Vol. 76 Thursday, No. 194 October 6, 2011

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Mohave Ground Squirrel as Endangered or Threatened; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62214 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife information to indicate that listing the and Plants that contains substantial Mohave ground squirrel may be Fish and Wildlife Service scientific or commercial information warranted, announced the initiation of a that listing may be warranted, we make status review of this species, and 50 CFR Part 17 a finding within 12 months of the date solicited comments and information to [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0006; of receipt of the petition. In this finding, be provided in connection with the 92210–1111–0000–B2] we determine whether the petitioned status review by June 28, 2010. This action is: (a) Not warranted, (b) notice constitutes our 12-month finding Endangered and Threatened Wildlife warranted, or (c) warranted, but the regarding the petition to list the Mohave and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a immediate proposal of a regulation ground squirrel. Petition To List the Mohave Ground implementing the petitioned action is Squirrel as Endangered or Threatened precluded by other pending proposals to Species Information determine whether species are Species Description AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, endangered or threatened, and Interior. expeditious progress is being made to The Mohave ground squirrel is a ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition add or remove qualified species from medium-sized squirrel. Total length, finding. the Federal Lists of Endangered and including the tail, is about 9 inches (in) Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section (23 centimeters (cm)), tail length is SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we about 2.5 in (6.4 cm), and weight is Wildlife Service (Service), announce a treat a petition for which the requested about 3.5 ounces (104 grams). The upper 12-month finding on a petition to list action is found to be warranted but body is grayish brown, pinkish gray, the Mohave ground squirrel precluded as though resubmitted on the cinnamon gray, and pinkish cinnamon, (Spermophilus mohavensis) as date of such finding, that is, requiring a without stripes or fleckings. The endangered or threatened under the subsequent finding to be made within underparts of the body and the tail are Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 12 months. We must publish these 12- silvery white and the tail is bushy amended (Act). After review of the best month findings in the Federal Register. (Grinnell and Dixon 1918, p. 667). The available scientific and commercial Previous Federal Actions skin is darkly pigmented and dorsal hair information, we find that listing the tips are multi-banded. The Mohave Mohave ground squirrel is not On December 13, 1993, the Service ground squirrel has a winter and warranted at this time. However, we ask received a petition dated December 6, summer pelage (coat). In summer the the public to continue to submit to us 1993, from Dr. Glenn R. Stewart of pelage is coarser and shorter, the sides any new information that becomes California Polytechnic State University, of the face paler, and the underbelly available concerning the threats to the Pomona, California, requesting the whiter than the winter pelage. The two Mohave ground squirrel or its habitat at Service list the Mohave ground squirrel sexes appear to be alike in color and any time. as a threatened species. At that time, the measurements (Grinnell and Dixon DATES: The finding announced in this species was a category 2 candidate 1918, p. 667). document was made on October 6, 2011. (November 15, 1994; 59 FR 58982), and was first included in this category on Two other species of small ground ADDRESSES: This finding is available on September 18, 1985. Category 2 squirrels occur within the range of the the Internet at http:// included taxa for which information in Mohave ground squirrel, the antelope www.regulations.gov at Docket Number the Service’s possession indicated that ground squirrel (Ammospermophilus FWS–R8–ES–2010–0006 and at http:// listing the species as endangered or leucurus) and the round-tailed ground www.fws.gov/ventura/. Supporting threatened was possibly appropriate, squirrel (Xerospermophilus documentation we used in preparing but for which sufficient data on tereticaudus). The three species are this finding is available for public biological vulnerability and threats were different in appearance. Although inspection, by appointment, during not available to support a proposed similar in size to the Mohave ground normal business hours at the U.S. Fish listing rule. On September 7, 1995, we squirrel, the antelope ground squirrel is and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and published our 90-day petition finding, grayish brown in color, with a white Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, which determined that the 1993 petition side stripe and a black band on the Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. Please did not present substantial information underside of the tail near the tip (Ingles submit any new information, materials, indicating that the petitioned action 1965, pp. 169–171). The round-tailed comments, or questions concerning this may be warranted (60 FR 46569). ground squirrel has a unicolored tail finding to the above address. On September 5, 2005, we received a that is cylindrical or round and not FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petition, dated August 30, 2005, from bushy, and a larger body than the Michael McCrary, Listing and Recovery the Defenders of Wildlife and Dr. Glenn Mohave ground squirrel (Ingles 1965, p. Program Coordinator, U.S. Fish and R. Stewart to list the Mohave ground 171). However, its skull is significantly Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and squirrel as an endangered species in smaller than that of the Mohave ground Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES); by accordance with section 4 of the Act. It squirrel in 18 of 20 cranial telephone at 805–644–1766; or by also requested that critical habitat be characteristics (Best 1995, p. 508). facsimile at 805–644–3958. If you use a designated concurrent with the listing of Mohave and antelope ground squirrels telecommunications device for the deaf the Mohave ground squirrel. The occur sympatrically (occupying the (TDD), call the Federal Information petition clearly identified itself as such same or overlapping geographic areas Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. and included the requisite identification without interbreeding) in the same SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information for the petitioners, as habitat (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 20), required in 50 CFR 424.14(a). while round-tailed ground squirrels Background On April 27, 2010, the Service made overlap only along the eastern edge of Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 its 90-day finding (75 FR 22063), the Mohave ground squirrel’s range (see U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for concluding that the petition presented ‘‘Nomenclature and Taxonomy’’ section any petition to revise the Federal Lists substantial scientific or commercial below).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62215

Nomenclature and Taxonomy area within which a species may be previously reported (Wessman 1977, The scientific name of the Mohave found. p. 4). For this 12-month finding, the Service ground squirrel was changed from Aspects of the Mohave ground is defining the range of the Mohave Spermophilus mohavensis to squirrel’s biology and behavior make ground squirrel as about 5,319,000 acres Xerospermophilus mohavensis with the individuals of the species difficult to (ac) (2,152,532 hectares (ha)) (Service publication of a review of the available observe, trap, and count, which in part calculations) (see Map 1). The range is research on morphological, genetic, explains why the range of the species bounded on the south and west by the cytogenetic, ecological, and behavioral has increased over time (see below). San Bernardino, San Gabriel, attributes in the genus Spermophilus Mohave ground squirrels are only active Tehachapi, and Sierra Nevada mountain (Helgen et al. 2009, p. 273). and above ground for part of the year ranges, although the species occurs in The Mohave ground squirrel is a (generally February through August) canyons in the eastern foothills of the distinct, full species with no recognized and therefore can only be trapped and Sierra Nevada up to 5,600 feet (ft) (1,706 subspecies. It was discovered in 1886 by observed during this time. They spend much of the year underground and in a meters (m)) (Gustafson 1993, pp. 56–57; Frank Stephens (Grinnell and Dixon Laabs 1998, p. 1). The range is bounded 1918, p. 667) and described by Merriam state of dormancy (see ‘‘Active Season and Dormancy’’ section). The length of on the north and east by Owens Lake (1889, p. 15). The type specimen is from and the Mojave River/Lucerne Valley, near Rabbit Springs, San Bernardino the active season and movements of Mohave ground squirrels may also be respectively (Leitner 2008, p. 18). County, California, about 15 miles (mi) Howell (1938, p. 184) and Aardahl and (24.1 kilometers (km)) east of Hesperia affected by rainfall amounts. The number of individuals in an area Roush (1985, p. 3) included the (Grinnell and Dixon 1918, p. 667). Antelope Valley west of Palmdale and The closest relative of the Mohave appears to decline during dry years, and movements and home range size shrink Lancaster in the range of the Mohave ground squirrel is the round-tailed ground squirrel (see Map 1). ground squirrel (Bell et al. 2009, p. 5; (Harris and Leitner 2004, p. 521). Thus, if traps are set during a dry year, the The range map in the petition did not Helgen et al. 2009, p. 293). Until 1977, include the western Antelope Valley reduced movements of Mohave ground the ranges of these two species were because there are no definite records of squirrels and reduced densities or local thought to be adjacent to each other but the species in that area. However, for extirpations make it less likely that the not overlapping (Hall and Kelson 1959, several reasons, we included the traps are located when and where they p. 358). However, Wessman (1977, p. western Antelope Valley in our range of will capture Mohave ground squirrels. 10) determined that the eastern edge of the Mohave ground squirrel. First, older Conversely, if traps are set during a wet the geographic range of the Mohave reports and scientific papers on the year when home ranges are larger, the ground squirrel overlapped the western Mohave ground squirrel included this Mohave ground squirrel may avoid the edge of the round-tailed ground squirrel area in the range of the species (e.g., baited traps because of the increased (Wessman 1977, pp. 12–13). He Howell 1938, p. 184; Aardahl and Roush identified several areas of contact availability of forage. 1985, p. 3). Second, although portions of between the two species and identified Because most surveys for the Mohave this area are now used for agriculture one area near Helendale, San ground squirrel have been only 1 year and livestock grazing, suitable habitat Bernardino County, California, as a in duration, this limited survey duration still remains and may be connected to possible zone of hybridization between makes it difficult to assess population currently occupied habitat to the east. the species. He observed morphological trend for a species whose numbers, Third, early museum collections of the characteristics of both species exhibited movements, and ‘‘trapability’’ can Mohave ground squirrel did not record in a few of the squirrels captured there fluctuate greatly among years (Brooks precise locality data and often used the (e.g., long, narrow tail with white on the and Matchett 2002, p. 171). These closest town for reference such as ‘‘near underside) (Wessman 1977, p. 13). factors in combination have made it Palmdale.’’ Frequently, the closest town However, in 2009, Bell et al. (p. 11) difficult to determine the boundaries of was several miles away and the locality found no evidence of mitochondrial the species’ range, its distribution information vague. Fourth, recent visual DNA introgression between the Mohave within the range, and population trends observations of Mohave ground ground squirrel and the round-tailed (see ‘‘Abundance and Trends’’ section). squirrels occurred southwest of Mojave ground squirrel, including the three This has been further complicated (see Map 1) (Leitner 2008, p. 7). Thus, individuals identified as backcross because the vast majority of the there is some indication that the individuals based on allozyme (form of information currently available on the Mohave ground squirrel may have an enzyme that differs in amino acid distribution and abundance of Mohave occurred, and may continue to occur, in sequence) and karyotypic (the shape, ground squirrels is based on the the western portion of the Antelope type, number, and order of a species’ California Department of Fish and Game Valley. Although areas of natural habitat chromosomes) data from Hafner and (CDFG) survey protocol, which has been within the range of the Mohave ground Yates (1983). We are not aware of any known to not detect squirrels when squirrel have been lost or degraded from information that would indicate other methods have shown them to be human activity (see Factor A), the hybridization occurs with the sympatric present (see ‘‘Abundance and Trend’’ boundary of the current range is larger antelope ground squirrel. section below). than reported by Howell in 1938. In 1938, Howell (1938, p. 184) The range of the Mohave ground Range and Distribution published a map of the range of the squirrel may be larger than defined by The Mohave ground squirrel is Mohave ground squirrel that included the Service, as there have been recent endemic to the western part of the the western Antelope Valley to an area sightings beyond the area defined by the Mojave Desert, in portions of Inyo, Kern, 15 mi (25.2 km) west of Barstow. In Service as the range of the Mohave Los Angeles, and San Bernardino 1977, Wessman surveyed for the ground squirrel. Although the Mohave Counties, California. It has one of the Mohave ground squirrel along much of ground squirrel has previously been smallest ranges of any species of ground its eastern boundary and found the reported at elevations up to 5,600 ft squirrel in North America (Hoyt 1972, p. species’ range extended 1,152,000 ac (1,706 m) in the canyons in the eastern 3). We define range as the geographical (466,200 ha) farther east and south than foothills of the Sierra Nevada that open

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62216 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

to the Mojave Desert (Gustafson 1993, in the Tehachapi Mountains (California northeastern edge of the range (see Map pp. 56–57; Laabs 1998, p. 1), a biologist Natural Diversity Database 2007). 1) (Threloff 2007 in litt., p.1), whereas recently reported a Mohave ground Another biologist sighted a Mohave Aardahl squirrel about 10 mi (16.1 km) south of ground squirrel in the Panamint Valley, BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Weldon (see Map 1) in an interior valley which is about 5 mi (8 km) outside the

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP06OC11.000 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62217

and Roush were unsuccessful in protocol. These surveys were usually range of the Mohave ground squirrel has capturing a squirrel here in 1985 performed in association with proposed not been surveyed (Leitner 2008, p. 9). (Gustafson 1993, p. 56). We are not development, because the Mohave Leitner (2008, p. 10) identified four using these two sightings in our range ground squirrel is listed as threatened areas that he labels as ‘‘core’’ areas for calculations because they are anecdotal under the California Endangered the Mohave ground squirrel. ‘‘Core’’ and fall outside the areas previously Species Act (CESA) (see Factor D, ‘‘State areas have the following criteria: published about the range of the Laws and Regulations’’). The survey (1) The species has been present for Mohave ground squirrel. Although we effort has been heavily weighted to the a substantial period; have not included these two sightings, southernmost portion of the species’ (2) The species is currently found at they indicate that the range of the range (Leitner 2008, p. 5), where most multiple locations; and Mohave ground squirrel may actually be of the development in the range of the (3) There is a substantial number of larger than previously indicated on Mohave ground squirrel has occurred adults representing a viable range maps or currently defined by the and is occurring (see Factor A, ‘‘Urban reproductive population. Service. and Rural Development’’). Four areas that meet the above criteria Within its range, the Mohave ground Approximately 67 percent of the are: (1) Coso Range-Olancha; (2) Little squirrel has a patchy distribution (Hoyt surveys were conducted south of State Dixie Wash; (3) EAFB; and (4) 1972, p. 7), likely caused by differences Route 58 (SR–58) (see Map 1), and Coolgardie Mesa-Superior Valley (see in rainfall, terrain (Zembal and Gall almost half of all surveys were in two Map 2). Leitner (2008, p. 1) also 1980, p. 348), elevation, temperature areas in the southernmost part of the described four other population areas (Gustafson 1993, pp. 56–57), and soils with multiple recent records of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel: and vegetation (Harris and Leitner 2005, species, although these areas are not The Lancaster-Palmdale area and the p. 189). The habitat requirements of the known to have Mohave ground squirrels Adelanto area. Almost all recorded Mohave ground squirrel for feeding, present for a substantial period: Pilot breeding, and sheltering are not observations of Mohave ground Knob, the Desert Tortoise Natural Area- uniformly spaced throughout its range. squirrels from 1998 to 2007 have been Fremont Valley, Boron-Kramer Junction, Leitner (2008, pp. i–A2) collected and from Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB), and Poison Canyon (Leitner 2008, p. analyzed 1,236 unpublished which is south of SR–58 (see Map 1), or 34). Together these eight important observations, field studies, and surveys from the central and northern portion of population areas comprise about from 1998 to 2007, including both the squirrel’s range; only a few were 606,000 ac (245,240 ha), or 11.4 percent positive and negative findings of observed in the southern end of the of the species’ range. trapping efforts using the CDFG survey squirrel’s range. However, much of the BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62218 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C areas have been identified using the population areas for the Mohave ground Leitner has emphasized the data available from limited surveys for squirrel. As an example of a recent importance of protecting and the Mohave ground squirrel. Much of discovery of an important population maintaining connectivity between these the range has not been surveyed (Leitner area, the Poison Canyon area was eight areas for the conservation of the 2008, p. 9); therefore, unsurveyed areas discovered during a 2006 survey for a Mohave ground squirrel (2008, p. 12). It may support additional important proposed drainage improvement project should be noted, however, that these

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP06OC11.001 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62219

along a State highway (Sapphos 2006, p. patterns; for example, in dry years, was conducted, was much higher; the 3–1). reproduction the following spring may video system recorded nine Mohave be unsuccessful, and population ground squirrels compared to the one Abundance and Trends numbers and the area occupied by the that was trapped (Delaney 2009, pp. Data on population abundance and species may decrease (Leitner and 13–14). trend for the Mohave ground squirrel Leitner 1998, pp. 29–31; Harris and Food Habits are limited (Leitner 2008, p. 8). The Leitner 2005, p. 520). behavioral characteristics of the Mohave Gustafson (1993, p. 22) reported that The diet of the Mohave ground ground squirrel make it difficult to prolonged periods of drought may result squirrel consists of leaves (Recht 1977, determine its presence or abundance as in the loss of Mohave ground squirrels p. 75), flowers, fruits, and seeds (Leitner it spends much of the year underground in local areas, because no young may be and Leitner 1992, p. 12; Gustafson 1993, (see ‘‘Active Season and Dormancy’’ born for one up to several years, and pp. 77–83) from a variety of plants; they section below). Based on his adult survivability is reduced by poor also feed on fungi (Burt 1936, p. 223) observations, Burt (1936, p. 222) habitat conditions to the point where and arthropods (caterpillars) when estimated the density of Mohave ground the population dies out. In general, the available (Zembal and Gall 1980, p. squirrels in the southern part of their population dynamics of the Mohave 345). When available in spring, new, range at 15 to 20 animals per square mi ground squirrel appear to follow a tender, green vegetation makes up (5 to 8 animals per square km). Most contraction and expansion pattern, i.e., nearly all of the diet of the Mohave subsequent studies cannot be readily there are local extirpations of squirrel ground squirrel (Best 1995, p. 6). The compared with Burt (1936) because they populations following drought years Mohave ground squirrel is also known did not estimate density of animals (i.e., and recolonization of these areas with to eat alfalfa (Best 1995, p. 5). they either reported the number of consecutive wet years (Harris and The Mohave ground squirrel forages animals trapped or compared numbers Leitner 2005, p. 189). During the last on the ground, in the branches of trapped to individual trapping efforts few decades, more consecutive years in shrubs, and, where present, in Yucca (Hoyt 1972, p. 6; Recht 1977, p. 4; the western Mojave Desert have been brevifolia (Joshua trees) (Johnson no Wessman 1977, p. 4; Leitner 1980, pp. dry versus wet (Brooks and Matchett date, p. 1). It caches food in its burrow IV–26; Aardahl and Roush 1985, pp. 11– 2002, p. 175), suggesting a trend for future use (Johnson no date, p. 1). It 13; Scarry et al. 1996, pp. 12–17; Leitner weighted toward extirpations rather obtains water from its diet, but will 2001, pp. 13–18, 30–32). than recolonizations. However, Brooks drink water if available (Johnson no The only location we are aware of and Matchett (2002, p. 176) suggest that date, p. 1). where a population of Mohave ground factors other than, or in addition to, Recht (1977, p. 80) categorized the squirrels has been studied in detail for rainfall amount and timing seem to be foraging strategy of the Mohave ground several years is in the Coso Region in affecting Mohave ground squirrel squirrel as a facultative specialist. the northern portion of the species’ abundance, such as trapping Because the availability of food range (Leitner 2005, p. 3). Trapping characteristics, trapping protocols, resources fluctuates seasonally and surveys for the Mohave ground squirrel weather conditions, or site (habitat) annually in the Mojave Desert, the at this location were conducted from characteristics. Mohave ground squirrel specializes in 1989 to 1996 and from 2001 to 2005. Leitner (2001, pp. 30–31) conducted a certain food species for short periods, However, the estimated population similar comparison of trapping results at but changes the foods it consumes as density was only reported for 1990 and 11 sites in 1980, 1999, and 2000, and at their availability changes. For example, for the period from 1992 to 1996 19 sites in 2004 (Leitner 2005, p. 5). The in March 1994, the diet of the Mohave because of limited sample size in other first study showed a positive correlation ground squirrel in the northern part of years (Leitner and Leitner 1998, pp. A– between rainfall and trapping success its range was 90 percent shrubs, 10 3, A–6, A–8, A–9, A–12, A–15, A–18, prior to 1991, but no correlation after percent forbs (i.e., any herbaceous plant and A–22). The number of Mohave that. Both studies reported that trapping that is not grass or grasslike), and less ground squirrels that were captured success has declined and concluded than 1 percent nonnative annual grasses varied from year to year, ranging from that this indicated a possible decline in (Schismus and Bromus) (Leitner et al. 10 squirrels trapped in 2003 to 78 in the distribution and abundance of the 1995, p. 45). By April, the Mohave 1994 (Leitner 2005, p. 3). The number Mohave ground squirrel during this ground squirrel’s diet had changed to 60 of adult Mohave ground squirrels period, despite periods of above-normal percent shrubs, 35 to 40 percent forbs, trapped was higher per year during the precipitation (Leitner 2001, p. 32; and 2 percent grasses (Leitner et al. period 1990–1996 than during the Brooks and Matchett 2002, p. 176). 1995, p. 48). period 2001–2004 (Leitner 2005, p. 3). However, the survey protocol is The quantity, variety, and nutritional Researchers have suggested that subject to potential inaccuracies, such quality of plant food sources available trends in protocol survey data over time as yielding false negative results or ultimately depend on the amount of could be used to evaluate the status of undersampling the population (see also rainfall from the preceding fall and the species. Brooks and Matchett (2002) Factor D, ‘‘State Laws and Regulations’’ winter (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 22). analyzed the data from 19 reported section). Mohave ground squirrels are During drought years, there are few-to- studies on the Mohave ground squirrel difficult to trap (Hoyt 1972, p. 7), and no herbaceous native annual forbs in 1918 and during the period 1970– they have been observed approaching available, and Mohave ground squirrels 2001. They suggested that the Mohave traps but not entering them (Leitner must then depend on shrub foliage for ground squirrel may be undergoing a 2009, pers. comm.). For example, in water and nutrition (Leitner and Leitner long-term decline as indicated by the 2009, only one Mohave ground squirrel 1998, p. 20). decreased trapping success since the was trapped during two surveys This foraging strategy provides mid-1980s (Brooks and Matchett 2002, conducted in the Fort Irwin western efficiency and flexibility to maximize p. 176). One possible reason for decline expansion area (Delaney and Leitner nutritional and water intake in a is that Mohave ground squirrel 2009, p. 9). However, the detection rate changing desert habitat (Recht 1977, p. populations appear to be sensitive to for a video detection system, which was 80). These abilities are needed, as the both seasonal and annual rainfall used at the same time as the trapping Mohave ground squirrel must increase

