee Kentucky; Massac and Pulaski Counties, (Epioblasma capsaeformis) and Highway 272, Marshall County, Illinois Cumberlandian combshell (Epioblasma Tennessee, downstream to Interstate 40 brevidens; 50 CFR 17.95(f)). This unit near Bucksnort, Hickman County, Unit RF21 includes 45.9 rkm (28.5 was occupied at the time of listing and Tennessee. Seventy-four rkm (46 rmi) in rmi) of the Ohio River from the contains all or some components of all Unit RF19 from rkm 214 (rmi 133) Tennessee River confluence four PBFs, except in the Bear Creek upstream to Lillards Mill at rkm 288 downstream to Lock and Dam 53 near Floodway, which has been channelized (rmi 179) is currently designated as Olmstead, Illinois. This unit was for flood control and only contains critical habitat for the oyster mussel and occupied at the time of listing and components of PBF 2 and contains all Cumberlandian combshell (50 CFR contains all or some components of all five PCEs, except in the Bear Creek 17.95(f)). four PBFs and contains PCEs 1, 3, 4, and Floodway, which has been channelized This unit was occupied at the time of 5. The PBFs in this unit may require for flood control and only contains PCEs listing and contains all or some special management considerations or 3, 4, and 5. The PBFs in this unit may components of all four PBFs and protection to address changes described require special management contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this above, as well as row crop agriculture, considerations or protections to address unit may require special management channelization, and channel stability changes described above. Adjacent considerations or protections to address associated with tail water releases. riparian lands in this unit are in private changes described above as well as row Approximately 72 percent of the (64 percent), Federal (24 percent), and crop agriculture and channelization. adjacent riparian lands in this unit are 12 percent in State or local ownership Approximately 83 percent of the in private ownership and 28 percent are (Table 5). adjacent riparian lands in this unit are in State or local ownership (Table 5).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63483
Unit RF22: Green River—Green, Hart, components of all four PBFs and likely Unit RF27: Walhonding River— and Taylor Counties, Kentucky functions as a metapopulation to French Coshocton County, Ohio Unit RF22 includes 175.6 rkm (109.1 Creek (Unit RF23). This unit was Unit RF27 includes 17.5 rkm (10.9 rmi) of the Green River from Green occupied at the time of listing and rmi) of the Walhonding River from the River Lake Dam south of contains PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 5 for the convergence of the Kokosing and Campbellsville, Taylor County, rabbitsfoot. A series of nine lock and Mohican Rivers downstream to Ohio Kentucky, downstream to Maple dams and Kinzua Dam constructed over Highway 60 near Warsaw, Coshocton Springs Ranger Station Road in the past century has resulted in altered County, Ohio. This unit was occupied at Mammoth Cave National Park, hydrologic flow regimes in the the time of listing and contains all or Kentucky. This unit was occupied at the Allegheny River (Butler 2005, p. 29). some components of all four PBFs and time of listing and contains all or some The PBFS in this unit may require contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this components of all four PBFs and special management considerations or unit may require special management contains PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 5. Releases protections to address changes considerations or protections to address from Green River Lake dam have altered described above as well as row crop changes described above. hydrologic flows and temperature agriculture, oil and gas development, Approximately 83 percent of the regimes in the tail water reach (Butler and channelization. Approximately 83 adjacent riparian lands in this unit are 2005, p. 39). The PBFs in this unit may percent of the adjacent riparian lands in in private ownership and 17 percent are require special management this unit are in private ownership and in State or local ownership (Table 5). considerations or protection to address 17 percent are in State or local Unit RF28: Little Darby Creek—Madison changes described above and row crop ownership (Table 5). and Union Counties, Ohio agriculture, channelization, and channel stability associated with tail water Unit RF25: Muddy Creek—Crawford Unit RF28 includes 33.3 rkm (20.7 releases. Approximately 90 percent of County, Pennsylvania rmi) of Little Darby Creek from Ohio the adjacent riparian lands in this unit Highway 161 near Chuckery, Madison Unit RF25 includes 20.1 rkm (12.5 are in private ownership and 10 percent County, Ohio, downstream to U.S. rmi) of Muddy Creek from Pennsylvania are in Federal ownership (Table 5). Highway 40 near West Jefferson, Highway 77 near Little Cooley, Madison County, Ohio. This unit was Unit RF23: French Creek—Crawford, Crawford County, Pennsylvania, occupied at the time of listing and Erie, Mercer, and Venango Counties, downstream to its confluence with contains all or some components of all Pennsylvania French Creek east of Cambridge Springs, four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. Unit RF23 includes 120.4 rkm (74.8 Crawford County, Pennsylvania. This The PBFS in this unti may require rmi) of French Creek from Union City unit was occupied at the time of listing special management considerations or Reservoir Dam northeast of Union City, and contains all or some components of protections to address changes Erie County, Pennsylvania, downstream all four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. described above and row crop to its confluence with the Allegheny The PBFS in this unit may require agriculture. All adjacent riparian lands River near Franklin, Venango County, special management considerations or in this unit are in private ownership Pennsylvania. The Allegheny River protections to address changes (Table 5). rabbitsfoot population (Unit RF24) is described above and oil and gas Unit RF29: North Fork Vermilion River likely a single metapopulation with the development. Approximately 81 percent and Middle Branch North Fork French Creek population (Butler 2005, of the adjacent riparian lands in this Vermilion River, respectively, Vermilion p. 31). This unit was occupied at the unit are in Federal ownership and 19 County, Illinois time of listing and contains all or some percent are in private ownership (Table components of all four PBFs and 5). Unit RF29 includes 28.5 rkm (17.7 contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this rmi) of the North Fork Vermilion River unit may require special management Unit RF26: Tippecanoe River—Carroll, from the confluence of Middle Branch considerations or protections to address Pulaski, Tippecanoe, and White North Fork Vermilion River downstream changes described above as well as row Counties, Indiana to Illinois Highway 1 and U.S. Highway crop agriculture and oil and gas 136 upstream of Lake Vermilion, Unit RF26 includes 75.6 rkm (47.0 development. Approximately 97 percent Vermilion County, Illinois. Unit RF29 rmi) of the Tippecanoe River from of the adjacent riparian lands in this also includes 7.2 rkm (4.5 rmi) of the Indiana Highway 14 near Winamac, unit are in private ownership and 3 Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion percent are in Federal ownership (Table Pulaski County, Indiana, downstream to River from the Jordan Creek confluence 5). its confluence with the Wabash River northwest of Alvin, Illinois, northeast of Battle Ground, Tippecanoe downstream to its confluence with Unit RF24: Allegheny River—Venango County, Indiana, excluding Lakes North Fork Vermilion River west of County, Pennsylvania Schafer and Freeman and the stream Alvin, Vermilion County, Illinois. The Unit RF24 includes 57.3 rkm (35.6 reach between the two lakes. This unit rabbitsfoot in the North Fork Vermilion rmi) of the Allegheny River from the was occupied at the time of listing and River is considered a metapopulation French Creek confluence near Franklin, contains all or some components of all with the Middle Branch North Fork Venango County, Pennsylvania, four PBFs and contains all five PCEs. Vermilion River population (Butler downstream to Interstate 80 near The PBFs in this unit may require 2005, p. 47). This unit was occupied at Emlenton, Venango County, special management considerations or the time of listing and contains all or Pennsylvania. The lower Allegheny protections to address changes some components of all four PBFs, River and French Creek (Unit RF23) described above. Approximately 97 including connectivity between North populations likely represent a single percent of the adjacent riparian lands in Fork Vermilion River and Middle metapopulation because no barriers this unit are in private ownership and Branch North Fork Vermilion River. exist between the streams (Butler 2005, 3 percent are in State or local ownership This unit contains all five PCEs. The p. 29). This unit contains all or some (Table 5). PBFs in this unit may require special
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63484 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