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62220 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

its body weight in spring and early Mortality and Predation enter dormancy until July at the earliest summer to sustain itself during the Mohave ground squirrels can live up and as late as the end of August (Leitner dormant period of mid-summer through to 5 years or longer (Leitner and Leitner and Leitner 1998, pp. 32, 38). The period when dormancy begins winter (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 33). 1998, p. 28). Mortality for juveniles is varies annually. Dormancy does not high during the first year and is Reproduction appear to be an adaptation to avoid low disproportionately higher for males than temperatures; rather it appears to be an Female Mohave ground squirrels can females. As a result, the juvenile adaptation to seasonally restricted food breed at 1 year of age if environmental population contains significantly more and water (Bartholomew and Hudson conditions are favorable (Leitner and females than males, and the adult 1960, p. 202). The initiation of Leitner 1998, p. 28), while males do not female-to-male ratio averages about breed until 2 years of age or older dormancy appears to correspond to 2.6:1, but was reported to be as high as either the absence of available green (Leitner and Leitner 1998, p. 36). 7:1 in one population (Leitner and The Mohave ground squirrel mating vegetation or its abundance (Aardahl Leitner 1998, p. 36). and Roush 1985, pp. 20–21). For the season occurs from mid-February to Information on the causes of mortality mid-March (Harris and Leitner 2004, p. latter, the Mohave ground squirrel in the Mohave ground squirrel is enters dormancy earlier as food 1). Mohave ground squirrel males limited. We are not aware of any typically emerge from dormancy in abundance allows the animal to meet information on diseases in the species. energy needs to sustain it through February, up to 2 weeks before females Although not based on direct (Recht pers. comm., as cited in dormancy earlier (Harris and Leitner observation, predators are believed to 2004, p. 521). Gustafson 1993, p. 83). Male Mohave include coyote (Canis latrans), ground squirrels defend a territory, The principal source of energy for the American badger (Taxidea taxus), Mohave ground squirrel during which females enter for mating (Recht golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), red- dormancy is stored body fat, although pers. comm., as cited in Gustafson 1993, tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), prairie food is stored in burrows and may be pp. 83–84). Three to four females mate falcon (Falco mexicanus), common consumed during the dormant period and remain in the male’s territory for a raven (Corvus corax), and rattlesnake (Ingles 1965, p. 177; Recht 1977, p. 85; day or so, before returning to their (Crotalus sp.) (Boarman 1993, p. 2; Johnson no date, p. 1). During more respective home ranges. After a Gustafson 1993, p. 88; Harris, pers. severe drought years, Mohave ground gestation period of 29 to 30 days, the comm., as cited in Defenders of Wildlife squirrels may enter dormancy with young are born in the female’s burrow and Stewart 2005, p. 15). relatively low body weight, which likely (natal burrow) from March to May, with Mortality may also be caused by affects survivorship of Mohave ground a peak in April. Average litter size is extended periods of low amounts of squirrels, especially juveniles, to the about six (Burt 1936, p. 224; Recht pers. winter rainfall, which results in reduced following spring (Leitner and Leitner comm., as cited by Leitner et al. 1991, availability of forage and water and 1998, p. 32). p. 63) and ranges from four to nine (Best increases the species’ vulnerability to 1995, p. 3). Parental care continues malnutrition, disease, and starvation. Home Range and Movements through mid-May, with juveniles Gustafson (1993, p. 22) indicated that In general, juvenile Mohave ground emerging above ground at 10 days to 2 prolonged periods of drought result in squirrels have larger home ranges (at weeks of age (Gustafson 1993, p. 84). By the extirpation of Mohave ground least twice as large) than adults, and early May, the juveniles are active above squirrels in local areas as adult survival adult males have larger home ranges ground and can be captured in live is reduced by poor forage conditions. than females (Aardahl and Roush 1985, traps. p. 11; Best 1995, p. 6). Mohave ground Active Season and Dormancy Reproductive success appears to be squirrels are territorial and, throughout strongly influenced by rainfall. In dry The Mohave ground squirrel lives in much of their active period, there is years, the Mohave ground squirrel’s burrows which it digs (Gustafson 1993, little overlap between home ranges survival strategy appears to be to forego p. ix), and remains in burrows in a state (Recht 1977, p. 20). Best (1995, p. 6) reproductive activity and concentrate on of dormancy throughout much of the observed that home ranges are separate gaining weight and fat reserves in the year. For the Mohave ground squirrel, until late June, with little evidence of spring and early summer to better dormancy is a physiological state that territorial behavior. The home ranges survive the dormant period (Leitner and includes a reduced frequency of are not static and may shift during the Leitner 1998, p. 32). For example, breathing, or apnea, reduced oxygen active season, and from year to year, in Mohave ground squirrels in the Coso consumption, reduced body response to changes in food quality and Range failed to reproduce successfully temperature (Bartholomew and Hudson quantity (Best 1995, p. 6; Harris and in 1989, 1990, and 1994, which 1960, pp. 195–197), and a reduced heart Leitner 2004, p. 520). Home ranges of correlated with low fall and winter rate (Ingles 1965, p. 177). Mohave juveniles form a cluster around the precipitation and a low standing crop of ground squirrels may be active from home range of an adult (Best 1995, p. 6), annual forbs. In each of the 3 years, February to August (Bartholomew and and adults exclude juveniles from those precipitation during the period when it Hudson 1960, p. 194), with dormancy portions of the habitat with the densest normally occurs in the region usually beginning in July or August; vegetation (Best 1995, p. 6). Adult (September 1 to March 31) was lower emergence dates vary with elevation Mohave ground squirrels gain weight than the long-term average for the same (Johnson no date, p. 1). In years when twice as fast as most juveniles, likely period (average of 3.3 in (8.5 cm) versus reproduction occurs, most adults are due to differences in resource quality the average of 5 in (12.7 cm), active through June, but all have entered between adult and juvenile home ranges respectively) (Leitner and Leitner 1998, dormancy by the end of July; in years (Recht 1977, p. 82). pp. 18–19, 21, and 29). In years when with no reproduction, adults may enter Home range size varies with the reproduction does occur, females of all dormancy as early as the end of April. reproductive period and rainfall levels age classes (including yearlings) In contrast, juvenile Mohave ground and food availability (Harris and Leitner produce young (Leitner and Leitner squirrels begin to forage outside their 2004, p. 1). During the mating season, 1998, p. 28). natal burrows by mid-May and do not the median male home range is much

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62221

larger than the female home range, 16.6 Soil characteristics are important, as In making this 12-month finding, ac (6.73 ha) compared to 1.8 ac (0.74 ha) the Mohave ground squirrel constructs information pertaining to the Mohave (Harris and Leitner 2004, pp. 521–522). burrows to escape temperature and ground squirrel in relation to the five The females’ home ranges are non- humidity extremes and predators, and factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the overlapping and noncontiguous, and to give birth (Aardahl and Roush 1985, Act is discussed below. each individual exhibits a high degree p. 23). The species is absent from very In making our 12-month finding on a of site fidelity (Harris and Leitner 2004, rocky areas and playas (i.e., a sandy, petition to list the Mohave ground p. 522). During the post-mating period, salty, or mud-caked flat floor of a desert squirrel, we considered and evaluated male home range size varies from 3.7 to drainage basin that is periodically the best available scientific and 26.7 ac (1.5 to 10.8 ha), while female covered with water) (Wessman 1977, commercial information. To ensure that home range size varies from 0.72 to 4.69 pp. 7–9; Zembal and Gall 1980, p. 348). this finding is based on the latest ac (0.29 to 1.90 ha) (Harris and Leitner Rainfall must be adequate as it affects scientific information, we contacted 2004, pp. 517, 521). Female post-mating the quality and quantity of forage species experts; land managers within home range size is larger than the (Gustafson 1993, p. 57). Plant species the range of the Mohave ground mating season home range (Harris and diversity and the availability of native squirrel; the CDFG; and others with Leitner 2004, p. 520). annual forbs are important to expertise on the species, its habitat, and An evaluation of different sequential population stability and reproduction threats occurring, or likely to occur, survey results indicated that juvenile (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 22). The within the range of the species. We Mohave ground squirrels moved farther presence of a variety of shrubs that conducted a search of the available than adults (Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. provide a reliable food source during published literature on the Mohave 11), and long-distance movements were drought years may be critical for a ground squirrel and collected greater in males than in females. Among population to persist (Charis 2005, pp. unpublished reports on the species from juveniles, the greatest long-distance 3–75). resource agencies and others. movements between two sites for males The Mohave ground squirrel is Unpublished reports included regional (n = 15) was a mean of 4,987 ft (1,520 considered to be absent, or nearly so, field studies by State and Federal m) (range 360–20,440 ft (110–6,230 m)), from dry lakebeds, lava flows, and agencies and conservation groups, and for females (n = 21) 1,657 ft (505 m) steep, rocky slopes, although juveniles results of presence/absence surveys (range 344–12,670 ft (105–3,862 m)) may disperse through such areas conducted prior to proposed (Harris and Leitner 2005, p. 188). (Leitner, pers. comm., as cited in Laabs development, and incidental observations reported by field biologists. Both adult male and female Mohave 1998, p. 3). Harris and Leitner (2005, p. In addition, we accessed information in ground squirrels vocalize during their 193) found that Mohave ground the California Natural Diversity active season, and have multiple types squirrels travelled through habitats considered marginal for permanent Database. This information, information of calls (Delaney 2009, pp. 15–17). The provided by the public, and additional occupancy (e.g., contained rocky or purpose of these calls is unknown but information and data in our files gravelly soils, and elevation changes of may be linked to identifying home provided the basis for the status review hundreds of feet) but did not cross a ranges. for the Mohave ground squirrel. In playa barren of vegetation. Long- making our 12-month finding, we Habitat Requirements distance movement by juveniles through considered and evaluated all scientific marginal areas may be critical for The Mohave ground squirrel occurs in and commercial information in our files, connecting local populations and a wide variety of habitats in the western including information received during recolonizing sites after local, drought- Mojave Desert (Wessman, as cited in the public comment period that ended related extirpations (Harris and Leitner Aardahl and Roush 1985, p. 22). They June 28, 2010. The analysis of potential 2005, p. 1). include Mojave creosote bush scrub, threats to the Mohave ground squirrel Mojave mixed woody scrub, desert Summary of Information Pertaining to discussed below includes those saltbush scrub, blackbrush scrub, the Five Factors identified in the petition and those Mojave desert wash scrub, Joshua-tree identified in the information sources Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) woodland, and shadescale scrub listed above. (Gustafson 1993, pp. ix, 81; Bureau of and implementing regulations (50 CFR In considering what factors might Land Management (BLM) 1998, p. 1); part 424) set forth procedures for adding constitute threats to a species, we must Mojave creosote bush scrub is the species to, removing species from, or look beyond the exposure of the species preferred habitat of the Mohave ground reclassifying species on the Federal to a particular factor to evaluate whether squirrel (Aardahl and Roush 1985, pp. Lists of Endangered and Threatened the species may respond to that factor 22, 23). The Mohave ground squirrel has Wildlife and Plants. Under section in a way that causes actual impacts to also been found in some areas used for 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be the species. If there is exposure to a agriculture (Gustafson 1993, pp. ix, 81; determined to be endangered or factor and the species responds BLM 1998, p. 1). threatened based on any of the negatively, the factor may be a threat Habitat features considered most following five factors: and, during the status review, we suitable for the Mohave ground squirrel (A) The present or threatened attempt to determine how significant a include areas with relatively flat destruction, modification, or threat it is. The threat is significant if it topography, often located in large curtailment of its habitat or range; drives or contributes to the risk of alluvial-filled valleys, containing fine- (B) Overutilization for commercial, extinction of the species such that the to-medium-textured soil with little or no recreational, scientific, or educational species warrants listing as endangered rocks, and with the presence of a variety purposes; or threatened as those terms are defined of native shrubs, including Larrea (C) Disease or predation; in the Act. However, the identification tridentata (creosote bush), Ambrosia (D) The inadequacy of existing of factors that could impact a species dumosa (white bursage), and Atriplex regulatory mechanisms; or negatively may not be sufficient to spp. (saltbush) (Aardahl and Roush (E) Other natural or manmade factors compel a finding that the species 1985, p. 9). affecting its continued existence. warrants listing. The information must

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62222 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

include evidence sufficient to suggest Most urban and rural development Mohave ground squirrel is absent from that the potential threat has the capacity has occurred in valleys, flats, and gently the area or the area does not provide (i.e., it should be of sufficient magnitude sloping areas, which are the same types habitat for the species (Leitner 2008, p. and extent) to affect the species’ status of areas most often used by Mohave 9). Negative trapping results can occur such that it meets the definition of ground squirrels. The greatest losses of for various reasons, including trap endangered or threatened under the Act. Mohave ground squirrel habitat have location, time of trapping, and food occurred in, and adjacent to, cities availability (Brooks and Matchett 2002, Factor A: The Present or Threatened including Palmdale, Lancaster, p. 172; Leitner 2008, p. 9) (see ‘‘Range Destruction, Modification, or Victorville, Adelanto, Hesperia, Apple and Distribution’’ section and Factor D, Curtailment of the Species’ Habitat or Valley, Barstow, and Ridgecrest, ‘‘State Laws and Regulations,’’ for Range California (see Map 1). Smaller areas further discussion of the survey The following potential threats that have also been lost at the towns of protocol). may affect the habitat or range of the Hinkley, Boron, North Edwards, As discussed in the Background Mohave ground squirrel are discussed California City, Mojave, Rosamond, section, trapping surveys south of SR– in this section: (1) Urban and rural Inyokern, and Littlerock, and the 58 have most often been conducted in development, (2) off-highway vehicle unincorporated communities of areas where the squirrel has already (OHV) recreational use, (3) Pearblossom, Phelan, and Pinyon Hills, been extirpated due to extensive transportation infrastructure, (4) California (see Map 1). urbanization, such as the Palmdale- military operations, (5) energy Most of this urban development has Lancaster area in the southwestern development, (6) livestock grazing, (7) occurred in the southernmost portion of portion of the range (Leitner 2008, p. 3). agriculture, (8) mining, and (9) climate the Mohave ground squirrel’s range on More importantly, large areas south of change. Climate change is discussed private land, generally south of SR–58 SR–58 have either never been surveyed under Factor A because, although (see Map 1). More than 62 percent of the or have been surveyed only 1–2 times climate change may affect Mohave private land within the range of the (Leitner 2008, pp. 5, 9, 25). In addition, ground squirrels directly by creating Mohave ground squirrel is south of SR– the trapping protocol that was used may physiological stress, the primary impact 58. The three cities with the largest not be the most effective method to of climate change on the species is developed areas within the range of the determine the presence or absence of expected to be through changes to the squirrel (i.e., Lancaster, Palmdale, and Mohave ground squirrels. Some Victorville) occur in this area, as do scientists have identified potential availability and distribution of Mohave several of the smaller towns listed above problems with the protocol that raise ground squirrel habitat. In addition, (see Map 1). Some of this area has also questions about the accuracy of the commercial filming occurs on private been converted to agriculture (see current survey technique (Brooks and and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) ‘‘Agriculture’’ section below), and there Matchett 2002, p. 172) (see Factor D, lands in the western Mojave Desert. The are areas that do not contain suitable ‘‘State Laws and Regulations,’’ for activities for creating motion pictures, habitat for the squirrel (e.g., dry lake further discussion of the survey television shows, and commercials may beds). We estimate the portion of the protocol). require travelling on unpaved roads and range of the Mohave ground squirrel Federal lands comprise 28.5 percent trails or cross-country use. However, in south of SR–58 to be 1,690,797 ac of the area south of SR–58 (9.3 percent our review of the best available (684,244 ha), or about 31.8 percent of of the total range of the Mohave ground scientific and commercial information, the range of the Mohave ground squirrel squirrel). One of the more important we did not find information that (see Background section for our range concentrations of Mohave ground indicates these filming activities have analysis). Urbanization in this area is squirrels south of SR–58 is on EAFB. occurred, are presently occurring, or are mainly concentrated along the southern The 307,435 ac (124,468 ha) EAFB likely to occur in the future within edge of the squirrel’s range, and much encompasses about 18 percent of the Mohave ground squirrel habitat, and of the area south of SR–58 is area south of SR–58 (5.8 percent of the therefore, we have determined that they undeveloped. range of the Mohave ground squirrel) are not a threat to the species. Trapping results in the southern and contains one of the eight important Urban and Rural Development portion of the Mohave ground squirrel’s population areas for the Mohave ground range have generally been negative, squirrel (Leitner 2008, p. 10; se Map 2 The present and projected future especially in areas that are most heavily and Background section). EAFB is used growth of urban areas in the western developed (Leitner 2008, p. 5). Mohave primarily for testing and evaluating Mojave Desert could adversely affect the ground squirrels are currently known to aircraft, and the impacts to Mohave Mohave ground squirrel. About 136,900 occur in several areas south of SR–58, ground squirrel habitat from urban and ac (55,426 ha), or 2.6 percent of the including one of the largest rural development are primarily 5,319,000 ac (2,152,532 ha) range of the concentrations of squirrels on EAFB (see confined to the small cantonment areas Mohave ground squirrel (see below). Recent records of the Mohave (see ‘‘Military Operations’’ section Background section), has been lost to ground squirrel south of SR–58 and below for details). urban and rural development (Defenders outside EAFB include two in the Victor In addition to the Federal lands on of Wildlife and Stewart 2005, pp. 19, Valley-Lucerne Valley area (Jones pers. EAFB, there are more than 175,000 ac 38). Loss of Mohave ground squirrel comm., as cited in Defenders of Wildlife (70,820 ha) of Federal land managed by habitat has occurred from the and Stewart 2005, p. 8), four records the BLM south of SR–58, all of which construction of residential homes, near Adelanto (Leitner 2008, p. 7), three is not subject to the direct impacts of commercial and industrial complexes, records west and south of Barstow urbanization. These BLM lands include shopping malls, golf courses, airports (Leitner 2008, pp. 7–8), and two records the southern part of the Fremont-Kramer and associated commercial and southwest of the town of Mojave Desert Wildlife Management Area industrial development, roads, landfills, (Leitner 2008, pp. 7–8). (DWMA), which is managed for Mohave wastewater treatment facilities, prisons, The fact that trapping results south of ground squirrel habitat. Urban and rural flood management structures, and other SR–58 have generally been negative development will not occur on these facilities. does not necessarily mean that the lands (however, see ‘‘Off-Highway

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62223

Vehicle Recreational Use,’’ ‘‘Military includes the important population area BLM land. Because of their missions, we Operations,’’ and ‘‘Energy for the Mohave ground squirrel at EAFB anticipate minimal future urban Development’’ sections below for a (Leitner 2008, p. 10) (see Map 2). Except development on the military bases; any discussion on other activities that may for possibly minor additions to the development will likely be limited to affect these areas managed by EAFB and cantonment areas of EAFB, the Federal the cantonment areas (see ‘‘Military the BLM). land south of SR–58 is not subject to Operations’’ section). We expect that further urbanization of urban and rural development. In summary, we recognize that some privately owned lands south of SR–58 About 3,648,830 ac (1,476,635 ha) or Mohave ground squirrel habitat has will occur in the future. The population 68.6 percent of the range of the Mohave been lost to development within the of the western Mojave Desert is ground squirrel is north of SR–58. This range of the squirrel. Currently, about projected to grow from 795,000 (in area comprises the central and northern 2.6 percent of the range of the Mohave 2000) to more than 1.5 million people portions of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel has been lost to by 2035 (BLM et al. 2005, p. 244). Most ground squirrel. Most of this land has development, and we expect that more incorporated cities and communities in not experienced urban development; of the range will be lost in the future, the western Mojave Desert have general rather, urbanization is limited and most likely adjacent to existing urban or community plans that describe their concentrated mainly around Ridgecrest areas. A worst-case scenario would be growth and development for the next 20 and California City. About 144,000 ac that all incorporated land (about 8.9 years or more. We estimate that about (58,275 ha), or 3.9 percent of the percent (475,000 ac (192,226 ha)) within 475,000 ac (192,226 ha), or about 8.9 Mohave ground squirrel’s range north of the range of the squirrel is developed. percent of the entire range of the SR–58, is incorporated, almost all of Although unlikely because of the Mohave ground squirrel, is which (90 percent) is within California expected slow growth of California City, incorporated. The majority (about 70 City (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, p. 2). even if this were to occur, 62 percent percent) of the incorporated land south California City was incorporated in (3,300,000 ac (1,335,468 ha)) of the of SR–58 occurs within the cities of 1965, and although it is the third largest squirrel’s range is federally owned, very Palmdale, Lancaster, Victorville, Apple city in California in area, the population little of which is subject to urban Valley, Hesperia, Adelanto, and has grown to only about 14,120 in the development. We estimate that about 57 Barstow. Although these areas are 46 years since it was incorporated. percent of the Federal lands (EAFB, already extensively urbanized, not all of Additionally, most of the incorporated NAWS, Goldstone Complex, DWMAs, the incorporated lands south of SR–58 area remains undeveloped. Given the and Mohave Ground Squirrel are developed, and future growth is slow growth rate of California City, we Conservation Areas (MGSCA)) are expected to occur in these areas. Under believe that much of the land within its managed, at least in part, for Mohave a worst-case scenario, all areas within incorporated boundaries will likely ground squirrel habitat (see Map 2, the incorporated boundaries could be remain undeveloped. Table 1, and Factor D, ‘‘Federal Laws developed in the future. Federal lands managed by the BLM and Regulations’’). The eight important We did not find any information on and Department of Defense (DOD) make population areas for the Mohave ground major proposed urban developments or up about 80 percent (2,109,326 ac squirrel occur mostly or entirely within new communities being planned in the (853,617 ha)) of the range of the Mohave Federal lands managed in part for the unincorporated and rural lands south of ground squirrel north of SR–58 (39.7 Mohave ground squirrel, and are SR–58, although the existing percent of the entire range). The BLM therefore not threatened with urban unincorporated communities will likely manages 438,364 ac (177, 400 ha), while development. In addition, Leitner (2008, continue to grow. However, we expect the DOD manages 1,670,962 ac (676,217 p. 9) has stated that additional that future development will most likely ha). Most of the 1,110,443-ac (449,382- populations of the Mohave ground occur in areas that are already ha) China Lake Naval Air Weapons squirrel may well exist because much of incorporated because of proximity to Station (NAWS) and the 33,359-ac the range of the squirrel has never been existing infrastructure. Although we (13,500-ha) Goldstone Deep Space surveyed or has only been surveyed 1– cannot predict with any certainty what Communications Complex (Goldstone 2 times, which may not be sufficient to areas will be developed or when they Complex), managed by the National determine the presence of the squirrel may be developed in the next 20–30 Aeronautical and Space Administration (Leitner 2008, p. 25). We conclude, years, even if all incorporated lands (NASA), experience little habitat based on this assessment, that urban south of SR–58 were developed, more disturbance. Seven of the eight Mohave and rural development does not than 475,000 ac (161,875 ha) would ground squirrel important population currently pose a threat to the Mohave likely remain under Federal ownership areas are located north of SR–58, occur ground squirrel in relation to the south of SR–58. Much of this land is in mostly or entirely on Federal land (see present or threatened destruction, the Fremont-Kramer DWMA, which the Map 2), and are not subject to urban modification, or curtailment of its BLM designated for management of development on Federal land. We do habitat or range, nor do we anticipate it Mohave ground squirrel habitat, and not expect any urbanization to occur on posing a threat in the future.

TABLE 1—FEDERAL LANDS MANAGED FOR THE MOHAVE GROUND SQUIRREL OR ITS HABITAT, AND THE PERCENT OF THE SPECIES’ RANGE 1

Percent of Mohave ground squirrel range State/private Management areas for the Mohave ground squirrel Total area within Federal ownership 2 with- ownership in management management area area boundary

Mohave Ground Squirrel Conservation Area 3 ...... 16.7 7.9 24.6 Department of Defense—Limited Use/Protected ...... 27.0 0 27.0

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62224 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—FEDERAL LANDS MANAGED FOR THE MOHAVE GROUND SQUIRREL OR ITS HABITAT, AND THE PERCENT OF THE SPECIES’ RANGE 1—Continued

Percent of Mohave ground squirrel range State/private Management areas for the Mohave ground squirrel 2 Total area within Federal ownership with- management ownership in management area area boundary

Bureau of Land Management ACECs 4 (Fremont-Kramer Desert Wildlife Management Area, Superior-Cronese Desert Wildlife Management Area, Desert Tortoise Re- search Natural Area) 3 ...... 13.6 8.5 22.1

Total ...... 57.3 16.4 73.7 1 Species’ range is 5,319,000 ac (2,152,532 ha) as calculated by the Service. 2 State/private ownership is not specifically managed for the Mohave ground squirrel. 3 Land ownership within designated boundary includes Federal, State, and privately-owned lands. 4 Area of Critical Environmental Concern.

Off-Highway Vehicle Recreational Use water for the Mohave ground squirrel. of the BLM to designate new OHV Off-highway vehicle (OHV) use is any Many native annual plants have a management areas in the future. use that includes driving a motorized higher percentage of water and protein The impacts from OHV use to the vehicle off a paved road, including than nonnative plants (Oftedal et al. Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat driving cross country and on existing 2002, p. 344); however, we have no vary depending on the type of OHV dirt roads. OHV use has the potential to information on the Mohave ground activity, the designated land use, and adversely affect the Mohave ground squirrel’s nutritional needs and their the level of enforcement. The impacts to squirrel by crushing individuals (see use of nonnative plants. the Mohave ground squirrel and its Factor E, ‘‘Direct Mortality’’) and their Other potential impacts of OHV use habitat are greatest in open areas and burrows (Bury et al. 1977, p. 16), include: Noise, which can cause hearing high-OHV-use areas (e.g., staging areas damaging or destroying native loss in rodents (Lovich and Bainbridge for OHV events, camping areas), and vegetation, and compacting soils. 1999, p. 316) and may interfere with the less in areas where activities are confined to existing roads and trails. Burrows are essential to the survival of Mohave ground squirrel’s ability to the Mohave ground squirrel, as they detect predators and establish and Cross-country OHV use is restricted to provide protection from predation and maintain territories (Bury et al. 1977, p. the four management areas; however, the temperature extremes of the desert, 16); littering and dumping of garbage the occurrence of off-route OHV use tends to extend or spill over into areas are likely used to store food, and (BLM 2003, p. 31), which can attract immediately adjacent to the provide a safe location for reproduction Mohave ground squirrel predators (see management areas. Although the and rearing young. Impacts to vegetation Factor C, ‘‘Predation’’); and increased impacts to Mohave ground squirrels increase the exposure of the Mohave fire sources (BLM 2003, p. 32), such as likely diminish with distance from the ground squirrel to predators, decrease campfires and cigarettes, which can management areas, the BLM estimates available shade for thermoregulation, result in fires that destroy Mohave that these ‘‘spill-over’’ zones, some of and increase soil temperature extremes, ground squirrel habitat. which adversely affect plant which are on private land, encompass germination, growth (Boarman 2002, p. In the western Mojave Desert, the an additional 150,239 ac (60,800 ha) 47), and food availability. Compacted BLM manages its lands for OHV (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, pp. 131, soils reduce the infiltration rate of rain, recreation. The BLM has designated four 132), or 2.8 percent of the range of the which means there is less water open areas (i.e., OHV management Mohave ground squirrel. This area, available for plants and seed areas) within the range of the Mohave combined with the four designated OHV germination (Boarman 2002, p. 46), ground squirrel as open to all OHV use, management areas, constitutes about 4.6 reduce the root growth of established including cross-country use (BLM et al. percent of the range of the Mohave plants, and make it harder for seedlings 2005, chapter 3, pp. 242–243). The four ground squirrel. to survive (Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, OHV management areas within the The BLM has documented other areas p. 316). With soil compaction, soil range of the Mohave ground squirrel are: not associated with the designated erosion from wind and water increases, (1) Dove Springs (3,840 ac (1,554 ha)); management areas where OHV use of nitrogen fixation is reduced, less organic (2) El Mirage (25,600 acres (10,360 ha)); designated routes is more frequent. The material is available for plant growth, (3) Jawbone Canyon (3,827 ac (9,642 BLM estimates that these high-use areas and seedling establishment is reduced ha)); and (4) Spangler Hills (62,080 acres include about 107,520 ac (43,512 ha), or (Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, pp. 315– (25,123 ha)) (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, 2 percent of the range of the Mohave 316; Boarman 2002, pp. 45–46). pp. 243, 244; Service GIS data) (see Map ground squirrel (BLM et al. 2005, OHVs also transport nonnative annual 2). These four areas comprise 95,347 ac chapter 3, p. 133). When combined with seeds and plant parts from other (38,586 ha) (BLM 2003, p. 31), or 1.8 the management areas and spill-over locations. Their roads, trails, and tracks percent of the range of the Mohave zones, about 6.6 percent of the squirrel’s act as dispersal corridors for invasive ground squirrel. Outside of these four range is intensively used for OHV annual plant species (Lovich and areas, the BLM restricts OHV use to recreation. One of the more extensive Bainbridge 1999, p. 313). These specific existing roads and trails, and high-use areas is the Rand Mountains nonnative species suppress the growth cross-country use is prohibited (BLM et area. To reduce OHV impacts in part of of native annual forbs (Brooks 2000, p. al. 2005, chapter 3, pp. 264–273). We the Rand Mountains area, the BLM 105), which are a source of food and are not aware of any plans on the part expanded the Western Rand Mountain

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62225

Area of Critical Environmental Concern resource management plan for the ac (102,386 ha), or 4.6 percent of the (ACEC) from 17,877 ac (7,235 ha) to western Mojave Desert and amends the range of the Mohave ground squirrel. 32,050 ac (12,970 ha), and closed the California Desert Conservation Area Although portions of the wilderness ACEC to OHV use except for 129 mi (CDCA) Plan. It also implements the areas include steep slopes and rocky (208 km) of designated open routes, a Rand Mountains Fremont Valley substrates that would not provide 90-percent reduction in miles of open Management Plan that reduces the suitable habitat for the Mohave ground routes (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, p. 8). number of open routes in the Rand squirrel, most of the wilderness areas This resulted in a reduction of more Mountains by 90 percent (BLM et al. are within the elevational range of the than 14,000 acres (5,666 ha) of the high- 2005, chapter 3, p. 8). Mohave ground squirrel (BLM et al. use area in the Rand Mountains. The BLM has implemented 2005, chapter 3, p. 138) and provide Although we are not aware of any minimization measures to ensure that connectivity among squirrel habitat. estimates, the intensive and widespread the different types of OHV uses occur DOD lands are closed to public OHV activity that occurs within the within the appropriate designated access, and only persons with business management and high-use areas has management areas, roads, and trails, and on the military installations may enter. likely resulted in extensive loss and thereby avoid the loss of additional Because of the research, development, degradation of potential habitat for the Mohave ground squirrel habitat. These testing, and evaluation missions of squirrel. However, the status of the measures also allow for the eventual EAFB and NAWS (see ‘‘Military Mohave ground squirrel within these restoration of the habitat in areas where Operations’’ below), vehicle access is areas is not well known. Mohave ground the roads and trails have been closed to restricted almost entirely to existing squirrels have been trapped in the Dove OHV use (although restoration time roads in those areas (EAFB 2008a, p. Springs OHV Area, but not the Spangler from these impacts is believed to take 102). However, EAFB has designated a Hills OHV Area (Leitner 2010, in litt.). several decades (Bury et al. 1977, p. 16; 10,387 ac (4,203 ha) OHV recreation Leitner suggests that the negative Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, p. 316)). area on the base for use by base trapping results at the Spangler Hills These measures include signing closed personnel (EAFB 2008a, p. 104), and OHV Area may be from an inadequate routes, obscuring closed routes with Fort Irwin has an 82 ac (33 ha) OHV trapping effort in this large area. Thus, vertical mulching, increasing public recreation area (Department of the Army we cannot confirm that the Mohave education, installing fencing and 2003, p. 1). Although these activities ground squirrel occurs or does not occur barriers, and increasing law may impact the Mohave ground squirrel at the Spangler Hills OHV Area. We are enforcement (BLM et al. 2005, chapter and its habitat, the two areas comprise not aware of any information on the 2, pp. 156–157, 163). In 2011, BLM is only 0.2 percent of the squirrel’s range. status of the Mohave ground squirrel in signing open routes, implementing a There are no State Vehicular the other two management areas or the monitoring plan to determine Recreation Areas (SVRAs) in the range high-use areas. compliance with route closures and of the Mohave ground squirrel. SVRAs In addition to the management areas whether any new illegal routes are being are operated and managed by the Off- and high-use areas, there are numerous created, and implementing additional single unpaved roads and trails within enforcement capability for the route Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation the range of the Mohave ground squirrel network in the WEMO Plan area (U.S. Division of California State Parks and that are used by OHVs, including utility District Court 2011, pp. 13–15). By provide trails, tracks, and other OHV corridors. The potential direct and 2014, the BLM will be preparing a recreational opportunities; interpretive indirect impacts of roads are described revised OHV route network that and educational activities and above; however, road density and OHV complies with the Federal Land Policy publications promoting safe and use of these roads are much lower than and Management Act’s (FLPMA) responsible OHV recreation; public in management areas. This lower use requirement to minimize damage to safety, including law enforcement and likely means potential impacts to the public resources and harassment and first aid; and resource management Mohave ground squirrel are less than in disruption of wildlife and habitat (U.S. designed to sustain OHV opportunities management and high-use areas. District Court 2011, pp. 2, 13). These and protect and enhance wildlife We were unable to find information measures should reduce the impacts habitat, erosion control, revegetation, on the total number of miles of unpaved from OHV use on BLM land near etc. (California State Parks 2011, roads within the range of the Mohave management areas and on designated unpublished information). ground squirrel. Based on a 2001–2002 roads and trails in the range of the OHV recreation also occurs on private inventory, the BLM estimated that 5,054 Mohave ground squirrel. However, the lands. Unauthorized OHV use on linear mi (8,134 km) of roads (including BLM’s management actions for OHV use private lands includes illegal trespass, paved roads, unpaved roads, and trails) only apply to lands that they manage; off-trail riding, illegal operation of non- occur on BLM land in the western they do not apply to State or private street legal vehicles, and vandalism Mojave Desert. However, subsequent to lands. (Ciani 2011, p. 1). The Kern County that inventory, the BLM permanently Part or all of 14 designated Sheriff’s Department is proposing to closed 2,260 mi (3,637 km), or 45 Wilderness areas (BLM et al. 2005, reduce unauthorized OHV use on percent of the roads and trails (BLM chapter 3, p. 9) are in the range of the private lands by expanding and 2003, pp. 4–9). Most closures occurred Mohave ground squirrel. Under the enhancing current safety and in the DWMAs in Mohave ground Wilderness Act of 1964, roads, new enforcement efforts (Ciani 2011, p. 1). squirrel habitat (BLM 2003, p. 396). structures, commercial activities, and However, there is no information DWMAs are ACECs where the BLM can use of motorized vehicles or equipment quantifying the degree or extent of the limit or exclude surface disturbance, are prohibited within designated areas impacted by this unauthorized including use of roads and trails (see wilderness areas (BLM et al. 2005, use, either in Kern County or anywhere Factor D). In addition, the West Mojave chapter 3, p. 9). The acreage of else in the range of the Mohave ground (WEMO) Plan commits the BLM to an wilderness area within the range of the squirrel. Additionally, although some aggressive program of closed route Mohave ground squirrel and therefore authorized OHV activity may occur on rehabilitation (BLM et al. 2005, chapter closed to vehicle access and other forms private lands, we are unaware of any 4, p. 7). The WEMO Plan is the BLM’s of surface disturbance is about 253,000 information on the degree or extent of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62226 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

impacts for authorized OHV activity on of such losses is undocumented for the threat to the Mohave ground squirrel in private lands. Mohave ground squirrel. Although relation to the destruction, modification, OHV recreational use is likely to miles of roads and trails exist, the or curtailment of habitat or range, nor continue to increase in the future. The habitat loss is essentially a narrow, do we anticipate OHV recreational use State’s population is projected to grow linear band, the impacts of which are posing a threat in the future. from 34 million in 2000 to 46 million minor compared to that of a Transportation Infrastructure by 2020 (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, p. management or high-use area. Unpaved 244). The demand for OHV recreational roads and trails do not result in the total Transportation infrastructure is a opportunities is increasing, along with fragmentation of habitat as they are not network of paved highways and roads. California’s growing population (BLM et barriers to Mohave ground squirrel Although we were unable to find al. 2005, p. 244). However, the BLM has movement (Leitner 2010, in litt.). studies on the effects of transportation reduced the number of roads and trails OHV use of unpaved roads and trails infrastructure on the Mohave ground available for OHV use and has not also occurs on private land, and most of squirrel, research on other animals has indicated that it has plans to designate this use is probably not authorized by found that the presence of roads in an additional OHV management or high- the land owner. However, we found no area may have a positive, negative, or no use areas in the range of the Mohave information on the extent of this type of effect on animal abundance (Fahrig and ground squirrel, and the expected OHV use on private lands. At least one Rytwinski 2009, p. 21). increase in OHV use will mainly be county in the range of the Mohave Potential positive effects of roads limited to existing management or high- ground squirrel has identified include greater availability of forage use areas. unauthorized OHV activities on private plants adjacent to the roadway caused In summary, OHV use is a popular land as a natural resource and public by precipitation runoff from the recreational activity within portions of safety problem and is seeking ways to roadway and fewer predators near the range of the Mohave ground reduce these activities through roadways because of the negative effects squirrel. Potential impacts of OHV use enforcement (Kern County Sheriff 2011, of roadways on larger mammals vary from none in wilderness areas, to unpublished information). (Garland and Bradley 1984, p. 47; Fahrig substantial in management or high-use Using the best available information, and Rytwinski 2009, p. 21). Potential areas, depending on the type and we have determined that OHV use is not negative impacts from construction and intensity of OHV activity, the a significant threat to the Mohave operation may include mortality (see designated land use, and the level of ground squirrel. We found no Factor E, ‘‘Direct Mortality’’), barriers to enforcement. About 6.6 percent of the information that the transport and movement and fragmentation (see range of the Mohave ground squirrel, expansion of nonnative vegetation or Factor E, ‘‘Fragmentation’’), and habitat including BLM, DOD, and private lands, potential impacts of noise and other loss and degradation (Gustafson 1993, is classified as management areas, indirect impacts are adversely affecting pp. 23, 26; BLM 2003, p. 30; Leitner, spillover zones, or high-use areas. the Mohave ground squirrel. The impact pers. comm., as cited in Defenders of Although Mohave ground squirrels have of OHV use to the habitat of the squirrel Wildlife and Stewart 2005, p. 22). been reported in one of the four mainly occurs in management, spill- Mohave ground squirrels may be management areas, we have no over, and high-use areas, which crushed by vehicles, and the presence of information that indicates that the comprise less than 7 percent of the trash and other animals that are run impacts from OHV use in these areas range of the Mohave ground squirrel. over by vehicles (‘‘road kill’’) may constitute a barrier to their movement. Recreational OHV use is of minimal attract common ravens and other We presume the management areas are concern on DOD land due to predators to the road and nearby areas, extensively degraded and provide little restrictions, and because only 0.2 thereby increasing the likelihood that value to supporting populations of percent of the species’ range overlaps Mohave ground squirrels adjacent to Mohave ground squirrels now or in the with DOD recreational use areas. The these sites would be vulnerable to future; however, these areas occur in BLM has closed a substantial number of predation (see Factor C, ‘‘Predation’’). less than 7 percent of the range of the roads and trails in the squirrel’s range Some studies showed that roads Mohave ground squirrel. Additionally, and is implementing measures to produce an ecological ‘‘road-effect we have no information indicating that monitor and enforce these closures and zone,’’ a zone over which significant additional management areas will be to restore habitat in the closed areas. ecological effects extend outward from a designated for OHV use in the future. The BLM has no plans to establish road (Forman and Deblinger 2000, p. In addition, the BLM has: additional areas for OHV use in the 37). Besides road kill and loss of habitat, (1) No plans to designate additional range of the Mohave ground squirrel. indirect effects of roads in the road- high-use areas or roads and trails for the Therefore, we find that OHV effect zone may include traffic noise, next few decades, recreational use on BLM land is not a which many species avoid, and barriers (2) Closed 45 percent of the roads and significant threat to the Mohave ground to movements within a population, with trails in the DWMAs and 90 percent in squirrel. Although we do not have an potential demographic and genetic the western Rand Mountains, and exact estimate, less than 2 percent of the consequences (see Factor E, (3) Implemented actions to restore high-use area is on private land, and one ‘‘Fragmentation’’). habitat in these areas (BLM et al. 2005 county is pursuing enforcement options Roads alter habitat upslope and chapter 2, p. 167) and monitor to address this unauthorized OHV use downslope by causing hydrologic and compliance (such as increasing and its impacts on natural resources. In erosion effects (Foreman and Alexander enforcement and minimizing damage to the future, we expect that OHV use will 1998, p. 217), and promote the invasion public resources and harassment/ likely increase but will be limited to of nonnative annual plant species disruption of wildlife and habitat). existing management areas and (Brooks 2007, p. 154). Thus, the road- Areas of lesser use, such as existing designated roads and trails. Therefore, effect zone may interrupt horizontal unpaved roads and trails, can result in based on our evaluation of the best ecological flows (e.g., animal the loss of habitat, and vehicle activity available scientific and commercial movements, hydrology), alter landscape can crush Mohave ground squirrels and data, we conclude that OHV recreational spatial patterns (i.e., the number, size, their burrows; however, the significance use does not currently pose a significant and arrangement of ecological pattern