management considerations or considerations or protections to address authorized, do not require section 7 protections to address changes changes described above. consultation. described above and channelization and Approximately 54 percent of the As a result of section 7 consultation, row crop agriculture. All adjacent adjacent riparian lands in this unit are we document compliance with the riparian lands in this unit are in private in Federal ownership and 46 percent are requirements of section 7(a)(2) through ownership (Table 5). in private ownership (Table 5). our issuance of: (1) A concurrence letter for Federal Unit RF30: Fish Creek—Williams Effects of Critical Habitat Designation County, Ohio actions that may affect, but are not Section 7 Consultation likely to adversely affect, listed species Unit RF30 includes 7.7 rkm (4.8 rmi) or critical habitat; or of Fish Creek from the Indiana and Ohio Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the Service, (2) A biological opinion for Federal State line northwest of Edgerton, Ohio, actions that may affect, or are likely to downstream to its confluence with the to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out is not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical St. Joseph’s River north of Edgerton, habitat. Williams County, Ohio. This unit was jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened When we issue a biological opinion occupied at the time of listing and concluding that a project is likely to contains all or some components of all species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated jeopardize the continued existence of a four PBFs and sustains genetic diversity listed species and/or destroy or and historical distribution as the only critical habitat of such species. In addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act adversely modify critical habitat, we remaining rabbitsfoot population in the provide reasonable and prudent Great Lakes subbasin. This unit contains requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on any agency action which alternatives to the project, if any are all five PCEs. The PBFs in this unit may identifiable, that would avoid the require special management is likely to jeopardize the continued likelihood of jeopardy and/or considerations or protections to address existence of any species proposed to be destruction or adverse modification of changes described above as well as row listed under the Act or result in the critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable crop agriculture and confined animal destruction or adverse modification of and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR operations (hogs). Approximately 90 proposed critical habitat. 402.02) as alternative actions identified percent of the adjacent riparian lands in Decisions by the United States Courts during consultation that: this unit are in private ownership and of Appeal for the Fifth and Ninth (1) Can be implemented in a manner 10 percent are in State or local Circuits have invalidated our regulatory consistent with the intended purpose of ownership (Table 5). definition of ‘‘destruction or adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) (see the action, Unit RF31: Red River—Logan County, Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish (2) Can be implemented consistent Kentucky; and Robertson County, and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d 1059 with the scope of the Federal agency’s Tennessee (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. legal authority and jurisdiction, Unit RF31 includes 50.2 rkm (31.2 Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d (3) Are economically and rmi) of the Red River from the South 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do not technologically feasible, and Fork Red River confluence west of rely on this regulatory definition when (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, Adairville, Kentucky, downstream to analyzing whether an action is likely to avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the the Sulphur Fork confluence southwest destroy or adversely modify critical continued existence of the listed species of Adams, Tennessee. This unit was habitat. Under the provisions of the Act, and/or avoid the likelihood of occupied at the time of listing and we determine destruction or adverse destroying or adversely modifying contains all or some components of all modification on the basis of whether, critical habitat. four PBFs and sustains genetic diversity with implementation of the proposed Reasonable and prudent alternatives and historical distribution as the largest Federal action, the affected critical can vary from slight project of two remaining rabbitsfoot habitat would continue to serve its modifications to extensive redesign or populations within the Cumberland intended conservation role for the relocation of the project. Costs River basin. This unit contains all five species. associated with implementing a PCEs. The PBFs in this unit may require If a Federal action may affect a listed reasonable and prudent alternative are special management considerations or species or its critical habitat, the similarly variable. protections to address changes responsible Federal agency (action Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require described above as well as row crop agency) must enter into consultation Federal agencies to reinitiate agriculture and channelization. All with us. Examples of actions that are consultation on previously reviewed adjacent riparian lands in this unit are subject to the section 7 consultation actions in instances where we have in private ownership (Table 5). process are actions on State, tribal, listed a new species or subsequently local, or private lands that require a designated critical habitat that may be Unit RF32: Shenango River—Mercer Federal permit (such as a permit from affected and the Federal agency has County, Pennsylvania the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under retained discretionary involvement or Unit RF32 includes 16.3 rkm (10.1 section 404 of the Clean Water Act or a control over the action (or the agency’s rmi) of the Shenango River from Kidds permit from the Service under section discretionary involvement or control is Mill Road near Greenville, 10 of the Act) or that involve some other authorized by law). Consequently, Pennsylvania, downstream to the point Federal action (such as funding from the Federal agencies sometimes may need to of inundation by Shenango River Lake Federal Highway Administration, request reinitiation of consultation with near Big Bend, Mercer County, Federal Aviation Administration, or the us on actions for which formal Pennsylvania. This unit was occupied at Federal Emergency Management consultation has been completed, if the time of listing and contains all or Agency). Federal actions not affecting those actions with discretionary some components of all four PBFs and listed species or critical habitat, and involvement or control may affect contains all five PCEs. The PBFs in this actions on State, tribal, local, or private subsequently listed species or unit may require special management lands that are not federally funded or designated critical habitat.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63485
Application of the ‘‘Adverse heated effluents into surface water or applicable, provide for fish and wildlife Modification’’ Standard connected groundwater at a point management; fish and wildlife habitat The key factor related to the adverse source or by dispersed release (nonpoint enhancement or modification; wetland modification determination is whether, source). These activities could alter protection, enhancement, and with implementation of the proposed water conditions that are beyond the restoration where necessary to support Federal action, the affected critical tolerances of these mussels or their fish fish and wildlife; and enforcement of habitat would continue to serve its hosts or both, and result in direct or applicable natural resource laws. intended conservation role for the cumulative adverse effects to the species The National Defense Authorization species. Activities that may destroy or and their life cycles. Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– adversely modify critical habitat are (4) Actions that would significantly 136) amended the Act to limit areas those that alter the physical or alter stream bed material composition eligible for designation as critical biological features to an extent that and quality by increasing sediment habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) appreciably reduces the conservation deposition or filamentous algal growth. of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) value of critical habitat for Neosho Such activities may include, but are not now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not mucket and the rabbitsfoot. As limited to, construction projects, gravel designate as critical habitat any lands or discussed above, the role of critical and sand mining, oil and gas other geographical areas owned or habitat is to support life-history needs of development, livestock grazing, timber controlled by the Department of the species and provide for the harvest, off-road vehicle use, and other Defense, or designated for its use, that conservation of the species. watershed and floodplain disturbances are subject to an integrated natural Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us that release sediments or contaminants resources management plan prepared to briefly evaluate and describe, in any into the water. These activities could under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 proposed or final regulation that eliminate or reduce habitats necessary U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines designates critical habitat, activities for the survival, growth and in writing that such plan provides a involving a Federal action that may reproduction of these mollusks or their benefit to the species for which critical destroy or adversely modify such fish hosts or both by causing excessive habitat is proposed for designation.’’ habitat, or that may be affected by such sedimentation and burial of Neosho There are no Department of Defense designation. mucket and rabbitsfoot or their habitats, lands with a completed INRMP within Activities that may affect critical sublethal effects from sediment the proposed critical habitat designation habitat, when carried out, funded, or exposure that are not readily apparent, for the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. acute and chronic exposure to chemical authorized by a Federal agency, should Exclusions result in consultation for the Neosho contaminants resulting in sublethal and mucket and rabbitsfoot. These activities lethal effects, and nutrification leading Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act include, but are not limited to: to excessive filamentous algal growth. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that (1) Actions that would alter the Excessive filamentous algal growth can the Secretary must designate and make geomorphology of their stream and river cause reduced nighttime dissolved revisions to critical habitat on the basis habitats. Such activities may include, oxygen levels through respiration and of the best available scientific data after but are not limited to, instream prevent mussel glochidia from settling taking into consideration the economic excavation or dredging, impoundment, into stream sediments. impact, national security impact, and channelization, sand and gravel mining, Exemptions any other relevant impact of specifying clearing riparian vegetation, and any particular area as critical habitat. discharge of fill materials. These Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act The Secretary may exclude an area from activities could cause aggradation or The Sikes Act Improvement Act of critical habitat if he determines that the degradation of the channel bed 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) benefits of such exclusion outweigh the elevation or significant bank erosion, required each military installation that benefits of specifying such area as part result in entrainment or burial of these includes land and water suitable for the of the critical habitat, unless he mollusks, and cause other direct or conservation and management of determines, based on the best scientific cumulative adverse effects to these natural resources to complete an data available, that the failure to species and their life cycles. integrated natural resources designate such area as critical habitat (2) Actions that would significantly management plan (INRMP) by will result in the extinction of the alter the existing flow regime where November 17, 2001. An INRMP species. In making that determination, these species occur. Such activities may integrates implementation of the the statute on its face, as well as the include, but are not limited to, military mission of the installation with legislative history, are clear that the impoundment, channelization, urban stewardship of the natural resources Secretary has broad discretion regarding development, water diversion, water found on the base. Each INRMP which factor(s) to use and how much withdrawal, and tail water releases includes: weight to give to any factor. downstream of dams. These activities (1) An assessment of the ecological Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we could eliminate or reduce the habitat needs on the installation, including the may exclude an area from designated necessary for growth and reproduction need to provide for the conservation of critical habitat based on economic of these mollusks and their life cycles listed species; impacts, impacts on national security, including fish hosts. (2) A statement of goals and priorities; or any other relevant impacts. In (3) Actions that would significantly (3) A detailed description of considering whether to exclude a alter water chemistry or water quality management actions to be implemented particular area from the designation, we (for example, temperature, pH, to provide for these ecological needs; identify the benefits of including the contaminants, conductivity, and excess and area in the designation, identify the nutrients). Such activities may include, (4) A monitoring and adaptive benefits of excluding the area from the but are not limited to, tail water releases management plan. designation, and evaluate whether the downstream of dams, or the release of Among other things, each INRMP benefits of exclusion outweigh the chemicals, biological pollutants, or must, to the extent appropriate and benefits of inclusion. If the analysis
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63486 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
indicates that the benefits of exclusion In preparing this proposed rule, we regulatory system to promote outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the have determined that there are currently predictability, to reduce uncertainty, Secretary may exercise his discretion to no HCPs or other management plans for and to use the best, most innovative, exclude the area only if such exclusion the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot. The and least burdensome tools for would not result in the extinction of the proposed designation of critical habitat achieving regulatory ends. The species. includes only tribal jurisdictional areas executive order directs agencies to not lands managed by any Tribe. We consider regulatory approaches that Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts anticipate no effect to tribal lands, reduce burdens and maintain flexibility Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we partnerships, or HCPs from this and freedom of choice for the public consider the economic impacts of proposed critical habitat designation. where these approaches are relevant, specifying any particular area as critical Accordingly, the Secretary does not feasible, and consistent with regulatory habitat. In order to consider economic propose to exert his discretion to objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes impacts, we are preparing an analysis of exclude any areas from the final further that regulations must be based the economic impacts of the proposed designation based on other relevant on the best available science and that critical habitat designation and related impacts. the rulemaking process must allow for factors. public participation and an open Peer Review We will announce the availability of exchange of ideas. We have developed our draft economic analysis as soon as In accordance with our joint policy this rule in a manner consistent with it is completed, at which time we will published in the Federal Register on these requirements. seek public comment. During the July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 development of a final designation, we the expert opinions of at least three et seq.) will consider economic impacts, public appropriate and independent specialists for each species regarding this proposed Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act comments, and other new information (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as amended related to economic impacts, and areas rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our critical habitat by the Small Business Regulatory may be excluded from the final critical Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) designation is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), of the Act and our implementing whenever an agency is required to regulations at 50 CFR 424.19. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment during this public comment publish a notice of rulemaking for any Exclusions Based on National Security period on our specific assumptions and proposed or final rule, it must prepare Impacts conclusions in this proposed and make available for public comment designation of critical habitat. a regulatory flexibility analysis that Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we describes the effects of the rule on small consider whether there are lands owned We will consider all comments and information received during this entities (small businesses, small or managed by the Department of organizations, and small government Defense where a national security comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a final jurisdictions). However, no regulatory impact might exist. In preparing this flexibility analysis is required if the proposal, we have determined that none determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this proposal. head of the agency certifies the rule will of the lands within the proposed not have a significant economic impact designation of critical habitat for the Public Hearings on a substantial number of small Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot are entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA owned or managed by the Department of Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings on this to require Federal agencies to provide a Defense and, therefore, we anticipate no certification statement of the factual impact on national security. proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days after the date of basis for certifying that the rule will not Consequently, the Secretary does not have a significant economic impact on propose to exert his discretion to publication of this proposed rule in the Federal Register. Such requests must be a substantial number of small entities. exclude any areas from the final According to the Small Business sent to the address shown in FOR designation based on impacts on Administration, small entities include FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will national security. small organizations such as schedule public hearings on this independent nonprofit organizations; Exclusions Based on Other Relevant proposal, if any are requested, and Impacts small governmental jurisdictions, announce the dates, times, and places of including school boards and city and Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we those hearings, as well as how to obtain town governments that serve fewer than consider any other relevant impacts, in reasonable accommodations, in the 50,000 residents; and small businesses addition to economic impacts and Federal Register and local newspapers (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses impacts on national security. We at least 15 days before the hearing. include such businesses as consider a number of factors, including Required Determinations manufacturing and mining concerns whether the landowners have developed with fewer than 500 employees, any HCPs or other management plans Regulatory Planning and Review wholesale trade entities with fewer than for the area, or whether there are (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 100 employees, retail and service conservation partnerships that would be Executive Order 12866 provides that businesses with less than $5 million in encouraged by designation of, or the Office of Information and Regulatory annual sales, general and heavy exclusion of lands from, critical habitat. Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant construction businesses with less than In addition, we look at any tribal issues, rules. The Office of Information and $27.5 million in annual business, and consider the government-to- Regulatory Affairs has determined that special trade contractors doing less than government relationship of the United this rule is not significant. $11.5 million in annual business, and States with tribal entities. We also Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the forestry and logging operations with consider any social impacts that might principles of E.O. 12866 while calling fewer than 500 employees and annual occur because of the designation. for improvements in the nation’s business less than $7 million. To
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63487