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62227

and ecological function and process), area with many swamps and ponds In addition to the proposed highway, and change species distribution and varied from greater than 328 ft (100 m) two existing highways within the range abundance (Forman and Alexander to greater than 3,280 ft (1,000 m), and of the squirrel are planned to be 1998, p. 1). The interruption of averaged 1,968 ft (600 m) (Forman and modified. Areas of US–395 may be hydrologic flows may have both positive Deblinger 2000, p. 1). However, working realigned and portions of SR–58 and and negative impacts on the habitat of in the high desert of southwestern Utah, US–395 would be widened within the the Mohave ground squirrel. The which is similar to the environment in range of the Mohave ground squirrel interruption may provide more water to the west Mojave Desert, Bissonette and (Caltrans District 8 website, 2010b, upslope habitat, thereby increasing the Rosa (2009, p. 27) found no clear road- unpublished information). For US–395, amount and availability of forage. effect zone for small mammals. the proposed widening and realignment Conversely, the interruption may Although they did not conduct their projects extend from the southern impede or prevent surface flow from study in desert areas, Adams and Geis terminus at I–15 north to Kramer reaching downslope areas, thereby (1983, p. 1) found instances where Junction (see Map 1). The US–395 decreasing the amount and availability population abundance of some small projects occur within the southern of forage. mammal species was greater near roads portion of the range of the Mohave One major highway is planned within because of their use of the adjacent ground squirrel, well outside any of the the range of the Mohave ground habitat created or enhanced by the important population areas for the squirrel, the High Desert Transportation roadway (e.g., water collection, squirrel. Some of the areas where the Corridor. This 63-mi (101.4-km) long increased vegetation). In a creosote bush road will be widened have already been east-west corridor would connect SR–14 community in southern Nevada, developed (e.g., Adelanto, Victorville, in Palmdale with US–395 (Adelanto) Garland and Bradley (1984, p. 47) found Kramer Junction, etc.) and would and I–15 (Victorville), and would the effects of roads on small mammals therefore not result in any additional terminate on the southeast side of Apple may differ in deserts when compared loss of habitat. However, a portion is Valley at SR–18 (see Map 1) (San with mesic habitats. Roadsides receive located in the Fremont-Kramer DWMA, Bernardino County 2011, unpublished runoff from pavement, which supports which is managed for the Mohave information). The corridor would lush vegetation compared to adjacent ground squirrel (see Map 2). We contain a highway with all, or portions, habitat. They also found that round- estimate the proposed highway composed of freeway/expressway/ tailed ground squirrels, a close relative widening would directly impact an tollway, and it may contain a high- of the Mohave ground squirrel, were additional 1,600 ac (647 ha), or 0.03 speed rail line (Caltrans 2010a, p. 1). We more common near roadways (Garland percent of the range of the Mohave estimate this project would result in the and Bradley 1984, p. 54). In a review of ground squirrel including the areas that loss of 7,634 ac (3,089 ha), or 0.14 the literature on the effects of roads on have already been developed. If a road- percent of the range of the Mohave wildlife, Fahrig and Rytwinski (2009, p. effect zone exists for the Mohave ground ground squirrel. 3) found that small mammals generally squirrel, under a worst-case scenario, up The new highway would be located in showed either a slightly positive effect to an additional 4,800 ac (1,942 ha) of the southern portion of the range of the from roads or no effect. habitat could be lost, or an additional Mohave ground squirrel, and south of With so little known about the effects 0.09 percent of the range of the squirrel. the important population area on EAFB. of roads on the Mohave ground squirrel For SR–58, the proposed widening The highway is planned to include areas and so many variations in the road- projects extend from near Boron east to currently developed for urban and rural effect zone reported in the scientific 7.5 mi (12.1 km) east of Kramer Junction use and agriculture, and thus, the loss literature, we employ a worst-case (see Map 1). The project would occur in of Mohave ground squirrel habitat approach to our assessment of the the southern portion of the range of the would likely be less than the footprint impact of the new highway, in which Mohave ground squirrel, well outside of the proposed corridor. The project we assume that there will be a road- any important squirrel population area. proponent may be required to mitigate effect zone associated with the new Most of the proposed highway widening for the loss of Mohave ground squirrel highway and that the impacts would be is located in the Fremont-Kramer habitat as part of the permitting process so severe as to eliminate all Mohave DWMA (see Map 2); however, in the under CESA (Jones 2011, in litt.) (see ground squirrel habitat within the zone. Kramer Junction area, impacts to the Factor D, ‘‘State Laws and Regulations’’) If such a zone were twice or even three Mohave ground squirrel have already and the WEMO Plan (see Factor D, times the width of the proposed occurred from existing urban and rural Bureau of Land Management). highway, then at most the zone would development. The proposed highway Although the new highway will likely result in the loss of an additional 22,902 widening is estimated to directly impact have some effect on the habitat of the ac (9,268 ha) of habitat, or an additional an additional 273 ac (110 ha), or less Mohave ground squirrel beyond what 0.43 percent of the range of the squirrel. than 0.01 percent of the range of the will be removed during road In total, construction of the proposed Mohave ground squirrel, which construction, we are not aware of any highway could result in the loss of less includes the areas that have already study on the extent of a potential road- than 0.6 percent of the range of the been developed. Again, under a worst- effect zone or whether such a zone will Mohave ground squirrel, which case scenario, up to an additional 819 ac have a positive or negative impact on includes potential impacts associated (331 ha) could be lost within the road- Mohave ground squirrel populations, or with a road-effect zone. However, the effect zone. how any impacts might change with actual loss of habitat will likely be less In total, road widening would result variables, such as road width, traffic because some areas have already been in the loss of about 7,492 ac (3,032 ha), rates, and location. The extent of the developed and mitigation will likely be or about 0.14 percent of the range of the road-effect zone varies, depending on required for the loss of habitat under the Mohave ground squirrel, which the species being affected, location, WEMO Plan and CESA (see Factor D, includes potential impacts associated habitat, road width, traffic density, and Bureau of Land Management and ‘‘State with a road-effect zone. However, the other factors. For example, the road- Laws and Regulations’’). Within the actual loss of habitat will likely be less effect zone along one road in DWMA, the mitigation ratio is 5:1 (see because some areas have already been Massachusetts that passes through an ‘‘Energy Development’’ section below). developed and mitigation will likely be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62228 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

required for the loss of habitat under the Fort Irwin has three major accumulate organic matter, and WEMO Plan and CESA (see Factor D, management units; the National facilitate native seedling establishment Bureau of Land Management and ‘‘State Training Center (NTC), the Goldstone and growth (Boarman 2002, pp. 46 and Laws and Regulations’’); within the Deep Space Communications Complex, 47), and thus aid in the maintenance of DWMA, the mitigation ratio is 5:1 (see and the Leach Lake Bombing Range. high-quality forage and habitat for the ‘‘Energy Development’’ section below). Fort Irwin’s primary mission is training squirrel. In summary, there are a few major ground forces for combat, including the In the future, the 75,300 ac (29,745 highways and numerous roads within use of tanks, other tracked vehicles, and ha) expansion area, some of which is the range of the Mohave ground wheeled vehicles. Impacts from the likely Mohave ground squirrel habitat, squirrel. There are plans to build a new training of ground forces and associated will be used for ground forces training; east-west highway across the southern use of wheeled and tracked vehicles impacts to the expansion area are portion of the range of the Mohave would be similar to impacts in OHV expected to be the same as areas ground squirrel and widen two existing management areas (see ‘‘Off-Highway currently used for ground forces highways, none of which will affect any Vehicle Recreational Use’’ section training. However, the entire area of the important squirrel population above). In addition, Fort Irwin has a within the NTC is not used for ground areas. Combined, these projects would small cantonment area, which contains forces training, as some of the terrain is result in the direct loss of about 9,507 offices, housing, shops, restaurants, not suitable for training and some areas ac (3,738 ha) of habitat, or about 0.18 utilities, and other facilities. The are set aside as buffer zones to shield percent of the range of the squirrel. The impacts to the Mohave ground squirrel the training activities from civilian uses actual amount would be less because from the cantonment area would be on lands adjacent to the base’s some areas have already been developed similar to those described above under boundary. Human access to the NTC is and no additional habitat would be lost, ‘‘Urban and Rural Development,’’ but on restricted, which precludes the use of and mitigation for loss of habitat would a very small scale. The Army has a the land for other forms of surface be required. proposal for both solar (14,000 ac (5,666 disturbance (e.g., OHV recreational use, urban and rural development, mining). We acknowledge that roads may affect ha)) and wind (49 ac (20 ha)) (Department of the Army 2009, p. 33) Thus, while some areas are intensively habitat beyond that lost during energy projects within the boundaries of used for ground forces training, others construction. This road-effect zone can Fort Irwin (which also potentially are not and remain undisturbed. have varying degrees of both positive includes the Goldstone Complex). Therefore, the estimated 8.2 percent of and negative impacts on a species and The NTC is about 642,558 ac (260,035 the range of the Mohave ground squirrel its habitat, and the zone can extend ha), with approximately 435,978 ac that is within the NTC is an various distances from the road (176,435 ha) within the range of the overestimate of the portion of the depending on factors, such as the Mohave ground squirrel. Located on the species’ range impacted by military species being affected, location, habitat, eastern edge of the range of the Mohave training activities. In addition, Fort road width, and traffic density. For ground squirrel, we estimate that 8.2 Irwin and the NTC have implemented squirrels and other small mammals, the percent of the range of the species is mitigation measures for the Mohave road-effect zone tends to be neutral to within the NTC boundary, which ground squirrel to offset the impacts slightly positive (Fahrig and Rytwinski includes a recent expansion of Fort from the expansion area (see Factor D, 2009, p. 13). Although we do not have Irwin’s southwestern boundary of Department of Defense). The location of any information that such a zone exists 75,300 ac (29,745 ha) into an area that the NTC does not appear to have an for the Mohave ground squirrel or is within the range of the Mohave adverse effect on the movement of the whether the impacts within the zone ground squirrel (see Factor D, Mohave ground squirrel between the would be positive or negative, based on Department of Defense, for additional Coolgardie Mesa and the EAFB a worst-case scenario, an additional discussion on the expansion area). important population areas (Bell 2006, 28,521 ac (11,542 ha) of habitat or about Ground forces training is usually pp. 43, 72) (see Map 2 and Significant 0.54 percent of the range of the squirrel located on the flats and lower slopes of Portion of the Range Analysis). could be lost. Therefore, based on a the NTC, which are the preferred habitat The 33,359-ac (13,500-ha) Goldstone review of the best available scientific of the Mohave ground squirrel. Deep Space Communications Complex, and commercial data, we find that Prior to 1977, the Mohave ground which is operated by the National transportation infrastructure projects squirrel was not known to occur on Fort Aeronautics and Space Administration likely to occur in the future could affect Irwin. From 1977 to the early 1990s, (NASA) for tracking and communication at most 0.74 percent of the range of the Fort Irwin conducted surveys and found for space missions, is off limits to Army Mohave ground squirrel, and therefore Mohave ground squirrels 40 mi (64 km) training activities, although a tank trail do not pose a significant threat to the farther east than previously documented constructed in 1985 bisects most of the Mohave ground squirrel in relation to occurrences (Wessman 1977, pp. 11, Complex. Little or no OHV use occurs the destruction, modification, or 12). Krzysik (1994, p. 29) documented within the Goldstone Complex, because curtailment of habitat or range. Note the impacts of ground forces training on there is no public access; personal staff that other impacts that may be the habitat of the Mohave ground vehicles are confined to paved and dirt associated with roads, including squirrel, which included extensive maintenance roads, and military mortality and habitat fragmentation, are losses of shrub cover, soil layers, and vehicles are restricted to the tank trail. discussed under Factor E. cryptobiotic soil crusts. Cryptobiotic Therefore, the Mohave ground squirrels soil crusts are collections of symbiotic Military Operations within the Goldstone Complex are bacteria, algae, fungi, and lichen that essentially protected from military The DOD manages about one-third of live on or slightly below the soil’s training activities. This is 0.6 percent of the range of the Mohave ground surface and create a semipermeable soil the range of the Mohave ground squirrel. Within the species’ range, there surface or crust. They reduce soil squirrel. are three major military bases—Fort erosion, promote and control water The 91,182 ac (36,900 ha) Leach Lake Irwin and the National Training Center infiltration, regulate soil temperatures, Bombing Range is managed by the Air (NTC), EAFB, and NAWS. catch and convert atmospheric nitrogen, Force for live-bomb practice, and is off

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62229

limits for ground use because of the federally threatened desert tortoise, and limits’’ areas allow NAWS to conserve high risk of unexploded ordnance. This the east boundary abuts the Fremont- natural resources, including Mohave area is 1.7 percent of the range of the Kramer DWMA, providing connectivity ground squirrel habitat, on much of the Mohave ground squirrel; however, only to this and other areas managed for the base. a small portion of it is used for bombing Mohave ground squirrel (see Factor D, Cattle grazing under BLM grazing practice. The remainder is managed as Bureau of Land Management, and leases no longer occurs on the base a buffer from human development in Factor E, ‘‘Fragmentation’’). The Air (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 4, p. 98). Feral case a bomb misses its intended target. Force has an active program on EAFB to burros and wild horses occur on NAWS. Although there are likely patches of minimize ground disturbing activities in Impacts from burros and horses include Mohave ground squirrel habitat in the desert tortoise habitat, which also loss of annual and woody perennial Bombing Range, their size, spatial benefits the Mohave ground squirrel vegetation used by Mohave ground arrangement, and degree of habitat (EAFB 2008a, p. 74). squirrels for forage, loss of cover from quality are unknown because there is no The Air Force has conducted Mohave predators and thermal shade, and soil ground access. ground squirrel presence/absence compaction from trailing (NAWS 2002, The 307,435 ac (124,468 ha) EAFB surveys on EAFB since 1988, p. B–97) (see ‘‘Grazing’’ section below). (see Map 1) is primarily used to test and concentrating on 60 study plots However, NAWS and the BLM have an evaluate aircraft. Additional activities distributed throughout the base that extensive burro removal program that include conducting and supporting tests were established to monitor long-term has substantially reduced the impact of of aerospace vehicles, evaluating flight trends of habitat quality and species burros (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, p. and recovery of research vehicles, diversity (EAFB 2008a, p. 74). Annual 81). participating in developmental test and trapping studies have occurred since the In summary, Mohave ground squirrel evaluation programs for the DOD and mid-1990s based on funding availability habitat has been lost to military other government agencies, and (EAFB 2008a, p. 73). Mohave ground operations primarily from ground forces operating the Air Force Test Pilot squirrels have been trapped in all years training. The largest area of loss is in the School (EAFB 2008b, pp. iii, 19). when trapping was conducted; these NTC, including the expansion area, with Because the emphasis at EAFB is results indicate that the Mohave ground about 8.2 percent of the range of the training and testing in the air, the squirrel is relatively widespread on the Mohave ground squirrel within the NTC impacts to Mohave ground squirrel base except for the northwest portion. boundary. However, the NTC is on the habitat are minimal and localized. Large Most observations have occurred in the eastern edge of the range of the Mohave areas of the base remain undeveloped east and south portions of EAFB (EAFB ground squirrel (see Factor E, and accommodate testing activities and 2008a, p. 75). Although densities are not ‘‘Fragmentation’’), and not all of the area buffers for these activities. These available with the methodology used on within the NTC is impacted by ground undisturbed and ‘‘off-limits’’ areas allow EAFB, one of the Mohave ground forces training. Other locations on DOD EAFB to conserve natural resources and squirrel important population areas was land, such as the Goldstone Complex minimize impacts to Mohave ground designated here because the area meets and much of EAFB and NAWS (more squirrel habitat. the three criteria for a ‘‘core’’ area than 1,745,000 ac (706,180 ha)), are Between 1993 and 2007, about 652 ac (Leitner 2008, p. 12) (see Map 2). undeveloped and receive little-to-no (264 ha) (about 0.2 percent of the base) The 1,110,443 ac (440,695 ha) NAWS surface impacts from military of permanent land disturbance (e.g., is located in the northern portion of the operations. Because of military security urban development within the range of the Mohave ground squirrel and the need for large areas of open cantonment area) occurred at EAFB. (NAWS 2002, p. 6). The primary space to test aircraft and weapon EAFB recently announced plans to function of NAWS is to research, systems and buffer areas around the test construct more than 3,000 ac (1,214 ha) develop, test, and evaluate weapons areas, these areas become de facto of solar panels in the northwestern systems for Navy, Air Force, Army, Joint conservation areas for Mohave ground portion of the base to be energy self- Service, commercial, and foreign squirrel habitat. sufficient; however, there is no military weapons systems. NAWS also We found no information that the timeframe for this project. Although this develops and tests airborne electronic DOD is proposing to change its mission project would result in the loss of more warfare systems and performs aircraft in the future and no information on Mohave ground squirrel habitat than has weapons integration (NAWS 2002, p. 1). proposals that would impact additional occurred in the past at EAFB (EAFB The Mohave ground squirrel has been lands within military boundaries. The 2008b, p. iv), it is less than 0.06 percent studied for several years at the Coso DOD manages about one third of the of the range of the Mohave ground Range in the northwest area of NAWS range of the Mohave ground squirrel. squirrel and has been sited to avoid: (1) (see ‘‘Abundance and Trend’’ section) Although about 9 percent of the range The EAFB important population area; and has been documented at other of the squirrel is used for training and (2) areas with recorded occurrences of locations throughout the base. testing to meet the military’s mission, Mohave ground squirrels on EAFB; and Impacts to the Mohave ground we estimate that 27 percent of the range (3) areas with likely connectivity to the squirrel and its habitat on NAWS are is managed under limited use or de south, east, and north where other similar to those described for EAFB in facto habitat conservation for the important populations of Mohave both type and magnitude. Similar to Mohave ground squirrel (see Table 1). ground squirrel are present (see Map 2). EAFB, large areas of NAWS remain Therefore, after reviewing the best OHV use is strictly confined to undeveloped to accommodate aerial available scientific and commercial designated areas on the base (see ‘‘Off- testing activities and to serve as buffers information, we conclude that military Highway Vehicle Recreational Use’’ for testing activities. For example, operations do not currently pose a section), while other activities that may NAWS tests unmanned aerial vehicles significant threat to the Mohave ground affect Mohave ground squirrel habitat for which they need large areas of open squirrel in relation to the destruction, (e.g., livestock grazing and agriculture) space to fly these vehicles and test their modification, or curtailment of habitat are not allowed (EAFB 2008a, p. 73). control capabilities and buffers to or range of the species, nor do we The southeast portion of the base is ensure the safety of civilians outside the anticipate military operations posing a designated critical habitat for the base. These large undisturbed and ‘‘off- threat in the future.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62230 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Energy Development Governor of California’s Executive planning effort that will identify and Energy development includes two Order S–14–08 requires California provide measures necessary to conserve components, the power plant where electric utilities to obtain 33 percent of and manage natural biological diversity energy production or generation occurs, their power from renewable energy by within the plan area while allowing and the transmission line that transports 2020. These laws and directives mean compatible and appropriate economic the energy to users. In the western that renewable energy projects will development, growth, and other human Mojave Desert, power plants currently likely be located in the Mojave Desert in uses (California Fish and Game Code generate energy using both non- the future and possibly in the range of section 2805(g)). This includes the Mohave ground squirrel. mitigation measures that will offset renewable sources (e.g., natural gas, etc.) The Department of the Interior has impacts to sensitive species that are and renewable sources (e.g., solar, wind, and continues to receive applications addressed in the DRECP, including the and geothermal) with several proposals for utility-scale renewable energy Mohave ground squirrel. to generate additional energy using projects on public lands, primarily in renewable sources. the western United States. As of Solar Projects Power Generation November 2010 (Miller 2010, in litt.), Solar energy projects require a large, the BLM had received 23 applications clear area for placing and maintaining A total of 22 non-renewable and for solar and wind renewable energy photovoltaic panels or mirrors to renewable energy power plants have projects in the CDCA, of which part or produce energy and ancillary structures, been constructed within or near the all of each project would be located in including distribution lines to transport range of the Mohave ground squirrel, the range of the Mohave ground the generated energy to a high-voltage including solar, wind, and geothermal squirrel. These applications that are transmission line and provide power to facilities. These facilities are located in entirely or partly within the squirrel’s the administration and operation or near cities and communities in the range encompass an estimated 204,200 facilities at the site; pipelines to supply range of the Mohave ground squirrel, ac (82,637 ha) of BLM land. However, water for administration and operation including Little Lake, Tehachapi, this is only a rough approximation, facilities and for the production of Mojave, Cantil, Argus, Trona, Boron, because at this point in the application energy (e.g., washing mirrors and Hinkley, Hesperia, Victorville, Oro process we cannot determine with any panels, generating steam to produce Grande, Barstow, Daggett, and Newberry accuracy what areas fall inside or energy); and roads to access the project Springs (California Energy Commission outside the range of the squirrel. Some site, distribution line route, and (CEC) 2011 Web site). These non- proposed projects are located on both pipeline route(s). Some of these renewable and renewable power plants BLM and private land, but the amount ancillary structures are tens of miles produce energy by using water, on private land is not available at this long. In addition, some projects are geothermal, natural gas, biomass, wind, time, and the location, size, and status obligated to provide energy on cloudy solar thermal, and coal, and they have of many of these proposed energy days. Therefore, a backup energy system ancillary facilities that require ongoing projects changes frequently. In addition, may be constructed within the project maintenance (such as pipelines, it is not likely that all of these proposed site that uses non-renewable energy transmission lines, and roads). Impacts projects will be permitted (see sources, such as natural gas or propane, from the construction and operation of discussion below under Solar Projects). to produce energy, which may require these existing facilities to the Mohave In addition to those applications on the construction of a pipeline to deliver ground squirrel are similar to those BLM-managed lands, several the hydrocarbon fuel to the project site. described below for new renewable applications for solar and wind energy Solar energy projects are likely the energy projects. and transmission projects have been most destructive renewable energy In addition, several applications have submitted to other agencies that manage projects to Mohave ground squirrel been submitted to Federal, State, and lands in the Mojave Desert or that are habitat. Based on the past construction local agencies for the construction and privately owned. These include the and operation of both solar thermal and operation of new renewable energy DOD, Department of Energy, CEC, photovoltaic solar energy projects in the projects (e.g., solar, wind, and California Public Utilities Commission, Mojave Desert, the footprint of the geothermal) and associated transmission and County planning agencies. At least project site is usually a large area, most lines, and for the expansion of existing a portion of many of these projects may of which is cleared and maintained free renewable energy projects in the range fall within the range of the Mohave of vegetation, and the right-of-way for of the Mohave ground squirrel. ground squirrel. the transmission line and pipeline(s) Various Federal and State directives In response to the Federal and State includes a maintained access road for foster the increase in proposed initiatives to encourage renewable operation and maintenance. Solar renewable energy projects. The Energy energy development and the several energy projects are usually located on Policy Act of 2005 requires the applications for permits for renewable level or slightly sloping ground, which Department of the Interior to approve at energy projects, the Renewable Energy is characteristic Mohave ground squirrel least 10,000 megawatts (MW) of Action Team (REAT) was formed. Its habitat. renewable energy on public lands by members include the CEC, CDFG, BLM, Adverse effects to the Mohave ground 2015. The American Recovery and Service, California Public Utilities squirrel from construction and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides Commission, California Independent operation of solar plants include monetary incentives for utility-level System Operators, National Park crushing animals and their burrows; renewable energy development that Service, U.S. Environmental Protection loss of habitat for foraging, cover, and occurs through December 2011. Agency, and DOD. The REAT is reproduction; increased levels of vehicle Executive Order 13514 declares the developing the Desert Renewable traffic that potentially result in the reduction of greenhouse gases as a Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP), increased mortality of squirrels and priority for Federal agencies, and which was mandated by California increased predation; introduction of Executive Order 13212 requires Federal Executive Order S–14–08. This plan is nonnative plants, especially along agencies to expedite review of energy a joint State Natural Communities pipelines, transmission lines, and access project applications. In addition, the Conservation Plan (NCCP) and Federal roads; and altering habitat upslope and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62231

downslope, causing hydrologic and utility-scale solar energy project require approval from a County agency erosion effects. applications located in SEZs a priority only, or from the County and the CEC. There are two existing solar thermal or restrict solar energy project The applications received by these power plants in the range of the Mohave development to SEZs. None of the four agencies are not always available to the ground squirrel, one near Kramer proposed SEZs is in the range of the public because of potential competition Junction and the second near Harper Mohave ground squirrel, and the EIS between energy developers, and as with Dry Lake. These two facilities, both of includes language and a map showing BLM land, the number, size, and which are located on private land, use that BLM lands that are ACECs, location of proposed solar energy solar trough or mirror technology, with DWMAs, or Mohave ground squirrel projects changes frequently. However, backup natural gas as an energy source habitat are excluded from solar we are aware of 21 proposed projects on to produce power at night and on development. However, within the private land within the range of the cloudy days. They cover an estimated range of the Mohave ground squirrel, Mohave ground squirrel, which 3,600 ac (1,457 ha), or 0.07 percent of the map identifies scattered tracts of combined total 16,772 ac (6,787 ha), or the range of the Mohave ground BLM land near the edge of EAFB and about 0.3 percent of the range of the squirrel, plus additional area for Victorville that have been identified as Mohave ground squirrel. Many of these transmission lines, pipelines, and access available for solar energy development projects are proposed for areas that were roads. We are unaware of any (BLM and DOE 2010, p. 2). We note that previously cleared and used for information documenting impacts of this is a draft document, and the final agriculture. None of these projects are these facilities on the Mohave ground document may be similar or different located in any of the important squirrel population. from the current EIS. Based on the population areas for the Mohave ground It is difficult to quantify the impacts currently available information, none of squirrel. of proposed solar energy projects on the the proposed solar energy projects, the In summary, the impacts from habitat of the Mohave ground squirrel SEZs, or the scattered tracts of BLM construction and operation of a solar because of the uncertainty about their land are within any of the important project in the range of the Mohave potential number, size, location, and population areas for the Mohave ground ground squirrel are similar to those jurisdiction. The DOD has proposed the squirrel. described in the ‘‘Urban and Rural development of 14,000 ac (5,666 ha) for Under the current WEMO Plan, which Development’’ section and are primarily solar energy production on Fort Irwin may extend to 2035, solar development loss of habitat. Two solar energy and 3,000 ac (1,214 ha) on EAFB. within the range of the Mohave ground projects occur in the range of the Although the average size of a solar squirrel will also be restricted because Mohave ground squirrel, which project proposed on BLM land is about the BLM has a maximum cumulative combined are less than 0.1 percent of 7,000 ac (2,832 ha), the combined size limit of 1 percent new surface the range of the Mohave ground of the three applications BLM has disturbance of any kind for the MGSCA. squirrel. The solar projects proposed on received that fall within the range of the One large solar project within the DOD land could comprise about 0.3 Mohave ground squirrel was originally MGSCA would meet or exceed this percent of the range of the squirrel. 9,686 ac (3,920 ha) (Miller 2010 in litt.). 1-percent cap on any kind of surface Three projects have been proposed on However, one of the three, the 3,883 ac disturbance. Although the 1-percent cap BLM land within the range of the (1,571 ha) Solar Millennium project, also applies to DWMAs, solar energy squirrel, one of which was recently was recently cancelled after 2 years of projects on BLM land in DWMAs are cancelled. The remaining two proposed environmental planning. It should be not likely to occur because of their projects make up about 0.1 percent of noted, however, that the cancellation of designation as ACECs (see Factor D, the range of the squirrel. Given the this project does not preclude another Bureau of Land Management). The limitations for future development in project proponent from submitting an WEMO Plan also requires a mitigation the MGSCA and DWMAs, the BLM’s application for solar development at the ratio of 5:1 for lands within the DWMAs current proposed position to either limit same site. The sizes of the two and the MGSCA for habitat lost from utility-scale solar energy development remaining projects are substantially ground disturbance (BLM et al. 2005, to SEZs or make projects located in different (5,325 ac (2,155 ha) versus 478 chapter 2, p. 204). The mitigation SEZs a priority for processing over other ac (193 ha)), which adds to the generally involves acquisition of non- projects, we expect that few solar uncertainty about potential impacts on Federal land to add to the DWMAs and projects will be approved and Mohave ground squirrel habitat. MGSCA, but mitigation measures other constructed on BLM land within the Ultimately, solar energy development than habitat acquisition may be range of the Mohave ground squirrel on BLM land is likely to be limited implemented to meet the 5:1 mitigation within the foreseeable future. within the range of the Mohave ground ratio. Outside of these areas, the We are aware of 21 proposed solar squirrel. Currently, none of the mitigation ratio is 1:1 (BLM et al. 2005, projects on private land, which proposed solar energy projects are chapter 2, p. 204, LaPre 2010). Once the combined are about 0.3 percent of the located in any of the eight important DRECP is completed, the WEMO Plan range of the Mohave ground squirrel. population areas for the Mohave ground would likely be amended to adopt this However, the locations for many of squirrel. plan. The current delineation for the these projects primarily occur on lands The BLM is developing DWMAs and MGSCA are not likely to previously cleared for agriculture. The programmatic-level guidance for the change with implementation of the combined total of existing and proposed development of solar energy projects DRECP. solar projects make up no more than and recently released a draft BLM does not have jurisdiction over 0.81 percent of the range of the Mohave programmatic Environmental Impact the permitting, development, and ground squirrel. It is unlikely that all of Statement (EIS) for solar energy (BLM operation of solar energy projects on the proposed projects will be built, and and DOE 2010). This draft EIS proposes private land within the range of the none of them are located in any of the four solar energy zones (SEZs) on Mohave ground squirrel and, therefore, important population areas for the 677,400 ac (27,414 ha) in the California does not have information on the Mohave ground squirrel. Therefore, desert. These SEZs are areas where the number, size, and location of these based on the best available scientific BLM would either make processing projects. A project on private land may and commercial information, we

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62232 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

conclude that solar energy development Small patches of wind resources that The total acreage of currently is not currently a significant threat to are considered economically feasible to proposed wind energy projects that the Mohave ground squirrel in relation develop occur within the range of the potentially occur in the range of the to the present or threatened destruction, Mohave ground squirrel (LM 2005, Mohave ground squirrel is about modification, or curtailment of its Appendix B, pp. 31–32), and some wind 107,347 ac (43,442 ha), or about 2 habitat or range, nor do we anticipate it development is likely to occur. percent of the range of the species. In posing a threat in the future. However, most of the large, addition, the actual number of acres that Wind Projects commercially important wind fields in fall within the range of the Mohave the Mojave Desert are to the west and ground squirrel is likely to be far less At wind energy project sites, wind south of the squirrel’s range. So far, because at this early stage in the turbine towers are scattered among wind energy projects have been proposal process the boundaries of each hundreds or thousands of acres. The constructed on non-Federal land along project are very generalized, and some entire project site is not cleared of the western edge of the Mohave ground of the current proposals overlap and vegetation, rather an area at the base of squirrel’s range in Kern County. Existing some are partly outside the squirrel’s each tower and the roads that provide projects encompass about 4,900 ac range. In fact, requests for permits access to the towers are cleared. Thus, (1,983 ha) or about 0.01 percent of the submitted to the BLM far exceed the the project area is crisscrossed with range of the Mohave ground squirrel 72,300 ac (29,259 ha) of economically cleared areas, which are used during (Waln 2011, p. 1). Wind turbines in this developable wind resources that the operation and maintenance. In addition area have been placed mainly on BLM estimates occur on the lands they to the roads, ancillary facilities include hilltops and ridgelines, which are not manage in the entire State of California meteorological towers, a substation and generally suitable habitat for the (BLM 205, pp. 2–5). Most of the an electrical collection system of buried Mohave ground squirrel. currently proposed wind energy projects electrical cables conveying electricity It is difficult to quantify the impacts on BLM land are located along the west from the wind turbines to a substation, of proposed wind energy projects on the and southeast edges of the range of the an operation and maintenance building, habitat of the Mohave ground squirrel. Mohave ground squirrel, and most are an electrical transmission line and Applications have been submitted and located on ridgetops and hillsides, associated tower structures to transmit withdrawn, and the size and location of which are not considered suitable the generated power to an existing high- the projects have changed after habitat for the Mohave ground squirrel. voltage transmission line, and a ‘‘switching station’’ that connects the submission. It should be noted, The BLM’s wind energy program electrical components associated from however, that even if a project is established policies, Best Management the wind turbines to the high-voltage cancelled, it does not prevent another Practices (BMPs), and an Instructional transmission line. Additionally, water project proponent from submitting an Memorandum (IM 2009–043, December and sewer lines are needed for an application for wind development at the 19, 2008) to address the administration operations and maintenance building. same site. Recently the demand for of wind energy development activities Adverse effects to the Mohave ground energy sources from wind has been and identify minimum requirements for squirrel from construction and dampened by a reduction in the price of mitigation measures. These operation of wind energy projects newly-found sources of natural gas and programmatic policies and BMPs would include crushing animals and their concerns over the future of renewable be applicable to all wind energy burrows; loss of habitat for foraging, energy subsidies from Congress (Ball development projects on BLM lands. cover, and reproduction; increased 2011, p. 2). As with solar energy Site-specific and species-specific levels of vehicle traffic that potentially projects, there is no single entity that is concerns, and the development of result in the increased mortality of responsible for overseeing the additional mitigation measures, would squirrels and increased predation; development and operation of all wind be addressed in project-level reviews, introduction of nonnative plants, energy projects in the Mojave Desert or including National Environmental especially along pipelines, transmission within the range of the Mohave ground Policy Act (NEPA) analyses, as required lines, and roads; and alteration of squirrel. (BLM 2005, Volume 1, Chapter ES, p. 4) habitat upslope and downslope causing There is uncertainty in the (see Factor D below for a discussion of hydrologic and erosion effects. development of future wind energy NEPA). For example, the BLM Although wind energy projects are projects in the range of the Mohave recommends establishing a policy by usually similar in size or larger than ground squirrel. For example, only one which right-of-way grants will not be solar energy projects, averaging about wind project has been proposed on DOD issued for lands where wind energy 8,725 ac (3,530 ha), they do not result land, a 49 ac (20 ha) project on Fort development would be incompatible in the elimination of all habitat within Irwin. In 2010, the BLM reported with specific resource values (BLM their perimeter as solar energy projects receiving 20 applications for wind 2005, Volume 1, Chapter 2, pp. 6–7), do. Habitat remains between the turbine energy projects totaling about 194,000 such as those found within ACECs. pads and access roads. In addition, ac (78,509 ha) (Miller 2010, in litt.), Additional areas of land may be unlike solar projects, wind energy although not all proposals occur within excluded from wind energy projects are frequently located on the range of the Mohave ground development on the basis of findings of ridgelines, slopes, or in passes and squirrel. The average project size is resource impacts that cannot be would not likely be in areas with habitat about 9,700 ac (3,925 ha), but sizes mitigated and/or conflict with existing characteristics preferred by Mohave range from 160 ac (65 ha) to 45,385 ac and planned multiple use activities or ground squirrels. However, we have no (18,367 ha) (Miller 2010, in litt.). In land use plans (BLM 2005, Volume 1, information on how Mohave ground contrast, in 2011 the BLM’s list of wind Chapter 2, p. 7). Other BLM policies squirrel populations have been affected energy applications (BLM 2011a, pp. 1, include incorporating management by currently operating wind energy 3, and 4) did not include eight projects goals and objectives specific to habitat projects or how they would be affected from the 2010 list. This change from conservation for species of concern by the construction and operation of 2010 was a reduction of about 86,000 ac (BLM 2005, Volume 1, Chapter 2, p. 9), proposed wind energy projects. (34,803 ha). such as the Mohave ground squirrel.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62233

Under the current WEMO Plan, which The impacts from construction and scattered throughout an area, pipelines may extend to 2035, wind development operation of a wind energy project in delivering water to the wells and heated within the range of the Mohave ground the range of the Mohave ground squirrel water to the power plant(s), a squirrel will also be restricted because would likely be similar to those substation, transmission lines to a high- the BLM has a maximum cumulative described under the ‘‘Off-Highway voltage transmission line, limit of 1 percent new surface Vehicle Recreational Use’’ section but administrative offices, water and sewer disturbance of any kind for the MGSCA with low vehicle use due to restricted lines, and ponds. Geothermal projects and 1 percent for each of the two access, the impacts would be reduced. are not limited to a particular type of DWMAs. One large wind project within Current operational wind energy terrain as are wind turbines; they may the MGSCA would meet or exceed this projects are on non-Federal lands on the or may not be located in areas with 1-percent cap on any kind of surface western edge of the range of the Mohave suitable habitat for Mohave ground disturbance. The WEMO Plan also ground squirrel and encompass about squirrels. However, ancillary facilities requires a mitigation ratio of 5:1 for 0.01 percent of the species’ range. Plans such as transmission lines, pipelines, lands within the DWMAs and the for wind energy development on DOD and access roads, would likely occur in MGSCA for habitat lost from ground land are limited to 49 ac (20 ha) on Fort Mohave ground squirrel habitat. disturbance (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, Irwin. On BLM land, development of Adverse effects to the Mohave ground p. 204). The mitigation generally wind energy projects in the MGSCA squirrel from construction and involves acquisition of non-Federal land would be limited and none is likely to operation of geothermal energy projects to add to the DWMAs and MGSCA, but occur in the DWMAs in the future as the include crushing animals and their mitigation measures other than habitat BLM has imposed restrictions on future burrows; loss of habitat used for acquisition may be implemented to development in these areas. Although foraging, cover, and reproduction; meet the 5:1 mitigation ratio. Outside of likely an overestimate, if we assume that increased levels of vehicle traffic that these areas, the mitigation ratio is 1:1 all proposed wind energy projects on potentially result in the increased (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, p. 204; BLM land are entirely within the range mortality of squirrels and increased LaPre 2010, in litt.). Although of the Mohave ground squirrel, would predation; introduction of nonnative compensation is required, there is no be constructed, and would result in the plants, especially along pipelines, requirement that the lands acquired will total loss of habitat within the project transmission lines, and roads; and be enhanced or excluded from future boundaries, 107,347 ac (43,442 ha), or altering habitat upslope and downslope development projects, but they are 2 percent of the range of the Mohave causing hydrologic and erosion effects. subject to the 1-percent development ground squirrel, would be lost. On non- Similar to wind energy projects, the cap. Once the DRECP is completed, the Federal land, about 47,000 ac (19,020 overall size of geothermal projects may WEMO Plan would likely be amended ha), or 0.9 percent of the range of the be large, but the entire project area is to adopt this plan. The current Mohave ground squirrel, have proposed not cleared of vegetation, which leaves delineations for the DWMAs and or recently approved wind energy patches of habitat within the project MGSCA are not likely to change with projects. The combined total of existing, area. Habitat patches would remain implementation of the DRECP. proposed, and approved wind projects between the wells, pipelines, transmission poles/towers, and access Although patches of economically make up at most about 3 percent of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel; roads. developable wind resources occur on Unlike solar and wind energy private land throughout the range of the however, this is an overestimate as the projects would not result in a total loss projects, geothermal energy projects are Mohave ground squirrel, most of the restricted to very specific areas where proposed and approved projects are of Mohave ground squirrel habitat. Therefore, based on the best available geothermal energy is sufficient and near along the western edge of the Mohave the surface. There are only two locations ground squirrel’s range in Kern County. scientific and commercial information, we conclude that wind energy in the range of the Mohave ground The Kern County Planning and squirrel with actual and potential Community Development Department development does not currently pose a threat to the Mohave ground squirrel in geothermal resources (Known listed 16 wind projects as either Geothermal Resource Areas (KGRA)). approved for construction or as deemed relation to the present or threatened destruction, modification, or One, the Coso Hot Springs KGRA, is on complete to begin the approval process both NAWS (NAWS 2002, p. 47) and (Kern County Planning 2011, pp. 1–2). curtailment of its habitat or range, nor do we anticipate it posing a threat in the BLM land in the northern portion of the Thirteen of these projects are located range of the Mohave ground squirrel; partly or entirely within the range of the future, because: (1) Large areas of economically the second, the Randsburg KGRA, is Mohave ground squirrel. Their area is developable wind resources do not mostly or entirely on BLM land near estimated to be 47,000 ac (19,020 ha), or occur within the range of the Mohave Randsburg in the central portion of the about 0.9 percent of the range of the ground squirrel; range of the squirrel (BLM et al. 2005, Mohave ground squirrel. (2) The number and size of proposed Appendix P–2, p. 3; California In summary, existing wind energy or approved development on DOD land Department of Conservation 2002, p. 1). projects occur in the range of the is limited; The single existing geothermal power Mohave ground squirrel and additional (3) There are limitations on the areal plant, the Coso geothermal plant, is projects have been proposed and extent of development in the MGSCA located in the Coso Hot Springs KGRA approved. Most wind energy projects and DWMAs; and and consists of 106,000 ac (42,897 ha), are or will be located on ridgetops and (4) Typical construction and or 2.0 percent of the range of the hillsides, which are not considered operation of wind energy projects does Mohave ground squirrel. Completed in suitable habitat for the Mohave ground not result in the total loss of habitat 1987, it has 4 power plants and more squirrel for feeding, breeding, or shelter. within the project site. than 120 wells producing 270 MW of None of the existing or proposed wind energy (NAWS 2002, p. 48). Within the energy projects are located in any of the Geothermal Projects Coso Hot Springs KGRA, the BLM important population areas for the A typical geothermal project has one recently approved a 55 ac (22.3 ha) Mohave ground squirrel. or more power plants, a series of wells (BLM 2008, p. 13) project that includes

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62234 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

a groundwater extraction and pipeline has developed BMPs for geothermal ground squirrel; and the BLM is delivery system for injection into the projects which include requiring the required to implement best management existing geothermal project. The operator or lessee to identify important, practices to avoid (if possible), addition of the 9-mile-long (14.5-km- sensitive, or unique habitats and biota minimize, or mitigate potential impacts long) pipeline and access right-of-way in the project vicinity, and siting and to species of concern, such as the would expand the existing energy designing the project to avoid (if Mohave ground squirrel. Therefore, we output by pumping an additional 4,800 possible), minimize, or mitigate conclude that the construction and ac-feet (5,920,713 cubic meters) of potential impacts on these resources operation of geothermal energy projects ground water per year, extending the (BLM and USFS 2008, p. D–6), such as are not currently a threat to the Mohave life of the power plants. the Mohave ground squirrel. During ground squirrel, nor do we anticipate Although a geothermal energy project each stage from exploration to geothermal energy projects posing a has been constructed in the range of the utilization, the BLM retains the threat in the future. Mohave ground squirrel, we have no authority to approve, deny, or approve Utility Corridors information on how Mohave ground with conditions such as protective squirrel populations have been affected measures (BLM 2008c, pp. 1–24). In the The development of renewable energy by the currently operating project and CDCA, geothermal leasing is designated projects in the western Mojave Desert can therefore only speculate how the for all lands, with the exception of will require construction of new Mohave ground squirrel would be wilderness areas (BLM 2008c, pp. 2–3; transmission lines and the upgrading of affected by the construction and BLM 1999, p. 15). We are not aware of existing transmission lines to carry the operation of proposed geothermal any proposed geothermal projects on increased electrical energy production. energy projects. Mohave ground private lands in the range of the Mohave Pipelines are also needed to carry water squirrels at the existing project in the ground squirrel. to some solar and geothermal energy northwest portion of the species’ range On September 11, 2009, the BLM plants for daily operational needs and have been studied, but the purpose of issued a notice of intent to prepare an natural gas or propane to some solar the study was to gather data on the EIS for the exploration, development, energy plants for energy production on effects of excluding livestock grazing and use of up to an additional 22,060 ac cloudy days. and provide data on the biology of the (8,927 ha), or 0.4 percent of the range of Utility corridors may impact the Mohave ground squirrel (Leitner and the Mohave ground squirrel in the Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat Leitner 1998, p. i), and not the impacts northern resource area (74 FR 175 in various ways. Construction activities of geothermal development on the 46786–46787). Within this 22,060 ac result in direct impacts by crushing squirrel. Only one of the important (8,927 ha) area, the BLM has received Mohave ground squirrels and their population areas for the Mohave ground three applications for new geothermal burrows, and collapsing burrows, which squirrel, the Coso Range—Olancha area, development on 4,460 ac (1,805 ha), or destroy the shelter the species needs to is near the Coso geothermal power 0.08 percent of the range of the Mohave escape temperature extremes and plant. Although the power plant is on ground squirrel. The BLM has received predators and to rear young. the southern edge of this important no applications for geothermal energy Construction activities also unearth, population area for the Mohave ground development near Randsburg. injure, or kill other animals that attract squirrel, it has not been reported as Once the DRECP is completed, the Mohave ground squirrel predators, such having been affected by construction WEMO Plan would likely be amended as the common raven. The construction and operation of the geothermal plant. to adopt this plan. The current and use of unpaved roads along The BLM issued a decision on the delineations for the DWMAs and transmission lines and pipelines affect final programmatic Environmental MGSCA are not likely to change with Mohave ground squirrel habitat in the Impact Statement (EIS) for geothermal implementation of the DRECP. same manner as roads created and used development in December 2008 (BLM In summary, there are limited by OHVs (see ‘‘Off-Highway Vehicle and USFS 2008). In its Record of locations for geothermal energy projects Recreation Use’’ section); OHVs would Decision, the BLM determined that within the range of the Mohave ground also use the utility corridors. The issuing a geothermal lease does not squirrel. Currently, there is only one physical structures (e.g., towers and cause any effect on a species, as there operating geothermal energy project in pads, access roads) cause loss of habitat is no guarantee that any development the range of the squirrel, and its impacts and facilitate predation of the Mohave will ever take place on such a lease on the Mohave ground squirrel and its ground squirrel by providing nesting, (BLM 2008c pp. 1–22). If development habitat have not been studied. Although roosting, and perching habitat for does take place, prior to the an important population area for the common ravens and birds of prey development the BLM would examine Mohave ground squirrel is nearby the (Boarman and Heinrich 1999, pp. 23– individual projects and phases existing project, the Mohave ground 24). Because of ongoing operation and (exploration, development, and squirrel has not been reported as having maintenance, the recovery or restoration operation) to determine the appropriate been affected by construction and of these areas of lost habitat is limited level of environmental analysis needed operation of the geothermal plant. (Lovich and Bainbridge 199, p. 313). to comply with NEPA (BLM and USFS Additional geothermal energy projects Because we have no reliable 2008, pp. 2–23) and address the impacts have been proposed in the vicinity of information on the number, size, and to the Mohave ground squirrel at that the existing plant, and, when added to location of potential renewable energy time. In addition, the BLM would apply the existing project, would impact about projects in the range of the Mohave stipulations on any lease where a 2.1 percent of the range of the Mohave ground squirrel, we have no reliable special status species, such as the ground squirrel. However, the impacts information of the number, size, and Mohave ground squirrel, is known or would likely not affect the entire area, location of their associated utility lines. strongly suspected to occur. These as not all of the habitat within these However, utility corridors in the range stipulations include modifications to geothermal energy areas is removed of the Mohave ground squirrel already existing exploration and development during construction and operation; not exist, having been designated by the proposals or modifications to lease all of the habitat within the project sites BLM. In the range of the Mohave ground terms (BLM 2008c pp. 1–23). The BLM is likely to be suitable for the Mohave squirrel, these corridors generally run