determine whether small entities may consultations on an annual basis in completed in 1996 (Service 1996, be affected, we will consider the types order to ensure a more complete entire). The biological opinion covers of activities that might trigger regulatory examination of the incremental effects existing, proposed, and future impacts under this designation as well of this proposed rule in the context of endangered and threatened species that as types of project modifications that the RFA. may be affected by the implementation may result. In general, the term In conclusion, we believe that, based and administration of surface coal ‘‘significant economic impact’’ is meant on our interpretation of directly mining programs under the Surface to apply to a typical small business regulated entities under the RFA and Mining Control and Reclamation Act of firm’s business operations. relevant case law, this designation of 1977. Through its analysis, the Service Importantly, the incremental impacts critical habitat will only directly concluded that the proposed action of a rule must be both significant and regulate Federal agencies which are not (surface coal mining and reclamation substantial to prevent certification of the by definition small business entities. activities) was not likely to jeopardize rule under the RFA and to require the And as such, certify that, if the continued existence of any preparation of an initial regulatory promulgated, this designation of critical endangered, threatened, or proposed flexibility analysis. If a substantial habitat would not have a significant species or result in adverse modification number of small entities are affected by economic impact on a substantial of designated or proposed critical the proposed critical habitat number of small business entities. habitat. designation, but the per-entity economic Therefore, an initial regulatory All other proposed units are remote impact is not significant, the Service flexibility analysis is not required. from energy supply, distribution, or use may certify. Likewise, if the per-entity However, though not necessarily activities. We do not expect the economic impact is likely to be required by the RFA, in our draft designation of this proposed critical significant, but the number of affected economic analysis for this proposal we habitat to significantly affect energy entities is not substantial, the Service will consider and evaluate the potential supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, may also certify. effects to third parties that may be this action is not a significant energy Under the RFA, as amended, and involved with consultations with action, and no Statement of Energy following recent court decisions, Federal action agencies related to this Effects is required. However, we will Federal agencies are only required to action. further evaluate this issue as we evaluate the potential incremental conduct our economic analysis, and Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— impacts of rulemaking on those entities review and revise this assessment as Executive Order 13211 directly regulated by the rulemaking warranted. itself, and not the potential impacts to Executive Order 13211 (Actions indirectly affected entities. The Concerning Regulations That Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 regulatory mechanism through which Significantly Affect Energy Supply, U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) critical habitat protections are realized Distribution, or Use) requires agencies In accordance with the Unfunded is section 7 of the Act, which requires to prepare Statements of Energy Effects Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et Federal agencies, in consultation with when undertaking certain actions. seq.), we make the following findings: the Service, to ensure that any action Although two of the proposed units are (1) This rule will not produce a authorized, funded, or carried by the downstream of hydropower reservoirs, Federal mandate. In general, a Federal Agency is not likely to adversely modify current and proposed operating regimes mandate is a provision in legislation, critical habitat. Therefore, only Federal have been deemed adequate for the statute, or regulation that would impose action agencies are directly subject to species, and therefore their hydropower an enforceable duty upon State, local, or the specific regulatory requirement operations are not anticipated to be tribal governments, or the private sector, (avoiding destruction and adverse affected by the proposed designation of and includes both ‘‘Federal modification) imposed by critical critical habitat. intergovernmental mandates’’ and habitat designation. Under these Natural gas and oil exploration and ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ circumstances, it is our position that development activities occur or could These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. only Federal action agencies will be potentially occur in the rabbitsfoot 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental directly regulated by this designation. proposed critical habitat (6 of 35 critical mandate’’ includes a regulation that Therefore, because Federal agencies are habitat units). However, compliance ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty not small entities, the Service may with State regulatory requirements or upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ certify that the proposed critical habitat voluntary BMPs would be expected to with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a rule will not have a significant minimize impacts of natural gas and oil condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also economic impact on a substantial exploration and development in the excludes ‘‘a duty arising from number of small entities. areas of proposed critical habitat for participation in a voluntary Federal We acknowledge, however, that in both species. The measures for natural program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates some cases, third-party proponents of gas and oil exploration and to a then-existing Federal program the action subject to permitting or development are generally not under which $500,000,000 or more is funding may participate in a section 7 considered a substantial cost compared provided annually to State, local, and consultation, and thus may be indirectly with overall project costs and are tribal governments under entitlement affected. We believe it is good policy to already being implemented by oil and authority,’’ if the provision would assess these impacts if we have gas companies. Coal mining occurs or ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of sufficient data before us to complete the could potentially occur in 5 of 35 assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or necessary analysis, whether or not this proposed critical habitat units for the otherwise decrease, the Federal analysis is strictly required by the RFA. rabbitsfoot. Incidental take for listed Government’s responsibility to provide While this regulation does not directly species associated with surface coal funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal regulate these entities, in our draft mining activities is currently covered governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust economic analysis we will conduct a under a programmatic, no jeopardy accordingly. At the time of enactment, brief evaluation of the potential number biological opinion between the Office of these entitlement programs were: of third parties participating in Surface Mining and the Service Medicaid; Aid to Families with
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63488 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Dependent Children work programs; development of habitat conservation Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social programs or issuance of incidental take 12988 Services Block Grants; Vocational permits to permit actions that do require In accordance with Executive Order Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, Federal funding or permits to go 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office Adoption Assistance, and Independent forward. The takings implications of the Solicitor has determined that the Living; Family Support Welfare assessment concludes that this rule does not unduly burden the judicial Services; and Child Support designation of critical habitat for system and that it meets the Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot does not requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) mandate’’ includes a regulation that pose significant takings implications for of the Order. We have proposed ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty lands within or affected by the designating critical habitat in upon the private sector, except (i) a designation. accordance with the provisions of the condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a Act. This proposed rule uses standard duty arising from participation in a Federalism—Executive Order 13132 voluntary Federal program.’’ property descriptions and identifies the The designation of critical habitat In accordance with Executive Order elements of physical or biological does not impose a legally binding duty 13132 (Federalism), this proposed rule features essential to the conservation of on non-Federal Government entities or does not have significant Federalism the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot private parties. Under the Act, the only effects. A Federalism assessment is not within the designated areas to assist the regulatory effect is that Federal agencies required. In keeping with Department of public in understanding the habitat needs of the species. must ensure that their actions do not the Interior and Department of destroy or adversely modify critical Commerce policy, we requested Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 habitat under section 7. While non- information from, and coordinated U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Federal entities that receive Federal development of this proposed critical funding, assistance, or permits, or that This rule does not contain any new habitat designation with appropriate collections of information that require otherwise require approval or State resource agencies in Alabama, authorization from a Federal agency for approval by OMB under the Paperwork Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, an action, may be indirectly impacted Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 Kentucky, Missouri, Mississippi, by the designation of critical habitat, the et seq.). This rule will not impose legally binding duty to avoid Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and recordkeeping or reporting requirements destruction or adverse modification of Tennessee. The designation of critical on State or local governments, critical habitat rests squarely on the habitat in areas currently occupied by individuals, businesses, or Federal agency. Furthermore, to the the Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot may organizations. An agency may not extent that non-Federal entities are impose nominal additional regulatory conduct or sponsor, and a person is not indirectly impacted because they restrictions to those currently in place required to respond to, a collection of receive Federal assistance or participate and, therefore, may have minor information unless it displays a in a voluntary Federal aid program, the incremental impact on State and local currently valid OMB control number. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would governments and their activities. The National Environmental Policy Act (42 not apply and neither would critical designation may have some benefit to U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) habitat shift the costs of the large these governments because the areas We have determined that entitlement programs listed above onto that contain the physical or biological environmental assessments and State governments. features essential to the conservation of environmental impact statements, as (2) We do not believe that this rule the species are more clearly defined, will significantly or uniquely affect defined under the authority of the and the elements of the features of the National Environmental Policy Act small governments because the Neosho habitat necessary to the conservation of mucket and rabbitsfoot occur only in (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not the species are specifically identified. navigable waters in which the river be prepared in connection with listing This information does not alter where bottom is generally owned by the State. a species as endangered or threatened However, the adjacent upland and what federally sponsored activities under the Endangered Species Act. We properties are owned by private, State, may occur. However, it may assist local published a notice outlining our reasons or Federal entities (see Table 5). As governments in long-range planning for this determination in the Federal such, a Small Government Agency Plan (rather than having them wait for case- Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR is not required. We will, however, by-case section 7 consultations to 49244). further evaluate this issue as we occur). It is also our position that, outside the conduct our economic analysis and Where State and local governments jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals revise this assessment if appropriate. require approval or authorization from a for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare environmental analyses Takings—Executive Order 12630 Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat, consultation pursuant to NEPA in connection with In accordance with Executive Order under section 7(a)(2) would be required. designating critical habitat under the 12630 (Government Actions and Endangered Species Act. We published While non-Federal entities that receive Interference with Constitutionally a notice outlining our reasons for this Federal funding, assistance, or permits, Protected Private Property Rights), we determination in the Federal Register or that otherwise require approval or have analyzed the potential takings on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This implications of designating critical authorization from a Federal agency for position was upheld by the U.S. Court habitat for Neosho mucket and an action, may be indirectly impacted of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rabbitsfoot in a takings implications by the designation of critical habitat, the (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d assessment. Critical habitat designation legally binding duty to avoid 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 does not affect landowner actions that destruction or adverse modification of U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when the do not require Federal funding or critical habitat rests squarely on the range of the species includes States permits, nor does it preclude Federal agency. within the Tenth Circuit, such as that of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63489
the Neosho mucket (Oklahoma) and (Government-to-Government Relations References Cited rabbitsfoot (Oklahoma and Kansas), with Native American Tribal A complete list of references cited in under the Tenth Circuit ruling in Catron Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive this rulemaking is available on the County Board of Commissioners v. U.S. Order 13175 (Consultation and Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Fish and Wildlife Service, 75 F.3d 1429 Coordination with Indian Tribal Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2012–0031 and (10th Cir. 1996), we will undertake a Governments), and the Department of upon request from the Arkansas NEPA analysis for critical habitat the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we Ecological Services Office (see FOR designation. Accordingly, we will notify readily acknowledge our responsibility the public of the availability of the draft to communicate meaningfully with FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). environmental assessment for this recognized Federal Tribes on a Authors proposal when it is finished. government-to-government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 The primary authors of this package Clarity of the Rule of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal are staff of the Arkansas Ecological We are required by Executive Orders Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Services Office. 12866 and 12988 and by the Responsibilities, and the Endangered List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Species Act), we readily acknowledge 1998, to write all rules in plain our responsibilities to work directly Endangered and threatened species, language. This means that each rule we with tribes in developing programs for Exports, Imports, Reporting and publish must: healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that recordkeeping requirements, (1) Be logically organized; tribal lands are not subject to the same Transportation. (2) Use the active voice to address controls as Federal public lands, to Proposed Regulation Promulgation readers directly; remain sensitive to Indian culture, and (3) Use clear language rather than to make information available to tribes. Accordingly, we propose to amend jargon; We have determined that there are part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title (4) Be divided into short sections and tribal lands occupied at this time that 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, sentences; and contain the physical and biological as set forth below: (5) Use lists and tables wherever features essential for the conservation of possible. Neosho mucket and rabbitsfoot (1 of 8 PART 17—[AMENDED] Neosho mucket critical habitat units and If you feel that we have not met these 1. The authority citation for part 17 2 of 35 rabbitsfoot critical habitat units). requirements, send us comments by one continues to read as follows: of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES However, these lands do not represent section. To better help us revise the riparian land ownership by any Tribe, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. rule, your comments should be as represent only tribal jurisdictional areas, 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. specific as possible. For example, you are not manged by any Tribe, and are on should tell us the numbers of the otherwise privately owned lands. We 2. In § 17.11(h) add entries for sections or paragraphs that are unclearly contacted each Tribe in writing and ‘‘Mucket, Neosho’’ and ‘‘Rabbitsfoot’’ in written, which sections or sentences are considered their comments during alphabetical order under ‘‘Clams’’ to the too long, the sections where you feel preparation of this proposed rule. Their List of Endangered and Threatened lists or tables would be useful, etc. comments were limited to providing Wildlife to read as follows: tribal land and jurisdictional area maps Government-to-Government and biological data for the two mussels. § 17.11 Endangered and threatened Relationship With Tribes At this time, we do not anticipate wildlife. In accordance with the President’s excluding any lands under tribal * * * * * memorandum of April 29, 1994 jurisdiction. (h) * * *
Species Vertebrate population where Critical Special Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules Common name Scientific name threatened
******* CLAMS
******* Mucket, Neosho ...... Lampsilis U.S.A. (AR, KS, NA ...... E ...... 17.95(f) NA rafinesqueana. MO, OK).
******* Rabbitsfoot ...... Quadrula cylindrica U.S.A. (AL, AR, GA, NA ...... T ...... 17.95(f) NA cylindrica. IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MS, MO, OH, OK, PA, TN, WV).
*******
3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (f) by ‘‘Rabbitsfoot (Quadrula cylindrica Pigtoe (Pleurobema hanleyianum)’’ to adding entries for ‘‘Neosho Mucket cylindrica)’’ after the entry for ‘‘Georgia read as follows: (Lampsilis rafinesqueana)’’ and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 63490 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