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62235

closely parallel to major highways, in litt.). Although compensation is Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 including I–15, US–395, SR–58, and required, there is no requirement that will be extended. SR–178 (Inyokern to Ridgecrest and the lands acquired will be enhanced or Although we are not aware of any Trona). Corridors that are not associated excluded from future development studies on the impact of renewable with highways, or that are only projects, but any acquired lands are energy development on the Mohave occasionally associated with highways, subject to the 1-percent development ground squirrel, at least some loss of include ones along the Mojave River, cap. Thus, habitat acquisition may habitat will occur, with the potential another along the southern boundary of result in securing blocks of habitat for amount and suitability of the habitat Fort Irwin, two north-south corridors in the Mohave ground squirrel, but it will lost dependent in part on the type of the western Antelope Valley, and one also result in a net loss of total available energy development. Solar energy east-west corridor near SRs-138 and 18 acres of habitat. In addition, the CDFG development may occur anywhere there (Palmdale to Victorville) (BLM 2011b, p. may require mitigation for the loss of is flat or gently sloping land, which is 1). The purpose for designating the Mohave ground squirrel habitat as part where Mohave ground squirrel habitat corridors is to provide a coordinated of the permitting process under CESA usually occurs, and is likely the most and consolidated delivery system (see Factor D, ‘‘State Laws and destructive type of renewable energy to network that meets the needs of the Regulations’’). Mohave ground squirrel habitat because public and minimizes the proliferation In summary, the construction and most of the area is cleared of vegetation of rights-of-way, construction, and loss operation of utility corridors may during construction and operation. In of habitat through the western Mojave impact the Mohave ground squirrel contrast, wind development is limited Desert (BLM et al. 2005, Chapter 3, p. through increased animal mortality and to those areas with economically 275). The BLM requires all new linear the loss and degradation of habitat used developable wind energy and generally utilities exceeding certain thresholds to for feeding, breeding, and sheltering. occurs on ridges and hilltops, while be placed within these designated Utility corridors have been designated geothermal development within the corridors (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, to minimize the proliferation of rights- range of the Mohave ground squirrel is pp. 274–275). of-way through the western Mojave limited to two areas where geothermal It is difficult to quantify the impacts Desert and range of the Mohave ground energy can be commercially developed. of proposed transmission lines and squirrel. Many are located along existing The impact of both wind and pipelines (‘‘lines’’) on the habitat of the highways, which confines the locations geothermal development may also be Mohave ground squirrel. First, the and impacts of linear structures and less than solar because much of the number, length, and location of new minimizes new impacts to Mohave vegetation is not cleared during their lines are dependent on the size, number, ground squirrel habitat. Where these construction. and location of new solar, wind, and rights-of-way cross BLM land, any Future solar and wind development geothermal development. Applications permitted surface disturbance would be on Federal land, which makes up about for these have been submitted and limited to a 1 percent development cap two-thirds of the range of the Mohave withdrawn, and the size and location of in the MGSCA and the DWMAs and the ground squirrel, is likely to be limited some of the projects may have changed mitigation rate would be 5:1. Outside for several reasons. No solar and wind after they were submitted. The cost of these special management areas, the projects exist on the 37 percent of the constructing new lines is a significant mitigation rate would be 1:1. Thus, range of the Mohave ground squirrel part of the overall cost of an energy habitat for the Mohave ground squirrel that is managed by the DOD, while project, and therefore, most power would likely be lost, but this loss would proposed solar and wind development suppliers locate their power generation be confined mainly to the utility on DOD land makes up about 0.3 source close to an existing utility corridors and other areas of habitat percent of the range of the Mohave corridor to reduce costs. Regardless, would be acquired through mitigation ground squirrel. On BLM land, which many miles of new lines and associated that could benefit the Mohave ground includes about one-third of the range of access roads will likely be constructed squirrel. the Mohave ground squirrel, existing in the range of the Mohave ground renewable energy projects make up Summary of Energy Development squirrel, a portion of which will be about 2.1 percent of the range of the outside of existing utility corridors. In summary, 22 non-renewable and squirrel, most of which is geothermal. Another important factor in renewable energy projects have been However, the BLM has received determining the overall impact of new constructed within the range of the applications for solar, wind, and lines on the Mohave ground squirrel Mohave ground squirrel. No new non- geothermal projects that could and its habitat is that the BLM requires renewable projects have been proposed; encompass about an additional 2.2 mitigation for the Mohave ground however, many more renewable energy percent of the range of the Mohave squirrel from direct impacts of projects, projects have been proposed. Existing ground squirrel. This level of such as energy development, and utility solar, wind, and geothermal projects development on BLM land is likely an construction and maintenance. The encompass about 2.2 percent of the overestimate because the BLM has WEMO Plan requires a mitigation ratio range of the Mohave ground squirrel. implemented a 1-percent cap (BLM et of 5:1 for lands within the DWMAs and However, at the present time, there is a al. 2005a, chapter 2, p. 48) on all new the MGSCA for habitat lost from ground great deal of uncertainty as to the development, including energy projects, disturbance (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, number, size, and location of future in the 1,726,722 ac (698,78 ha) MGSCA p. 204). The mitigation generally energy development and its potential and in the two DWMAs, which total involves acquisition of non-Federal land impact on the Mohave ground squirrel. 1,155,835 ac (467,752 ha) (BLM et al. to add to the DWMAs and MGSCA, but This uncertainty is caused by a number 2005, chapter 2, pp. 15, 48, 204) (see mitigation measures other than habitat of factors, including overlapping Map 2 and Factor D); the BLM also acquisition may be implemented to proposed projects, the cost of supplying requires extensive and potentially meet the 5:1 mitigation ratio. Outside of renewable energy compared to other expensive mitigation in these areas. these areas, the compensation energy sources, and whether or not the This cap means the BLM would limit requirement is at a rate of 1:1 (BLM et December 2011 construction deadline new development in each of these areas, al. 2005, chapter 2, p. 204, LaPre 2010, for funding under the American which make up most of the range of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62236 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

BLM land within the range of the these areas is expected to be limited, overgrazing, on soils and vegetation in Mohave ground squirrel, to no more long utility lines add substantially to the the Mojave Desert (Busack and Bury than 1 percent under the current WEMO cost of a project, and the lines are 1974, pp. 181–182; Berry 1978, pp. 511– Plan, which may extend to 2035. subject to the 1-percent development 515; Webb and Stielstra 1979, pp. 522– However, the proposed renewable cap and the 5:1 mitigation ratio. New 527; Nicholson and Humphreys 1981, energy projects in these limited lines would be subject to a 1:1 pp. 171–81; Brooks 1995, pp. 67–69; development areas may already exceed mitigation ratio outside the MGSCA and Avery 1998, pp. 67–68). this 1-percent cap, which means not all DWMAs. In the Mojave Desert, livestock of the proposed projects would be built, In conclusion, existing non-renewable grazing impacts soils in various ways. It and no other permitted projects of any energy development has occurred in or damages cryptobiotic soil crusts (see kind with surface disturbance could near cities and communities in the ‘‘Military Operations’’ section) in the occur in these areas. range of the Mohave ground squirrel; open spaces between desert shrubs and For solar development, the BLM has however, no new non-renewable causes soil compaction. In a comparison proposed four SEZs in its programmatic projects are proposed. Renewable of soil conditions following sheep EIS for solar energy, all of which are energy development has occurred in grazing in the western Mojave Desert, outside the range of the Mohave ground rural areas within the range of the Webb and Stielstra (1979, pp. 522–523) squirrel and within which solar Mohave ground squirrel and has been noted that surface strength (a measure of development is more likely to occur. mainly limited to solar thermal compaction) was significantly greater in Wind development may be more likely development in the central portion of grazed as compared to ungrazed areas, to occur on BLM land within the range the range and geothermal development particularly in the upper 4 in (10 cm) of of the Mohave ground squirrel than in the northern portion of the range. the soil, and that surface erosion was solar, but it will be restricted because of Future development on Federal land, greater after grazing. the 1-percent cap within the MGSCA which makes up about two-thirds of the Grazing has also been found to reduce and each of the DWMAs and the range, is likely to occur outside the the number of seeds in a soil seed bank required mitigation. The mitigation ratio MGSCA and the DWMAs. Development (Brooks 1995, p. 670), which contributes for ground disturbing activities within on BLM land outside the MGSCA and to changes in plant communities. In the the MGSCA is 5:1; for land acquisition the DWMAs will require a mitigation western Mojave Desert, a study that means up to 65,440 ac (26,483 ha) ratio of 1:1. This mitigation could comparing grazed and ungrazed plots of private lands (inholdings) in the include the acquisition of additional reported the grazed plot had reduced MGSCA could be purchased and lands to be included in the DWMAs and native forb density (Larson et al. 1997, become part of the MGSCA if the entire MGSCA. Proposed energy development as cited in Boarman 2002, p. 34). Native 1 percent (13,088 ac (5,297 ha)) was on DOD land makes up 0.3 percent of vegetation biomass in the Mojave Desert developed. The same mitigation the range. We are aware of several is higher in areas protected from requirement (1-percent cap on proposed projects on private land, but grazing, while nonnative grass biomass development and 5:1 mitigation ratio) many of them are in areas where the site is greater outside protected areas applies in the DWMAs, where up to has been graded, so the habitat is not (Brooks 1995, pp. 67–68). 86,335 ac (34,939 ha) could be added to suitable for the Mohave ground squirrel. The impacts to soils and vegetation in the DWMAs. However, assuming the Therefore, after reviewing the best active allotments vary by location and worst-case scenario that all proposed available scientific and commercial intensity. For much of the grazing wind and geothermal projects on BLM information, we conclude that energy season, the areas livestock graze are land are developed within the range of development does not currently pose a limited by distance from water. Grazing the Mohave ground squirrel, then as threat to the Mohave ground squirrel in intensity and associated impacts are much as 2.2 percent of the range would relation to the present or threatened generally greater near watering areas, be affected. destruction, modification, or but decrease substantially within a short On non-Federal land, which curtailment of its habitat or range, nor distance (Boarman 2002, p. 34), and comprises about one-third of the range do we anticipate it posing a threat in the some areas within an allotment may not of the Mohave ground squirrel, several future. be grazed because of their distance from solar and wind energy projects have water. been proposed that would impact about Livestock Grazing Although several studies have been 1.2 percent of the range of the Mohave Potential impacts from livestock conducted on the effects of livestock ground squirrel. However, many of the grazing to Mohave ground squirrel grazing on soils and vegetation in the projects on private land will be habitat are mainly from degradation of Mojave Desert, we found only one study constructed on land previously soils and vegetation rather than direct on the effects of livestock grazing on the converted to agriculture. Therefore, loss of habitat, which is limited to Mohave ground squirrel. This study although most probably an overestimate, construction and use of certain livestock focused on dietary overlap, not impacts 5.9 percent of the range could be lost as improvements, such as livestock to soils and vegetation. Using fecal a result of renewable energy troughs, stock tanks, and corrals (Lovich microhistological analysis, Leitner and development. None of the existing or and Bainbridge 1999, p. 313). Habitat Leitner (1998, pp. iv, 27) reported that proposed renewable energy projects on degradation due to grazing occurs to both Mohave ground squirrels and Federal or private land are located varying degrees and includes soil livestock rely on the leaves from shrubs, within any of the important population compaction, destruction or degradation particularly one uncommon shrub, areas for the Mohave ground squirrel. of cryptobiotic soil crusts, decreased Krascheninnikovia lanata (winterfat). Renewable energy development will water infiltration, increased erosion, This reliance by both livestock and also require the construction of trampling of plants, and overcropping squirrels was greater in dry years. The additional utility lines, which may (Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, p. 311). researchers concluded there was dietary result in the loss of Mohave ground Grazing also collapses burrows overlap between the Mohave ground squirrel habitat. These additional lines (Boarman 2002, p. 28). Several studies squirrel and cattle (Leitner and Leitner will be limited in the MGSCA and the have been conducted that document the 2006, p. 38), but provided no DWMAs, as energy development in impacts of livestock grazing, especially information on whether this overlap

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62237

was impacting the Mohave ground the BLM reports that although no standards and guidelines for grazing. squirrel. allotments have been voluntarily Recent BLM actions in the range of the Cattle and sheep grazing are relinquished, the permittee for the Mohave ground squirrel include authorized within the range of the 45,619 ac (38,994 ha) Pilot Knob eliminating grazing in some areas and Mohave ground squirrel. The majority of allotment has not grazed livestock reducing it in others, which should grazing occurs on BLM land, but grazing recently and has requested improve the condition of the soils and also occurs on private land. The BLM relinquishment (Fitton 2010, in litt.). vegetation, particularly in the MGSCA has designated 21 grazing allotments (11 This area is 0.9 percent of the range of and the DWMAs (see Map 2). Over time, sheep, 7 cattle, and 3 cattle/sheep) the Mohave ground squirrel. these changes are likely to provide within the range of the Mohave ground We do not have any information on increased foraging opportunities for the squirrel (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, pp. regionwide grazing on private lands Mohave ground squirrel and reduce the 125, 130; chapter 3, pp. 213, 215–216). outside of BLM allotments; therefore, overall amount of time that livestock An allotment is an area designated for the total area grazed presented above spend within these areas, thus reducing grazing for a private rancher to use. The underestimates the actual area of impacts to soils, vegetation, and dietary grazing program in the WEMO Plan grazing within the range of the Mohave overlap. Therefore, based on the best addresses BLM lands only; however, ground squirrel (BLM et al. 2005, available scientific and commercial many of the BLM allotments include Appendix M, no page number). data, we conclude that livestock grazing both public and private lands (BLM et Mohave ground squirrel habitat can does not currently pose a threat to the al. 2005, chapter 2, p. 130). also be degraded by feral burros and Mohave ground squirrel in relation to With adoption of the WEMO Plan, the wild horses, which occur in the the present or threatened destruction, BLM made several changes to grazing northern portion of the species’ range. modification, or curtailment of its management. The BLM implemented Impacts to Mohave ground squirrel habitat or range, nor do we anticipate public land health standards and habitat from feral burro and wild horses livestock grazing posing a threat in the guidelines for grazing management to are hypothesized to be similar to those future. improve ecological conditions and of livestock grazing. The extent of these ensure healthy sustainable rangelands impacts on Mohave ground squirrel Agriculture (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, p. 118). The habitat is likely influenced by wild Agriculture occurs in the range of the standards in the WEMO Plan include horse and feral burro population Mohave ground squirrel. Agricultural managing soils and native species’ density, topography and soils, resident development results in the conversion habitats by managing ecological plant communities, spatial and temporal of native desert habitat to croplands and processes, and include indicators to scale, other disturbances, year to year orchards. In addition to the direct loss evaluate whether populations and their and longer term climatic variation, and of habitat, agricultural activities expose habitats are sufficiently distributed and animal behavior (Abella 2008, p. 817). Mohave ground squirrels and nearby healthy to prevent the need for listing The BLM has an ongoing program on habitat to insecticides, herbicides, and under the ESA (BLM et al. 2005, chapter its lands to capture and move feral rodenticides (Hoyt 1972, p. 7). Because 2, p. 121). The BLM is required to burros and wild horses (BLM et al. 2005 the Mohave ground squirrel eats both restore, maintain, or enhance habitats of chapter 2, p. 90), and although these plants and insects, it could be adversely special status species, such as the animals remain within the range of the affected by the loss or reduction of these Mohave ground squirrel, to promote Mohave ground squirrel, their degree of food items from the use of insecticides their conservation (BLM et al. 2005, impact they have on the habitat of the and herbicides. In addition, drift of chapter 2, p. 124). Mohave ground squirrel has been insecticides, herbicides, or rodenticides Under the WEMO plan, specific greatly reduced. The Navy also has an from the fields into adjacent habitat or management changes to livestock ongoing program to capture and move bioaccumulation of these chemicals grazing in the range of the Mohave burros and horses from the NAWS (see from contaminated forage and insects ground squirrel included reducing the ‘‘Military Operations’’ section). could adversely affect the Mohave area authorized for grazing in the range In summary, although livestock ground squirrel. of the Mohave ground squirrel by 33 grazing may result in the degradation of We found no information that the use percent; eliminating ephemeral grazing soils and vegetation, it rarely results in of pesticides is adversely affecting the for cattle in the DWMAs; eliminating the direct loss of habitat, and there is no Mohave ground squirrel from direct sheep grazing in most of the DWMAs; information that demonstrates livestock exposure, reduction of forage, or excluding cattle grazing in the spring in grazing is negatively impacting Mohave bioaccumulation from consuming DWMAs in years when annual plant ground squirrel habitat. The focus of treated vegetation or insects. Habitat productivity is low; excluding cattle studies on livestock grazing in the loss from agricultural activities has grazing on NAWS; and allowing Mojave Desert has been on general occurred at several locations within the permittees to voluntarily relinquish impacts to soils and vegetation rather range of the Mohave ground squirrel. By cattle and sheep allotments (BLM et al. than how those impacts are affecting the the early 1990s, more than 39,000 ac 2005, chapter 2, pp. 127, 132–135). Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat. (15,700 ha), or 0.7 percent of the range These management prescriptions will be One study found there was dietary of the Mohave ground squirrel, had been in effect during implementation of the overlap between the Mohave ground lost to agriculture, including areas in the current WEMO Plan, which may extend squirrels and livestock for one forage Antelope Valley and Mojave River Basin to 2035. The area currently authorized species, but provided no information (Gustafson 1993, p. 24). In 1994, Krzysik for grazing by the BLM within the range that this was adversely affecting the (1994, p. 18) reported that the spread of of the Mohave ground squirrel habitat is Mohave ground squirrel. Although we alfalfa fields throughout the species’ 1,718,686 ac (695,530 ha) of BLM and are not aware of any significant impacts southern range in the Mojave River area private land (BLM et al. 2005, chapter of grazing on Mohave ground squirrel had destroyed prime Mohave ground 3, pp. 213, 215–216; Waln 2010, p. 1), habitat, soil and habitat degradation squirrel habitat and fragmented or about 32.3 percent of the range of the associated with grazing have been populations. Krzysik (1994, p. 18) Mohave ground squirrel (see ‘‘Range further reduced with the BLM’s recent concluded that the Mohave ground and Distribution’’ section). In addition, implementation of public land health squirrel was no longer found in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62238 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Lucerne Valley, Apple Valley, or additional details). Extracting minerals withdrawn from mineral entry. Lands Victorville areas, which are in the is usually done by constructing addits (a not withdrawn but requiring an southern portion of the squirrel’s range type of horizontal shaft), shafts, and/or approved plan of operation prior to (see Map 1). We estimate this area to be pits. The unused materials may include commencing mining activities include about 2.4 percent of the range of the overburden, waste ore, and tailings, proposals to remove more than 1,000 Mohave ground squirrel. However, there which are deposited near the mine site. tons of ore, to disturb more than 5 ac (2 have been recent sightings of the A mining operation may require office ha) of BLM land, or to be located on Mohave ground squirrel near Adelanto space, storage facilities, and power lands that are ACECs or wilderness. and Hesperia (Victorville/Mojave River plants at the mine site. These activities Class L public lands are limited-use Valley area) and Mojave (western impact Mohave ground squirrels areas to help protect sensitive, natural, Antelope Valley) (Leitner 2008, pp. through a direct loss of habitat, similar scenic, ecological, and cultural resource 6–7) (see Map 1). to impacts from urban development, values. These public lands are also We acknowledge that past agricultural although on a reduced scale (Boarman managed to provide for generally lower- development resulted in the destruction 2002, p. 18) (see ‘‘Urban and Rural intensity, carefully controlled multiple of Mohave ground squirrel habitat. Development’’ section). use of resources, while ensuring that However, the current cost of pumping Mining has occurred in the western sensitive values are not significantly ground water to irrigate crops in the Mojave Desert for more than a century. diminished. Class C public lands are western Mojave Desert discourages the Minerals extracted in the western wilderness areas with controlled use development of new areas for Mojave Desert include gold, borates, and that is also closed to OHV use (BLM et agriculture (Los Angeles County aggregate materials (sand, gravel, and al. 2005, chapter 3, p. 3 and Appendix Cooperative Extension 2009, p. 1). In stone). Mine size ranges from less than P, p. 4). Casual mining use or addition, many areas historically used a few acres for recreational mining and prospecting can occur on BLM lands in for agriculture are being converted to exploration, to large commercial mines the western Mojave Desert, as can residential and commercial covering several square miles. However, commercial mining. However, the development (Los Angeles County most of the mines in the western Mojave DWMAs are ACECs and the MGSCA Cooperative Extension 2009, p. 1). This Desert are small and their impacts are area is Class L land. The BLM would conversion would not result in very limited and localized. need to approve a plan of operation additional loss of habitat for the Mohave The only extensive mining operation prior to anyone initiating mining ground squirrel, as the native vegetation in the range of the Mohave ground activities in these areas. The plan of had previously been removed when squirrel is the U.S. Borax borate mine operation would also need to include developed for agriculture. After located north of Boron (see Map 1). This the 5:1 mitigation ratio, and mine reviewing the information on Web sites operation is proposing to increase its development would contribute to the 1- of local agricultural agencies in the footprint by 1,500 ac (607 ha) (U.S. percent development cap. Given these western Mojave Desert, we conclude Borax 2008, Figure ES–2), which would requirements, it is unlikely that mining that there will likely be no increase in allow the mine to operate past 2050. would occur on these lands in the range agricultural development in the future. Sand, gravel, cement, and other mineral of the Mohave ground squirrel in the Given the best available scientific and commodities used for construction future. commercial data, and the small percent materials are in demand as the In summary, mining occurs in the of the range of the species affected by population in the western Mojave Desert range of the Mohave ground squirrel on agriculture, we conclude that and southern California continues to private and BLM lands. However, using agriculture does not currently pose a grow. We anticipate there will be an the best available scientific and threat to the Mohave ground squirrel in increase in demand for these materials commercial information, we find that relation to the present or threatened in the future in the western Mojave only a small number of known active destruction, modification, or Desert (BLM et al. 2005, Appendix P, p. and proposed mines occur in the range curtailment of its habitat or range, nor 2), despite the current slowdown in the of the Mohave ground squirrel; many of do we anticipate it posing a threat in the economy. As sand and gravel mining these mines are located in areas that are future. operations deplete their material not suitable habitat (i.e., rocky, sources at currently approved mining mountainous areas) for the Mohave Mining sites, they will likely request permits to ground squirrel; and commercial mining Limited mining occurs in the range of expand their current operation sites is absent on DOD lands (which the Mohave ground squirrel, and (e.g., Ag Con in Oro Grande, San constitute about one third of the range includes mineral, sand, and gravel Bernardino County 2003 Mining of the species). Therefore, we conclude mines. Mining results in the loss of Conditional Use Permit and that mining does not currently pose a Mohave ground squirrel habitat through Reclamation Plan). Mine expansion threat to the Mohave ground squirrel in removal of vegetation used for forage would result in the loss of Mohave relation to the present or threatened and cover, and removal of soils used for ground squirrel habitat, but this loss destruction, modification, or burrows, which provide protection from would likely be minimal in area when curtailment of its habitat or range, nor temperature extremes and predation, compared to the range of the species (far do we anticipate it posing a threat in the and serve as a location to give birth. less than 0.01 percent of the range). future. Travel off road during mining Much smaller existing or proposed gold exploration, and the construction and and silver mines are in the Mojave- Climate Change use of roads to access the mine site Rosamond and Randsburg areas, but Climate change may be impacting the during production, also result in the these mines are located on rocky buttes Mohave ground squirrel. Climate change loss of habitat (Boarman 2002, p. 18). and do not occur in Mohave ground is discussed here under Factor A These activities impact the Mohave squirrel habitat. because, although climate change may ground squirrel by damaging and Commercial and recreational mining affect the Mohave ground squirrel removing shrub cover and compacting does not occur on DOD lands. On public directly by creating physiological stress, the soil (see ‘‘Off-Highway Vehicle land, the BLM allows mining in all the primary impact of climate change on Recreational Use’’ section above for areas, unless the land has been the Mohave ground squirrel is expected

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62239

to be through changes to the availability tsunamis), intense tropical cyclone individually or in combination, may and distribution of Mohave ground activity, and the area affected by affect the status of a species. squirrel habitat. droughts (IPCC 2007b, p. 8, Table Vulnerability to climate change impacts ‘‘Climate’’ refers to an area’s long-term SPM.2). More recent analyses using a is a function of sensitivity to those average weather statistics (typically for different global model and comparing changes, exposure to those changes, and at least 20- or 30-year periods), other emissions scenarios resulted in adaptive capacity (IPCC 2007, p. 89; including the mean and variation of similar projections of global temperature Glick et al 2011, pp. 19–22). As surface variables, such as temperature, change across the different approaches described above, in evaluating the status precipitation, and wind, whereas (Prinn et al. 2011, pp. 527, 529). of a species, the Service uses the best ‘‘climate change’’ refers to a change in All models (not just those involving scientific and commercial data the mean and/or variability of climate climate change) have some uncertainty available, and this includes properties that persists for an extended associated with projections due to consideration of direct and indirect period (typically decades or longer), assumptions used, data available, and effects of climate change. As is the case whether due to natural processes or features of the models; with regard to with all potential threats, if a species is human activity (Intergovernmental climate change this includes factors currently affected or is expected to be Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007a, such as assumptions related to affected by one or more climate-related p. 78). Although changes in climate emissions scenarios, internal climate impacts, this does not necessarily mean occur continuously over geological time, variability and differences among the species is a threatened or changes are now occurring at an models. Despite this, however, under all endangered species as defined under the accelerated rate. For example, at global models and emissions scenarios, Act. If a species is listed as threatened continental, regional and ocean basin the overall projected trajectory of or endangered, this knowledge scales, recent observed changes in long- surface air temperature is one of regarding its vulnerability to, and term trends include: A substantial increased warming compared to current impacts from, climate-associated increase in precipitation in eastern parts conditions (Meehl et al. 2007, p. 762; changes in environmental conditions of North America and South America, Prinn et al. 2011, p. 527). Climate can be used to help devise appropriate northern Europe, and northern and models, emissions scenarios, and strategies for its recovery. central Asia, and an increase in intense associated assumptions, data, and While projections from global climate tropical cyclone activity in the North analytical techniques will continue to model simulations are informative and Atlantic since about 1970 (IPCC 2007a, be refined, as will interpretations of in some cases are the only or the best p. 30); and an increase in annual projections, as more information scientific information available, various average temperature of more than 2 becomes available. For instance, some downscaling methods are being used to degrees Fahrenheit (F) (1.1 degrees changes in conditions are occurring provide higher resolution projections Celsius (C)) across the U.S. since 1960 more rapidly than initially projected, that are more relevant to the spatial (Global Climate Change Impacts in the such as melting of Arctic sea ice scales used to assess impacts to a given United States (GCCIUS) 2009, p. 27). (Comiso et al. 2008, p. 1; Polyak et al. species (see Glick et al. 2011, pp. 58– Examples of observed changes in the 2010, p. 1797), and since 2000 the 61). With regard to the area of analysis physical environment include: An observed emissions of greenhouse gases, for the Mohave ground squirrel, increase in global average sea level, and which are a key influence on climate downscaled projections are available to declines in mountain glaciers and change, have been occurring at the some degree. Specifically, the IPCC average snow cover in both the northern middle to higher levels of the various models predict that precipitation will and southern hemispheres (IPCC 2007a, emissions scenarios developed in the decrease, but the frequency and p. 30); substantial and accelerating late 1990s and used by the IPPC for magnitude of extreme precipitation reductions in Arctic sea ice (e.g., making projections (e.g., Raupach et al. events will increase. The IPCC provides Comiso et al. 2008, p. 1), and a variety 2007, Figure 1, p. 10289; Manning et al. a more recent report that supports EPA’s of changes in ecosystem processes, the 2010, Figure 1, p. 377; Pielke et al. 2008, prediction of temperature increases and distribution of species, and the timing of entire). Also, the best scientific and adds that rising air and ocean seasonal events (e.g., GCCIUS 2009, pp. commercial data available indicate that temperature is unquestionable (IPCC 79–88). average global surface air temperature is 2007a, p. 4). The Western Regional The IPCC used Atmosphere-Ocean increasing and several climate-related Climate Center’s California Climate General Circulation Models and various changes are occurring and will continue Tracker has developed 11 climate- greenhouse gas emissions scenarios to for many decades even if emissions are monitoring regions for California. The make projections of climate change stabilized soon (e.g. Meehl et al. 2007, western Mojave Desert is part of one globally and for broad regions through pp. 822–829; Church et al. 2010, pp. region that includes most of the Mojave the 21st century (Meehl et al. 2007, p. 411–412; Gillett et al. 2011, entire). Desert in California and the Owens 753; Randall et al. 2007, pp. 596–599), Changes in climate can have a variety Valley. Data collected from this region and reported these projections using a of direct and indirect impacts on indicate that mean, maximum, and framework for characterizing certainty species, and can exacerbate the effects minimum temperatures have increased (Solomon et al. 2007, pp. 22–23). of other threats. Rather than assessing during the last 110 years (Redmond Examples include: (1) It is virtually ‘‘climate change’’ as a single threat in 2009, pp. 36–46). certain there will be warmer and more and of itself, we examine the potential There is still a considerable degree of frequent hot days and nights over most consequences to species and their uncertainty associated with projecting of the earth’s land areas; (2) it is very habitats that arise from changes in future climate change, due in part to likely there will be increased frequency environmental conditions associated uncertainties about future emissions of of warm spells and heat waves over with various aspects of climate change. greenhouse gases and to differences most land areas, and the frequency of For example, climate-related changes to among climate models and simulations heavy precipitation events will increase habitats, predator-prey relationships, (Stainforth et al. 2005, pp. 403–406; over most areas; and (3) it is likely that disease and disease vectors, or Duffy et al. 2006, pp. 873–874), and to increases will occur in the incidence of conditions that exceed the physiological the inability to predict change at a local extreme high sea level (excludes tolerances of a species, occurring scale. It is difficult with currently

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62240 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

available models to make meaningful ‘‘Biology and Natural History’’ section, (Karl et al. 2009, p. 42). However, we are predictions of climate change for areas the activity period of the Mohave not aware of any formal studies on the such as the range of the Mohave ground ground squirrel is generally spring and direct effect of rising global temperature squirrel (Parmesan and Matthews 2005, early summer when they mate and on drought severity or frequency (Karl et p. 354). The difficulty in predicting how forage to sustain themselves for the al. 2009, p. 5). Drought severity and an animal or plant will respond further remainder of the year. Increased frequency are a function of a complex increases the uncertainty of evaluating temperatures could cause Mohave series of factors, such as the El-Nino- the potential impacts of climate change. ground squirrels to have a shorter active Southern Oscillation (ENSO) intensity Responses may include changes in period. A reduced active period may and duration, as well as geographic distribution, population size, behavior, lessen the species’ ability to consume variations in sea surface temperature, and physiological and physical and store sufficient forage to sustain it which may also be affected by characteristics (Parmesan and Mathews through the dormant period, and may increasing temperatures (Karl et al. 2005, p. 373). Several published studies reduce the frequency of reproduction. If 2009, p. 105), thereby compounding the predict that temperature and precipitation declines, the availability of uncertainty associated with precipitation trends may change in the nutritious forage would likely decline in precipitation projections (Karl et al. near future, and some describe how a given year and across years. If such 2009, p. 105). biotic communities may respond to reduced precipitation levels persist, the In summary, within the range of the such changes (Parmesan and Mathews habitat may no longer be suitable for the Mohave ground squirrel, the potential 2005, pp. 333–374; IPCC 2007a, pp. 1– Mohave ground squirrel during the effects of climate change, their 21; IPCC 2007b, pp. 1–22; Jetz et al. drought period. magnitude, and projections on how the 2007, pp. 1211–1216; Kelly and Drought is a natural feature of the species will react are speculative for Goulden 2008, pp. 11823–11826; Loarie Mojave Desert. The State of California several reasons, including the et al. 2008, pp. 1–10; Miller et al. 2008, has experienced cycles of drought for uncertainties of climate projection pp. 1–17). In the interior western region many years. For example, between 1928 models, the lack of models for of the United States, species may and 1987 the U.S. Geological Survey projecting climate change for relatively respond to increases in temperature by (USGS) reported five severe droughts small geographic areas, the complexity shifting their range to cooler areas. across California, including the longest of interacting factors that may influence The Mohave ground squirrel usually drought in the State’s history during the vegetation changes, and the uncertainty occurs in the flats and alluvial fans period 1929–1934 (USGS 2004, p. 2). regarding the effects of climate change between rocky, mountainous areas. The Mohave ground squirrel has on the Mohave ground squirrel’s Based on the specific known habitat evolved several adaptations to persist in foraging, breeding, and movement/ requirements of the Mohave ground an environment with drought. These dispersal behaviors. Although climate squirrel, the species could respond to adaptations include suppressing change may have some effect on the ambient temperature increases in three reproduction during periods of low species, at this time we cannot make general ways: (1) Constrict its range; (2) rainfall and food availability, retreating meaningful projections on either how move farther north; or (3) move higher to burrows for most of the year to escape the climate within the range of the in elevation within its current range. temperature and humidity extremes in Mohave ground squirrel may change, or Moving farther north would require summer and winter, reducing how the species may react to climate travelling over rocky hills, which is physiological demands by going into a change. The Mohave ground squirrel difficult, but possible, in some areas for state of torpor for much of the year, and has survived several periods of drought the Mohave ground squirrel (see ‘‘Home caching food in burrows. However, in the 20th century, including a 5-year Range and Movements’’ section). prolonged drought exacerbates the drought in the early 20th century, and Moving to higher elevations would effects of drought on the species; no has evolved several adaptations to require the Mohave ground squirrel to young may be born for several years, the persist in an environment with drought cross rocky terrain and inhabit more survivability of adults is reduced by as a natural feature of its environment, marginal habitats at higher elevations poor forage conditions, and the including recolonizing areas following with less suitable substrate for burrow surviving adults eventually die due to episodes of severe drought. Therefore, construction. The most likely response old age or predation (Gustafson 1993, p. based on a review of the best available by the Mohave ground squirrel to 22). This situation can result in the scientific and commercial data, we climate change would be to move north. extirpation of the Mohave ground conclude that climate change does not However, we cannot be certain that the squirrel in local areas (Gustafson 1993, currently pose a threat to the Mohave Mohave ground squirrel will respond p. 22). However, based on past records ground squirrel in relation to the this way. Regardless of the species’ of severe drought, the Mohave ground present or threatened destruction, response to ambient temperature squirrel has demonstrated that it can modification, or curtailment of its increases, ultimately the range of the persist and recolonize areas following habitat or range, nor do we anticipate it species will likely be smaller than it is episodes of severe drought. Therefore, posing a threat in the future. currently. we have no information that supports Based on the information discussed the assumption that severe drought will Summary of Factor A above, we acknowledge that threaten the species in the foreseeable We have assessed the best available temperatures in the western Mojave future. scientific and commercial data on the Desert where the Mohave ground We also have no information on impacts of urban and rural squirrel occurs have increased and are which to base meaningful predictions development, OHV recreational use, likely to continue increasing. We also on how climate change may influence transportation infrastructure, military acknowledge that, if hotter and drier the duration or severity of drought operations, energy development, summers and more extreme weather within the range of the Mohave ground livestock grazing, agriculture, mining, patterns in temperature and squirrel, or how its status may be and climate change on the range and precipitation occur within its range, the affected. Increasing temperature could habitat of the Mohave ground squirrel. Mohave ground squirrel may be result in more severe and frequent Urban and rural development negatively affected. As discussed in the drought, especially in the Southwest destroys habitat used by the Mohave

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62241

ground squirrel for feeding, breeding, WEMO Plan, has no plans to designate three major bases in the western Mojave and shelter; reduces or prevents additional high-use areas or roads and Desert, especially EAFB and NAWS, is movement of individuals among trails for the next few decades, has protected from human impacts, such as populations (see Factor E); and closed 45 percent of the roads and trails urban and rural development, OHV introduces human behaviors that result in the DWMAs and 90 percent in the recreational use, agriculture, and in an increase in the number of Mohave Rand Mountains ACEC (BLM et al. grazing, because these activities are not ground squirrel predators (see Factor C). 2005, chapter 2, p. 167), is restoring compatible with the military mission. Most habitat loss occurs at the southern habitat in areas of closed roads and Approximately 37.2 percent of the range end of the species’ range in the trails, is increasing enforcement, and is of the Mohave ground squirrel occurs incorporated areas of Palmdale, revising its route designation to within the boundaries of Fort Irwin, Lancaster, Victorville, Apple Valley, minimize damage to public resources EAFB, and NAWS. Although about 8.2 Hesperia, Adelanto, and Barstow (see and harassment and disruption of percent of the military land is Map 1). Except for California City, wildlife and habitat. intensively used for military operations, which is located in the central part of Several highways and roads cross the much of the remainder of its range the Mohave ground squirrel’s range (see western Mojave Desert. This network of within these DOD facilities is not map 1), these cities make up almost all roads potentially impacts the Mohave heavily used, and large undisturbed the incorporated lands within the ground squirrel and its habitat by direct areas are needed to test aerial vehicles squirrel’s range. Not all the incorporated mortality, loss of habitat from initial and weapons and to act as buffer areas lands within these cities are developed; construction, introduction of invasive around target sites. To maintain the however, because of the proximity to plants, and alteration of habitat upslope ongoing mission of the military, these existing infrastructures, we expect that and downslope from hydrologic and large, undisturbed areas must remain future growth will take place in these erosion effects. One new highway is undeveloped. Thus, while habitat for incorporated areas. We cannot predict proposed in the southern portion of the the Mohave ground squirrel is severely with any certainty how much or which range of the Mohave ground squirrel, impacted in some areas by military of these areas will be developed in the and two highways are proposed for operations, there are extensive areas next 20–30 years. Currently, about 2.6 widening, which combined would where it does not experience these percent of the range of the squirrel has result in the loss of at most 0.18 percent impacts. of the range of the squirrel. Although been lost to urban and rural Several renewable energy projects and there is no information specific to the development. The development of all utility lines have been constructed or incorporated areas would result in the Mohave ground squirrel, roads are known in some cases to affect species are proposed for construction in the loss of approximately 9–10 percent of range of the Mohave ground squirrel. the Mohave ground squirrel’s range; this and their habitat beyond the loss of habitat from construction of the road Besides the direct loss of potentially number includes the 2.6 percent of the large areas of habitat from the range already lost to development. itself. This road-effect zone can have varying degrees of both positive and construction of new facilities, new and However, this is highly unlikely because existing energy projects can also we expect very limited development of negative impacts, with the width of the zone varying with the species affected, facilitate an increased presence of California City (or 2.45 percent of the predators and promote invasive plants. species’ range), which is the largest location, habitat, road width, and traffic density. There is research that indicates Solar projects are likely to be the most incorporated area within the range of that the effects of roads on small destructive to Mohave ground squirrel the squirrel. mammals in the desert are neutral to habitat because these projects are OHV recreational use occurs slightly positive. Assuming the worst situated in relatively flat or gently throughout much of the range of the case scenario that such a road-effect sloping areas that are preferred by the Mohave ground squirrel. However, zone exists for the Mohave ground squirrel and because all vegetation is impacts to the Mohave ground squirrel squirrel, and its impacts to the species’ removed during construction and and its habitat occur mainly in the most habitat are severe, we estimate that operation. There are two existing solar heavily used areas (management areas, about 0.74 percent of the range could be projects within the range of the squirrel, spill-over zones, and high-use areas). If lost. which make up about 0.07 percent of we assume that all habitat in the Military operations vary in their the range. Both of these projects are on management areas, spill-over zones, and magnitude and intensity of impacts to private land; there are no projects at the high-use areas has been severely Mohave ground squirrel habitat. Ground present time on BLM or DOD land impacted, then about 6.6 percent of the force training activities that use live within the range of the squirrel. Unlike range of the Mohave ground squirrel has ammunition, ordnance, and tracked and solar projects, wind turbines are often been lost to OHV use. However, we wheeled vehicles remove vegetation, situated on ridges and hilltops, which know that the Mohave ground squirrel compact the soil, and cause fires that are not the squirrel’s preferred habitat, continues to occur on at least one of the remove perennial plants. These and geothermal energy only occurs in four management areas. Areas of lesser activities, including the Fort Irwin two areas within the range of the use (e.g., existing unpaved roads and expansion area, occur on about 8.2 squirrel. Also, all vegetation is not trails) result in the loss of habitat, and percent of the range of the Mohave cleared during the construction of wind vehicle activity can crush Mohave ground squirrel. Bombing and weapons and geothermal projects. Existing wind ground squirrels. However, the testing often result in intense projects are on private land on the significance of such losses is disturbance in small areas while large western edge of the squirrel’s range and undocumented for the Mohave ground buffer areas remain undisturbed. Flight- make up about 0.1 percent of the range. squirrel and does not result in the total testing and training have limited if any There are no wind projects on BLM or fragmentation of habitat, as unpaved ground impacts. Training areas for the DOD land at the present time. There is roads and trails are not barriers to military bases in the western Mojave one large geothermal project on Federal Mohave ground squirrel movement Desert have buffer areas where surface land that makes up about 2 percent of (Leitner 2010, in litt.). In addition, the disturbance is limited, or not allowed. the range, although much of the habitat BLM, through implementation of the However, much of the habitat on the in this area has not been destroyed.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62242 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Combined, existing renewable energy Livestock grazing occurs throughout number of active mines is small when projects make up about 2.2 percent of portions of the range of the Mohave compared to the number of inactive the range of the Mohave ground ground squirrel. The available mines. There is no commercial mining squirrel. information on the effects of livestock on DOD lands, and there are few large Several renewable energy projects grazing on the Mohave ground squirrel mines in the range of the Mohave have been proposed on both Federal and is limited to a study on dietary overlap ground squirrel. private land in the range of the Mohave between cattle and Mohave ground Average temperatures have been ground squirrel. However, at the present squirrels; the study provided no rising in the western Mojave Desert, and time, there is a great deal of uncertainty indication that this overlap was this trend will likely continue because as to the number, size, and location of adversely affecting the Mohave ground of climate change. Climate change may future energy development and its squirrel. Other studies in the Mojave also affect precipitation and the potential impact on the Mohave ground Desert have described the general severity, duration, or periodicity of squirrel. This uncertainty is caused by impacts of livestock grazing, drought. However, there is a great deal a number of factors, including the particularly overgrazing, on soils and of uncertainty as to the rate at which the overlap of proposed projects, the cost of vegetation, which may result in habitat average temperature may increase, and supplying renewable energy compared degradation but rarely habitat loss. The the effect of climate change on both to other energy sources, and the greatest ground-disturbance impact of precipitation and drought. In addition to uncertainty of whether or not the grazing occurs at and near stock tanks the uncertainty associated with how the December 2011 construction deadline and other water sources where cattle overall climate of the Mojave Desert for funding under the American congregate. However, these areas make may change, the impact of climate Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 up a small percent of the range of the change on the Mohave ground squirrel will be extended. Proposals for solar Mohave ground squirrel. The BLM’s will depend on a complex array of other and wind projects on DOD land, which recent implementation of public land factors, including how the species and include about 27 percent of the range of health standards and guidelines, which its habitat respond to climate change. In the Mohave ground squirrel, would include eliminating or reducing grazing light of all the factors involved, we are encompass about 0.3 percent of the in some areas in the range of the not aware of information that would range, if constructed. Proposed solar Mohave ground squirrel, should allow us to make a meaningful and wind projects on BLM land, which improve the conditions of the soils and projection on the impact of climate includes about one third of the range of vegetation, including in the MGSCA and change on the Mohave ground squirrel. the squirrel, would encompass about 2.2 DWMAs. Over time, these changes are We now look at the impacts of urban percent of the range, almost all of which likely to improve the condition of soils and rural development, OHV is wind energy. However, this is likely and vegetation in the range of the recreational use, transportation an overestimate because not all of the Mohave ground squirrel. infrastructure, military operations, proposed projects would likely be built. Agricultural activities are ongoing in energy development, livestock grazing, In addition, there is a 1 percent cap on the range of the Mohave ground agriculture, mining, and climate change, development in the DWMAs and squirrel. Agricultural development is cumulatively. Many acres of Mohave MGSCA and the BLM would require a focused in three areas: the western ground squirrel habitat have been lost to 5:1 mitigation ratio on all types of Antelope Valley, an area south of EAFB, these impacts and additional habitat is development in the MGSCA and and the Mojave River Valley and results expected to be lost in the future. The DWMAs and a 1:1 mitigation ratio in the direct loss of Mohave ground greatest impacts have resulted from outside these areas. Also, the BLM’s squirrel habitat. However, this loss is urban and rural development. Impacts draft PEIS on solar energy development estimated to be less than 1 percent of from development as well as those from has identified four proposed SEZs, none the range of the Mohave ground agriculture have and continue to be of which are within the range of the squirrel. Operational impacts in mainly concentrated on private lands in squirrel. agricultural areas may also include the southern portion of the range of the Proposals for new geothermal exposing Mohave ground squirrels and Mohave ground squirrel. Habitat loss development on Federal land amount to their forage to pesticide contamination. due to military operations has been only about 0.08 percent of the range of We found no information that pesticide concentrated in the NTC in the the Mohave ground squirrel. Although use is adversely affecting the Mohave easternmost portion of the squirrel’s unlikely, if all proposed projects on ground squirrel or its habitat. We also range. Other impacts, including heavy- Federal land, which makes up about 62 found no information that agricultural use OHV recreation and transportation percent of the range, were constructed development and associated impacts infrastructure, existing and proposed they would make up about 2.5 percent would likely increase in the western renewable energy development, and of the range. There are also proposals on Mojave Desert. The cost of irrigation has grazing are more dispersed throughout private land, which would encompass risen to a level that discourages the species’ range. Based on a worst- about 1.2 percent of the squirrel’s range, extensive conversion of desert scrub case analysis, we estimate that in the but many of these are proposed for land habitat to agriculture, and instead, some next 20–30 years about 32.2 percent of that has already been converted to agricultural lands are being converted to the range of the Mohave ground squirrel agriculture. Therefore, under the worst residential and commercial could be lost. However, we expect that case scenario, if we assume all proposed development. the actual loss during this timeframe projects are constructed, construction of Mining activities have been ongoing will be much less because this estimate all renewable energy projects destroys in the western Mojave Desert for more is based on a series of worst-case all habitat, and all the habitat that is lost than a century. Mining activities have assumptions. is suitable for Mohave ground squirrels, impacts to the Mohave ground squirrel For urban and rural development, we then an additional 3.7 percent of habitat similar to urban and rural development expect the loss of habitat to be less could be lost. However, even in this and OHV recreational use, but on a because California City, which is the worst case, large tracts of habitat would more localized and limited scale. BLM largest incorporated area in the Mojave remain untouched, especially on lands are open to mining unless Desert, has developed very little of its Federal land. otherwise withdrawn; however, the incorporated area in the past 46 years