§ 17.95 Critical habitat––fish and wildlife. and sand substrates with low to (v) Either no competitive or * * * * * moderate amounts of fine sediment and predaceous invasive (nonnative) (f) Clams and Snails. attached filamentous algae). species, or such species in quantities * * * * * (ii) A hydrologic flow regime (the low enough to have minimal effect on severity, frequency, duration, and survival of freshwater mussels. Neosho Mucket (Lampsilis seasonality of discharge over time) (3) Critical habitat does not include rafinesqueana) necessary to maintain benthic habitats manmade structures (such as buildings, (1) Critical habitat units for the where the species are found and to bridges, aqueducts, airports, roads, and Neosho mucket are depicted on the maintain connectivity of rivers with the other paved areas) and the land on maps below in: floodplain, allowing the exchange of which they are located exists within the (i) Arkansas: Benton and Washington nutrients and sediment for maintenance legal boundaries on the effective date of Counties. of the mussel’s and fish host’s habitat, this rule. (ii) Kansas: Allen, Chase, Cherokee, food availability, spawning habitat for (4) Critical habitat map units. Unit Coffey, Elk, Greenwood, Labette, native fishes, and the ability for newly maps were developed using ESRI Montgomery, Neosho, Wilson, and transformed juveniles to settle and ArcGIS mapping software along with Woodson Counties. become established in their habitats. (iii) Missouri: Jasper, Lawrence, (iii) Water and sediment quality various spatial data layers. Critical McDonald, and Newton Counties. (including, but not limited to, habitat unit upstream and downstream (iv) Oklahoma: Adair, Cherokee, and conductivity, hardness, turbidity, limits were delineated at the nearest Delaware Counties. temperature, pH, ammonia, heavy road crossing or stream confluence of (2) Within these areas, the primary metals, and chemical constituents) each occupied reach. Data layers constituent elements of the physical and necessary to sustain natural defining map units were created with biological features essential to the physiological processes for normal USGS National Hydrography Dataset conservation of the Neosho mucket behavior, growth, and viability of all life (NHD) Medium Flowline data. ArcGIS consist of five components: stages. was also used to calculate river (i) Geomorphically stable river (iv) The presence and abundance kilometers and miles from the NHD channels and banks (channels that (currently unknown) of fish hosts dataset, and it was used to determine maintain lateral dimensions, necessary for recruitment of the Neosho longitude and latitude coordinates in longitudinal profiles, and sinuosity mucket. The occurrence of natural fish decimal degrees. The projection used in patterns over time without an aggrading assemblages, reflected by fish species mapping and calculating distances and or degrading bed elevation) with richness, relative abundance, and locations within the units was North habitats that support a diversity of community composition, for each American Albers Equal Area Conic, freshwater mussel and native fish (such inhabited river or creek will serve as an NAD 83. as stable riffles, sometimes with runs, indication of appropriate presence and (5) Note: Index map of critical habitat and midchannel island habitats that abundance of fish hosts until units for the Neosho mucket follows: provide flow refuges consisting of gravel appropriate host fish can be identified. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63491
(6) Unit NM1: Illinois River—Benton Muddy Fork Illinois River confluence (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM1 (Illinois and Washington Counties, Arkansas; south of Savoy, Washington County, River) of critical habitat for Neosho and Adair, Cherokee, and Delaware Arkansas, downstream to the Baron mucket follows: Counties, Oklahoma. Creek confluence southeast of (i) Unit NM1 includes 146.1 rkm (90.8 Tahlequah, Cherokee County, rmi) of the Illinois River from the Oklahoma.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.000 63492 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(7) Unit NM2: Elk River—McDonald Highway 59 at Noel, McDonald County, (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM2 (Elk River) County, Missouri; and Delaware County, Missouri, downstream to the confluence of critical habitat for Neosho mucket Oklahoma. of Buffalo Creek, Delaware County, follows: (i) Unit NM2 includes 20.3 rkm (12.6 Oklahoma. rmi) of the Elk River from Missouri
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.001 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63493
(8) Unit NM3: Shoal Creek—Cherokee Highway W near Ritchey, Newton (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM3 (Shoal County, Kansas; and Newton County, County, Missouri, downstream to the Creek) of critical habitat for Neosho Missouri. upstream point of inundation by Empire mucket follows: (i) Unit NM3 includes 75.8 rkm (47.1 Lake, Cherokee County, Kansas. rmi) of Shoal Creek from Missouri
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.002 63494 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(9) Unit NM4: Spring River—Jasper Highway 97 north of Stotts City, (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM4 (Spring and Lawrence Counties, Missouri; and Lawrence County, Missouri, River) of critical habitat for Neosho Cherokee County, Kansas. downstream to the confluence of Turkey mucket follows: (i) Unit NM4 includes 102.3 rkm (63.6 Creek north of Empire, Cherokee rmi) of the Spring River from Missouri County, Kansas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.003 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63495
(10) Unit NM5: North Fork Spring southwest of Jasper, Missouri, (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM5 (North River—Jasper County, Missouri. downstream to its confluence with the Fork Spring River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit NM5 includes 16.4 rkm (10.2 Spring River near Purcell, Jasper Neosho mucket follows: rmi) of the North Fork Spring River from County, Missouri. the confluence of Buck Branch
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.004 63496 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(11) Unit NM6: Fall River—Elk, River Lake dam northwest of Fall River, Benedict, Wilson County, Kansas, Greenwood, and Wilson Counties, Greenwood County, Kansas, downstream to the Elk River confluence Kansas; Verdigris River—Montgomery downstream to its confluence with the near Independence, Montgomery and Wilson Counties, Kansas. Verdigris River near Neodesha, Wilson County, Kansas. (i) Unit NM6 includes a total of 171.1 County, Kansas. Unit NM6 also includes (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM6 (Fall and rkm (106.3 rmi) including 90.4 rkm 80.6 rkm (50.1 rmi) of the Verdigris Verdigris Rivers) of critical habitat for (56.2 rmi) of the Fall River from Fall River from Kansas Highway 39 near Neosho mucket follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.005 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63497
(12) Unit NM7: Neosho River—Allen, Kansas Highway 58 west of LeRoy, (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM7 (Neosho Cherokee, Coffey, Labette, Neosho, and Coffey County, Kansas, downstream to River) of critical habitat for Neosho Woodson Counties, Kansas. the Kansas and Oklahoma State line, mucket follows: (i) Unit NM7 includes 244.5 rkm Cherokee County, Kansas. (151.9 rmi) of the Neosho River from
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.006 63498 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(13) Unit NM8: Cottonwood River— confluence downstream to the Kansas (ii) Note: Map of Unit NM8 Chase County, Kansas. Road 140 (also known as Heins Road), (Cottonwood River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit NM8 includes 2.6 rkm (1.6 east of Cottonwood Falls, Chase County, Neosho mucket follows: rmi) of the Cottonwood River from the Kansas. South Fork Cottonwood River
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.007 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63499
Rabbitsfoot (Quadrula cylindrica (iii) Kansas: Allen and Cherokee (x) Oklahoma: McCurtain and Rogers cylindrica) Counties. Counties. (iv) Kentucky: Ballard, Green, Hart, (xi) Pennsylvania: Crawford, Erie, (1) Critical habitat units are depicted Mercer, and Venango Counties. for the rabbitsfoot in: Livingston, Logan, Marshall, and McCracken Counties. (xii) Tennessee: Hardin, Hickman, (i) Alabama: Colbert, Jackson, (v) Illinois: Massac, Pulaski, and Marshall, Maury, and Robertson Madison, and Marshall Counties. Vermilion Counties. Counties. (ii) Arkansas: Arkansas, Ashley, (2) Within these areas, the primary (vi) Indiana: Carroll, Pulaski, Bradley, Clark, Cleveland, Dallas, Drew, constituent elements of the physical and Tippecanoe, and White Counties. Fulton, Grant, Hot Spring, biological features essential to the Independence, Izard, Jackson, (vii) Mississippi: Hinds, Sunflower, conservation of the rabbitsfoot consist of Lawrence, Little River, Marion, Monroe, Toshimingo, and Warren Counties. five components: Montgomery, Newton, Ouachita, (viii) Missouri: Jasper, Madison, and (i) Geomorphically stable river Randolph, Saline, Searcy, Sevier, Sharp, Wayne Counties. channels and banks (channels that Van Buren, White, and Woodruff (ix) Ohio: Coshocton, Madison, maintain lateral dimensions, Counties. Union, and Williams Counties. longitudinal profiles, and sinuosity
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.008 63500 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
patterns over time without an aggrading temperature, pH, ammonia, heavy which they are located exists within the or degrading bed elevation) with metals, and chemical constituents) legal boundaries on the effective date of habitats that support a diversity of necessary to sustain natural this rule. freshwater mussel and native fish (such physiological processes for normal (4) Critical habitat map units. Unit as stable riffles, sometimes with runs, behavior, growth, and viability of all life maps were developed using ESRI and midchannel island habitats that stages. ArcGIS mapping software along with (iv) The presence and abundance provide flow refuges consisting of gravel various spatial data layers. Critical (currently unknown) of fish hosts and sand substrates with low to habitat unit upstream and downstream moderate amounts of fine sediment and necessary for recruitment of the limits were delineated at the nearest attached filamentous algae). rabbitsfoot. The occurrence of natural road crossing or stream confluence of (ii) A hydrologic flow regime (the fish assemblages, reflected by fish each occupied reach. Data layers severity, frequency, duration, and species richness, relative abundance, defining map units were created with seasonality of discharge over time) and community composition, for each USGS National Hydrography Dataset necessary to maintain benthic habitats inhabited river or creek will serve as an (NHD) Medium Flowline data. ArcGIS where the species are found and to indication of appropriate presence and was also used to calculate river maintain connectivity of rivers with the abundance of fish hosts until kilometers and miles from the NHD floodplain, allowing the exchange of appropriate host fish can be identified. nutrients and sediment for maintenance (v) Either no competitive or dataset, and it was used to determine of the mussel’s and fish host’s habitat, predaceous invasive (nonnative) longitude and latitude coordinates in food availability, spawning habitat for species, or such species in quantities decimal degrees. The projection used in native fishes, and the ability for newly low enough to have minimal effect on mapping and calculating distances and transformed juveniles to settle and survival of freshwater mussels. locations within the units was North become established in their habitats. (3) Critical habitat does not include American Albers Equal Area Conic, (iii) Water and sediment quality manmade structures (such as buildings, NAD 83. (including, but not limited to, bridges, aqueducts, airports, roads, and (5) Note: Index map of critical habitat conductivity, hardness, turbidity, other paved areas) and the land on units for the rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63501
(6) Unit RF1: Spring River—Jasper Highway 96 at Carthage, Jasper County, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF1 (Spring County, Missouri; and Cherokee County, Missouri, downstream to the confluence River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Kansas. of Turkey Creek north of Empire, follows: (i) Unit RF1 includes 56.5 rkm (35.1 Cherokee County, Kansas. rmi) of the Spring River from Missouri
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.009 63502 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(7) Unit RF2: Verdigris River—Rogers Lake dam north of Claremore, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF2 (Verdigris County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma, downstream to Interstate 44 River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF2 includes 45.5 rkm (28.3 (Will Rogers Turnpike) west of Catoosa, follows: rmi) of the Verdigris River from Oologah Rogers County, Oklahoma.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.010 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63503
(8) Unit RF3: Neosho River—Allen Creek confluence northwest of Iola, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF3 (Neosho County, Kansas. Kansas, downstream to the confluence River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF3 includes 26.6 rkm (16.5 of Owl Creek southwest of Humboldt, follows: rmi) of the Neosho River from the Deer Allen County, Kansas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.011 63504 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(9) Unit RF4a: Ouachita River— Montgomery County, Arkansas, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF4a (Ouachita Montgomery County, Arkansas. downstream to Arkansas Highway 298 River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF4a includes 21.9 rkm (13.6 east of Pencil Bluff, Montgomery follows: rmi) of the Ouachita River from County, Arkansas. Arkansas Highway 379 south of Oden,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.012 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63505
(10) Unit RF4b: Ouachita River— Interstate 30 at Malvern, Hot Spring (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF4b (Ouachita Clark, Hot Spring, and Ouachita County, Arkansas, downstream to U.S. River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Counties, Arkansas. Highway 79 at Camden, Ouachita follows: (i) Unit RF4b includes 157.9 rkm (98.1 County, Arkansas. rmi) of the Ouachita River from
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.013 63506 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(11) Unit RF5: Saline River—Ashley, 30 near Benton, Saline County, located northwest of Crossett, Ashley Bradley, Cleveland, Dallas, Drew, Grant, Arkansas, downstream to Snake Creek and Bradley Counties, Arkansas. and Saline Counties, Arkansas. confluence north of Felsenthal National (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF5 (Saline (i) Unit RF5 includes 288.4 rkm (179.2 Wildlife Refuge’s northern border River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot rmi) of the Saline River from Interstate follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.014 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63507
(12) Unit RF6: Little River— (i) Unit RF6 includes 139.7 rkm (86.8 of Wilton, Little River and Sevier McCurtain County, Oklahoma; and rmi) of the Little River from the Glover Counties, Arkansas. Little River and Sevier Counties, River confluence northwest of Idabel, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF6 (Little Arkansas. McCurtain County, Oklahoma, River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot downstream to U.S. Highway 71 north follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.015 63508 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(13) Unit RF7: Middle Fork Little north of Shirley, Arkansas, downstream (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF7 (Middle River—Van Buren County, Arkansas. to the upstream point of inundation by Fork Little Red River) of critical habitat (i) Unit RF7 includes 23.3 rkm (14.5 Greers Ferry Reservoir, Van Buren for rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the Middle Fork Little Red River County, Arkansas. from the confluence of Little Tick Creek
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.016 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63509
(14) Unit RF8a: White River— Batesville Dam at Batesville, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF8a (White Independence, Jackson, White, and Independence County, Arkansas, River) of critical habitat for the Woodruff Counties, Arkansas. downstream to the Little Red River rabbitsfoot follows: (i) Unit RF8a includes 188.3 rkm confluence north of Georgetown, White, (117.0 rmi) of the White River from the and Woodruff Counties, Arkansas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.017 63510 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(15) Unit RF8b: White River— Highway 79 at Clarendon, Monroe (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF8b (White Arkansas and Monroe Counties, County, Arkansas, downstream to River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Arkansas. Arkansas Highway 1 near St. Charles, follows: (i) Unit RF8b includes 68.9 rkm (42.8 Arkansas County, Arkansas. rmi) of the White River from U.S.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.018 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63511
(16) Unit RF9: Black River—Lawrence County, Arkansas, downstream to the (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF9 (Black and Randolph Counties, Arkansas. Strawberry River confluence southeast River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF9 includes 92.2 rkm (57.3 of Strawberry, Lawrence County, follows: rmi) of the Black River from U.S. Arkansas. Highway 67 at Pocahontas, Randolph
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.019 63512 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(17) Unit RF10: Spring River— Highway 412 and 62 at Hardy in Sharp (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF10 (Spring Lawrence, Randolph, and Sharp County, Arkansas, downstream to its River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Counties, Arkansas. confluence with the Black River east of follows: (i) Unit RF10 includes 62.8 rkm (39.0 Black Rock, Lawrence, and Randolph rmi) of the Spring River from U.S. Counties, Arkansas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.020 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63513
(18) Unit RF11: South Fork Spring from Fulton County Road 198 north of (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF11 (South River—Fulton County, Arkansas. Heart, Arkansas, downstream to Fork Spring River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF11 includes 16.4 rkm (10.2 Arkansas Highway 289 at Saddle, rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the South Fork Spring River Fulton County, Arkansas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.021 63514 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(19) Unit RF12: Strawberry River— Arkansas Highway 56 south of Strawberry, Lawrence County, Izard, Lawrence, and Sharp Counties, Horseshoe Bend, Izard County, Arkansas. Arkansas. Arkansas, downstream to its confluence (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF12 (i) Unit RF12 includes 123.8 rkm (76.9 with the Black River southeast of (Strawberry River) of critical habitat for rmi) of the Strawberry River from rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.022 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63515
(20) Unit RF13: Buffalo River— Newton County, Arkansas, downstream Leatherwood Creek in the Lower Buffalo Newton and Searcy Counties, Arkansas. to U.S. Highway 65 west of Gilbert, Wilderness Area (eastern segment). (i) Unit RF13 includes 113.6 rkm (70.6 Searcy County, Arkansas (western (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF13 (Buffalo rmi) of the Buffalo River from the Cove segment), and Arkansas Highway 14 River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Creek confluence southeast of Erbie, downstream to the confluence of follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.023 63516 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(21) Unit RF14: St. Francis River— Saco, Madison County, Missouri, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF14 (St. Madison and Wayne Counties, Missouri. downstream to the upstream point of Francis River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF14 includes 64.3 rkm (40.0 inundation by Lake Wappepello, Wayne rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the St. Francis River from the County, Missouri. Twelvemile Creek confluence west of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.024 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63517
(22) Unit RF15: Big Sunflower River— Doddsville, Mississippi, downstream to (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF15 (Big Sunflower County, Mississippi. the Quiver River confluence east of Sunflower River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF15 includes 51.5 rkm (32.0 Indianola, Sunflower County, rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the Big Sunflower River from Mississippi. Mississippi Highway 442 west of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.025 63518 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(23) Unit RF16: Bear Creek— and Mississippi State line east of Colbert County, Alabama (just upstream Tishomingo County, Mississippi; and Golden, Tishomingo County, of Pickwick Lake). Colbert County, Alabama. Mississippi, downstream to Alabama (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF16 (Bear (i) Unit RF16 includes 49.7 rkm (30.9 County Road 4 southwest of Sutton Hill, Creek) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot rmi) of Bear Creek from the Alabama follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.026 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63519
(24) Unit RF17: Big Black River— Creek confluence west of Lynchburg, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF17 (Big Black Hinds and Warren Counties, Hinds County, Mississippi, downstream River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Mississippi. to Mississippi Highway 27 west of follows: (i) Unit RF17 includes 43.3 rkm (26.9 Newman, Warren County, Mississippi. rmi) of the Big Black River from Porter
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.027 63520 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(25) Unit RF18: Paint Rock River— convergence of Estill Fork and Hope, Madison and Marshall Counties, Jackson, Madison, and Marshall Hurricane Creek north of Skyline, Alabama. Counties, Alabama. Jackson County, Alabama, downstream (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF18 (Paint (i) Unit RF18 includes 81.0 rkm (50.3 to U.S. Highway 431 south of New Rock River) of critical habitat for rmi) of the Paint Rock River from the rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.028 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63521
(26) Unit RF19: Duck River— Lillard Mill (RKM 288.1; RMI 179) west (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF19 (Duck Hickman, Marshall, and Maury of Tennessee Highway 272, Marshall River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Counties, Tennessee. County, Tennessee, downstream to follows: (i) Unit RF19 includes 235.3 rkm Interstate 40 near Bucksnort, Hickman (146.2 rmi) of the Duck River from County, Tennessee.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.029 63522 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(27) Unit RF20a: Tennessee River— Pickwick Lake Dam downstream to U.S. (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF20a Hardin County, Tennessee. Highway 64 near Adamsville, Hardin (Tennessee River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF20a includes 26.7 rkm (16.6 County, Tennessee. rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the Tennessee River from
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.030 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63523
(28) Unit RF20b: Tennessee River— Kentucky Lake Dam, Marshall and (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF20b Livingston, Marshall, and McCracken Livingston Counties, Kentucky, (Tennessee River) of critical habitat for Counties, Kentucky. downstream to its confluence with the rabbitsfoot follows: (i) Unit RF20b includes 35.6 rkm (22.1 Ohio River, Livingston and McCracken rmi) of the Tennessee River from Counties, Kentucky.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.031 63524 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(29) Unit RF21: Ohio River—Ballard, (i) Unit RF21 includes 45.9 rkm (28.5 downstream to Lock and Dam 53 near Livingston, and McCracken Counties, rmi) of the Ohio River from the Olmstead, Pulaski County, Illinois. Kentucky; Massac and Pulaski Counties, Tennessee River confluence, Livingston (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF21 (Ohio Illinois. and McCracken Counties, Kentucky, River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.032 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63525
(30) Unit RF22: Green River—Green, Campbellsville, Taylor County, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF22 (Green Hart, and Taylor Counties, Kentucky. Kentucky, downstream to Maple River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF22 includes 175.6 rkm Springs Ranger Station Road in follows: (109.1 rmi) of the Green River from Mammoth Cave National Park, Green River Lake Dam south of Kentucky.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.033 63526 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(31) Unit RF23: French Creek— Reservoir Dam northeast of Union City, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF23 (French Crawford, Erie, Mercer, and Venango Erie County, Pennsylvania, downstream Creek) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot Counties, Pennsylvania. to its confluence with the Allegheny follows: (i) Unit RF23 includes 120.4 rkm (74.8 River near Franklin, Venango County, rmi) of French Creek from Union City Pennsylvania.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.034 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63527
(32) Unit RF24: Allegheny River— Venango County, Pennsylvania, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF24 Venango County, Pennsylvania. downstream to Interstate 80 near (Allegheny River) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF24 includes 57.3 rkm (35.6 Emlenton, Venango County, rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the Allegheny River from the Pennsylvania. French Creek confluence near Franklin,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.035 63528 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(33) Unit RF25: Muddy Creek— Crawford County, Pennsylvania, (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF25 (Muddy Crawford County, Pennsylvania. downstream to its confluence with Creek) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF25 includes 20.1 rkm (12.5 French Creek east of Cambridge Springs, follows: rmi) of Muddy Creek from Pennsylvania Crawford County, Pennsylvania. Highway 77 near Little Cooley,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.036 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63529
(34) Unit RF26: Tippecanoe River— Indiana Highway 14 near Winamac, Schafer and Freeman and the stream Carroll, Pulaski, Tippecanoe, and White Pulaski County, Indiana, downstream to reach between the two lakes. Counties, Indiana. its confluence with the Wabash River (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF26 (i) Unit RF26 includes 75.6 rkm (47.0 northeast of Battle Ground, Tippecanoe (Tippecanoe River) of critical habitat for rmi) of the Tippecanoe River from County, Indiana, excluding Lakes rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.037 63530 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(35) Unit RF27: Walhonding River— convergence of the Kokosing and (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF27 Coshocton County, Ohio. Mohican Rivers downstream to Ohio (Walhonding River) of critical habitat (i) Unit RF27 includes 17.5 rkm (10.9 Highway 60 near Warsaw, Coshocton for rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of the Walhonding River from the County, Ohio.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.038 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63531
(36) Unit RF28: Little Darby Creek— Highway 161 near Chuckery, Madison (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF28 (Little Madison and Union Counties, Ohio. County, Ohio, downstream to U.S. Darby Creek) of critical habitat for (i) Unit RF28 includes 33.3 rkm (20.7 Highway 40 near West Jefferson, rabbitsfoot follows: rmi) of Little Darby Creek from Ohio Madison County, Ohio.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.039 63532 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(37) Unit RF29: North Fork Vermilion to Illinois Highway 1 and U.S. Highway downstream to its confluence with River and Middle Branch North Fork 136 upstream of Lake Vermilion, North Fork Vermilion River west of Vermilion River, respectively, Vermilion County, Illinois. Unit RF29 Alvin, Vermilion County, Illinois. Vermilion County, Illinois. also includes 7.2 rkm (4.5 rmi) of the (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF29 (North (i) Unit RF29 includes 28.5 rkm (17.7 Middle Branch North Fork Vermilion rmi) of the North Fork Vermilion River Fork Vermilion River and Middle River from the Jordan Creek confluence Branch North Fork Vermilion River) of from the confluence of Middle Branch northwest of Alvin, Illinois, North Fork Vermilion River downstream critical habitat for rabbitsfoot follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.040 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63533
(38) Unit RF30: Fish Creek—Williams Wildlife Area near the Indiana and Ohio (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF30 (Fish County, Ohio. State line northwest of Edgerton, Ohio, Creek) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF30 includes 7.7 rkm (4.8 downstream to its confluence with the follows: rmi) of Fish Creek from the western St. Joseph’s River north of Edgerton, (upstream) portion of Fish Creek Williams County, Ohio.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.041 63534 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(39) Unit RF31: Red River—Logan Fork Red River confluence west of (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF31 (Red County, Kentucky; and Robertson Adairville, Logan County, Kentucky, River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot County, Tennessee. downstream to the Sulphur Fork follows: (i) Unit RF31 includes 50.2 rkm (31.2 confluence southwest of Adams, rmi) of the Red River from the South Robertson County, Tennessee.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.042 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules 63535
(40) Unit RF32: Shenango River— Pennsylvania, downstream to the (ii) Note: Map of Unit RF32 (Shenango Mercer County, Pennsylvania. upstream point of inundation by River) of critical habitat for rabbitsfoot (i) Unit RF32 includes 16.3 rkm (10.1 Shenango River Lake near Big Bend, follows: rmi) of the Shenango River from Kidds Mercer County, Pennsylvania. Mill Road near Greenville,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.043 63536 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 16, 2012 / Proposed Rules
* * * * * Dated: August 22, 2012. Rachel Jacobson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2012–24151 Filed 10–12–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–c
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:16 Oct 15, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\16OCP2.SGM 16OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EP16OC12.044