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62243

and because the CDFG would likely end of the range to well south of SR–58 Predation require mitigation for the loss of in the southern portion of the range. Small rodents such as the Mohave Mohave ground squirrel habitat as part These lands contain most or all the ground squirrel are important prey for of the permitting process under CESA habitat within the eight important many species. The Mohave ground (see Factor D, ‘‘State Laws and population areas and include habitat squirrel is potentially prey to a host of Regulations’’). that provides for connectivity among the native predators, including the coyote; For transportation infrastructure, we eight areas. American badger; bobcat (Lynx rufus); calculated the loss of habitat from road Based on this information, we various species of raptors, such as the construction along the entire highway conclude that the cumulative impacts of golden eagle, prairie falcon, and red- length, which includes portions located urban and rural development, OHV tailed hawk (Gustafson 1993, p. 88); within incorporated areas and currently recreational use, military operations, common raven (Boarman 1993, p. 2); developed areas, thus double counting energy development, transportation and various species of rattlesnakes these impacts within the range of the infrastructure, grazing, agriculture, (Gustafson 1993, p. 88). In addition, Mohave ground squirrel. In addition, we mining, and climate change do not domestic cats and dogs may also prey assumed a road-effect zone for the currently constitute a significant threat on Mohave ground squirrels. Of 36 Mohave ground squirrel, although there to the Mohave ground squirrel in may be little or no such zone for the Mohave ground squirrels radio-collared relation to the present or threatened squirrel, as several studies indicate that in 1995 and 1997, 12 (33 percent) were destruction, modification, or the impacts of highways are generally believed to be lost to predation (Harris curtailment of its habitat or range, nor neutral to slightly positive for small and Leitner 2005, pp. 190–191). do we anticipate that they will pose a mammals. Although not directly observed, For military operations, we assumed threat in the future. mortality from predation was that the entire NTC including the Factor B: Overutilization for determined from a combination of blood expansion area would be used for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or or toothmarks on radio collars or the ground forces training resulting in the Educational Purposes discovery of collars at a raptor or raven loss of all Mohave ground squirrel perch site. Overall, predation on habitat within this area. In reality, not We found no known commercial or Mohave ground squirrels has seldom all of this area will be used for training recreational utilization of the Mohave been observed, and the impact of and some areas have been set aside as ground squirrel. Scientific and predation on the species is not known. buffer zones needed to shield the educational activities associated with Small rodents are important prey for training activities from civilian uses on the Mohave ground squirrel are many of the species listed above, and lands adjacent to the base. controlled by the CDFG through the predation on small rodents, including For renewable energy, although the issuance of scientific research permits. the Mohave ground squirrel, can be area requested for development may be Based on our review of the best high. large, the actual footprint of the projects available scientific and commercial The coyote is a common predator in is small, much of the Mohave ground information, we found no evidence of the western Mojave Desert. Although squirrel habitat within the project threats from overutilization for the coyote is likely a predator of the boundary for wind and geothermal will commercial, recreational, scientific, or Mohave ground squirrel, we found no not be developed, and many of these educational purposes affecting the recorded observations of coyotes projects are proposed for areas that were Mohave ground squirrel or potential preying on Mohave ground squirrels or previously cleared and used for risks in the future. We therefore fecal analysis of coyote scat that agriculture. We also believe the total conclude that overutilization for contained remains of Mohave ground loss from renewable energy will be less commercial, recreational, scientific, or squirrels. In addition, we found no because habitat loss is frequently educational purposes is currently not a information documenting that the mitigated by the acquisition and threat to the Mohave ground squirrel coyote population has increased or is enhancement of habitat for the Mohave across its range, nor do we anticipate expected to increase in the western ground squirrel. In the squirrel’s range, overutilization for commercial, Mojave Desert, or the level of predation the CDFG may require mitigation for recreational, scientific, or educational by the coyote on the Mohave ground development on private land and for purposes posing a threat in the future. squirrel has increased or is expected to Federal projects (see Factor D, ‘‘State increase, or that coyote predation is Laws and Regulations’’). The BLM Factor C: Disease or Predation having an adverse impact on the requires 5:1 mitigation for projects in Disease species. the DWMAs and MGSCA and 1:1 The increased presence of domestic elsewhere. Even if the worst case occurs Although other species of ground dogs and cats in the western Mojave and all 32.2 percent of the range is squirrels are subject to sylvatic plague Desert may impact the Mohave ground eventually lost, we expect that most of (Foley et al. 2007, p. 1; CA Dept. Public squirrel. Feral or free-ranging domestic the remaining area will remain Health 2008, p. 2), there is no evidence dogs have been identified as potential relatively undisturbed. More than 80 of its presence in Mohave ground predators of the Mohave ground squirrel percent of the remaining land is Federal, squirrels (Leitner 2005, PowerPoint (D. LaBerteaux, cited in Gustafson 1993, and includes the MGSCA and DWMAs, presentation, slide 11). There is no Appendix, p. 86). The BLM (BLM et al. which are managed at least in part for information of any other disease present 2005, chapter 3, p. 65) noted ‘‘feral dogs the Mohave ground squirrel, and large in the Mohave ground squirrel. Based are a problem in several areas’’ of the areas of DOD land, especially on EAFB on our review of the best available western Mojave Desert ‘‘where they may and NAWS, which we expect to remain scientific information, we found no kill Mohave ground squirrels.’’ The undisturbed in support of the military’s research or observational evidence that BLM found that dogs are most common mission. Of particular importance to the documents or suggests that disease is in the habitat adjacent to urbanized Mohave ground squirrel, much of the affecting the Mohave ground squirrel areas (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, p. 96). remaining lands are contiguous and (Service and CDFG 1998, p. 2; Leitner For example, BLM survey results provide connectivity from the northern presentation, 2005). showed that dog sign occurred on 88

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62244 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

percent of the transects surveyed in The common raven population Factor D: The Inadequacy of Existing proximity to urbanized areas but increased more than 700 percent in the Regulatory Mechanisms occurred on less than 1 percent of the western Mojave Desert from 1986 to The Act requires us to examine the transects surveyed in the undeveloped 2004 (Boarman and Kristan 2006, p. 2; adequacy of existing regulatory Fremont-Kramer and Superior-Cronese Service 2008, p. A–16), likely in mechanisms with respect to those DWMAs (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 3, p. response to increased urbanization and existing and foreseeable threats that may 104). For those transects within the recreational use, which provide place the Mohave ground squirrel in range of the Mohave ground squirrel, 4 common ravens with an artificial source danger of becoming either endangered percent had dog sign (BLM et al. 2005, of reliable and widespread food, water, or threatened. Existing regulatory chapter 3, p. 156). Although these data nest sites, roost sites, and perch sites mechanisms that provide some indicate that dogs, based on the (Boarman 2002, p. 1). In most locations, protection for the Mohave ground presence of sign, occur in desert habitats human-created nest, roost, and perch squirrel include local land use within the range of the Mohave ground sites, including transmission line ordinances and processes, State laws squirrel, Leitner (2005 presentation) towers, telephone and streetlight poles, and regulations, and Federal laws and indicated that no data have been regulations. The habitat of the Mohave collected that document that dogs have buildings, billboards, and fences, an impact on the species. In our review provide the common ravens with ground squirrel spans private lands, of the available information, we did not previously unavailable high perches, local government lands, State lands find any indication that feral or which allow them to hunt and scavenge (California State Parks, CDFG, and domestic dogs prey on Mohave ground more effectively, or with less energy California State Land Commission), and squirrels or dig up Mohave ground expenditure than required by flight or Federal lands (BLM, DOD, National Park squirrel burrows. In the WEMO Plan, from a low perch (Boarman 1993, p. 2). Service (NPS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS)) in California. the BLM stated that failure to Although common ravens likely prey implement a feral dog management plan on Mohave ground squirrels, and the Local Land Use Ordinances and is not likely to adversely affect the amount of predation has likely Processes Mohave ground squirrel, as ‘‘feral dog increased as the population of ravens predation has not been documented as Approximately 31 percent of the has increased, the available information range of the Mohave ground squirrel is a significant threat’’ (BLM et al. 2005, does not indicate that this level of chapter 4, p. 153). Therefore, we privately owned, or owned by local predation is having an adverse effect on governments. We found little in the way conclude that domestic or feral dogs are Mohave ground squirrel populations. not a major predator of the Mohave of local planning and enforceable ground squirrel and their rate of Summary of Factor C zoning regulations specific to the predation is not likely to increase in the Mohave ground squirrel. Approximately future. In summary, we found no information 11.9 percent of the range of the Mohave Domestic cats may have increased that disease is a threat to the Mohave ground squirrel lies within San near urban expansion areas in the ground squirrel throughout its range. Bernardino County, but the County has western Mojave Desert. Domestic cats Regarding predation, beyond the general regulatory authority over only a portion are efficient predators of small birds and knowledge of natural and potential of these lands. The County of San mammals (Harrison 1992, p. 10). predators of the Mohave ground Bernardino online ‘‘Biotic Resources Gustafson (1993, p. 30–31) postulated squirrel, we found no information on Overlay Map’’ includes information to that domestic cats may kill Mohave the observance or extent of predation by assist both the property developer and ground squirrels. However, Leitner coyotes, domestic dogs or cats on the County land use planner in identifying (2005 presentation) stated there is no Mohave ground squirrel, and no lands that may support the Mohave documentation of the impact of information suggesting that predation is ground squirrel. If a proposed predation by domestic cats on Mohave affecting Mohave ground squirrel discretionary project is within this overlay area, the County would accept ground squirrels. Although it is likely abundance, distribution, or long-term an application for development only that domestic cats have increased in the survival. We did find circumstantial after a focused survey for the Mohave western Mojave Desert with the information that predation by the ground squirrel has been completed increased human population in the past common raven likely occurs on the (Zias-Roe 2010, pers. comm.). If the few decades, we were unable to find Mohave ground squirrel. We also found survey results are positive, the County information documenting that domestic information that the number of common cats prey on Mohave ground squirrels. would require demonstration of ravens in the western Mohave Desert The common raven is a likely compliance with CESA. Similar predator of the Mohave ground squirrel. has increased substantially in the last planning tools are used by Harris and Leitner (2005, pp. 190–191) few decades. We acknowledge that the municipalities such as the Town of found empty radio collars from Mohave level of predation by the common raven Apple Valley (2009, p. III–50 of the ground squirrels under raven perch sites on the Mohave ground squirrel may General Plan) for discretionary projects. and concluded this was evidence of have increased, but the available The Mohave ground squirrel is usually predation by common ravens on information does not indicate that this not considered when implementing Mohave ground squirrels. Common level of predation is adversely affecting actions such as issuing building or ravens kill many types of animals for Mohave ground squirrel abundance, grading permits. food, including ground squirrels distribution, or long-term survival. (Boarman 1993, p. 2). Kochert et al. Therefore, based on our review of the State Laws and Regulations (1976, in Knight and Call 1980, p. 17) best available scientific and commercial California laws and regulations that reported that Townsend ground information, we conclude that predation may benefit the Mohave ground squirrel squirrels (Urocitellus townsendii) in is currently not a significant threat to include CESA and the California Idaho comprised 93 and 70 percent of the Mohave ground squirrel throughout Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the food biomass of nesting ravens its range, nor do we anticipate predation (Public Resources Code sections 21000– during a 2-year study. posing a threat in the future. 21177). These laws provide broad

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62245

authority to regulate and protect result in the overutilization of the the Mohave ground squirrel, but the wildlife within the State, specific Mohave ground squirrel for scientific lands acquired for mitigation are authority for lands directly owned by purposes. managed to improve their habitat value the State, and specific authority to California Fish and Game Code and are secured in perpetuity for the require reduction of take of the species section 2081, enacted in 1999, states Mohave ground squirrel. through minimization and mitigation of that the CDFG may authorize, by permit, One major difference between CESA impacts from discretionary actions at a the take of an endangered and and the Act is that there is no local or State government level. threatened species, if the take is requirement under CESA to develop and The State of California has broad incidental to an otherwise lawful implement a recovery plan for a State- authority to regulate and protect activity and the impacts of the take are listed species. Consequently, with no wildlife within its borders. The mission minimized and fully mitigated. recovery plan, there is no written of the CDFG is ‘‘to manage California’s Although CESA does not apply to guidance for Federal, State, and local diverse fish, wildlife, and plant Federal land management agencies agencies and the public to know what resources, and the habitats upon which conducting actions on Federal lands, it actions to implement and where to they depend, for their ecological values generally does apply to actions taken by implement them to achieve the State’s and for their use and enjoyment by the non-Federal entities. Therefore, policy to conserve, protect, restore, and public’’ (CDFG 2005, p. 1). The CDFG compliance with CESA is needed for enhance the Mohave ground squirrel does this through a variety of actions, many actions occurring in the range of and its habitat. including enforcing hundreds of laws the Mohave ground squirrel, including In evaluating the Mohave ground and regulations related to fish, wildlife, on Federal land. In addition, the State squirrel protocol, some scientists have and habitat; managing lands at wildlife listing of the Mohave ground squirrel identified potential problems with the areas, ecological reserves, and public helps focus Federal land managers’ protocol that raise into question the access sites for ecological and attention on the species and consider accuracy of the current survey recreational uses; and collecting and impacts to the species when developing technique (Brooks and Matchett 2002, p. analyzing scientifically based data on actions. Most Federal land managers 172). The survey protocol may yield the distribution and abundance of fish, would prefer to manage for a species to false negative results or undersample wildlife, and native plant species and ensure it does not require the the population. Mohave ground the natural communities and habitats in protections of the Act. squirrels are difficult to trap, even in which they live. When implemented in Because CESA prohibits the taking of locations where they have been sighted the range of the Mohave ground the Mohave ground squirrel without (Hoyt 1972, p. 7). Mohave ground squirrel, these actions benefit the obtaining a permit, the CDFG requires squirrels have been observed species. that a standard survey protocol, which approaching traps but not entering them One California law that addresses the was developed by the CDFG in 1987 (Leitner 2009, pers. comm.). In some conservation and protection of the (Gustafson 1993, p. 463) and revised in cases, only a few squirrels have been Mohave ground squirrel is CESA, which 2003, be used to determine the presence trapped while several had been seen or was enacted in 1985. The Mohave or absence of the Mohave ground heard calling in the same area (Urban et ground squirrel is listed as threatened squirrel on lands proposed for al. 2010, p. 1). In addition, the grid trap under CESA; CESA defines a threatened development. Therefore, the results arrangement is not necessarily the best species as a native species that, obtained with the protocol are a critical trapping method to use for detecting although not presently threatened with component of the decision making rare small mammals. For example, in extinction, is likely to become an process, and most of the information comparing grid and transect trap endangered species in the foreseeable available on the distribution and arrangements for small mammals, future in the absence of special abundance of the Mohave ground transect arrangements yielded more protection and management efforts. squirrel is based on the same results. total captures, more individual captures, CESA also declares that it is the policy The survey protocol specifies that a and more species than grid of the State to conserve, protect, restore, CDFG-approved, qualified biologist arrangements (Pearson and Ruggiero and enhance any endangered or conduct a visual survey of the proposed 2003, p. 457). The differences between threatened species and its habitat. Take, project site. If the results are negative, the two methods tend to be greatest as defined under CESA, of a threatened a series of live grid traps are set during when small mammals are least or endangered species is prohibited three periods. If the results for Mohave abundant (Pearson and Ruggiero 2003, without first obtaining authorization ground squirrels are negative after p. 457), as may be the case with the from the CDFG. implementation of the survey protocol, Mohave ground squirrel. Recently, a Because the Mohave ground squirrel the CDFG stipulates that the project site video survey method was compared to is a threatened species under CESA, contains no Mohave ground squirrels, the live trapping survey protocol at two anyone wishing to capture or otherwise and development may occur without an locations. The Mohave ground squirrel take a Mohave ground squirrel for incidental take permit and mitigation detection rate for the video method was scientific purposes must first obtain a (CDFG 2003, p. 3). If Mohave ground greater than for the trapping protocol memorandum of understanding (MOU) squirrels are present at a proposed (Delaney 2009, p. 12) (see ‘‘Abundance or a permit from the CDFG as described development, then CESA and California and Trend’’ section). under California Fish and Game Code Fish and Game Code section 2081 The CDFG acknowledges that a 2081(a) (CDFG 2003, p. 1). The issuance require that the impacts be minimized negative survey result does not mean of the MOU or permit is a discretionary and fully mitigated. The CDFG generally that the Mohave ground squirrel does action by the CDFG. Under the requires securing and managing existing not occur on the site, or that take will California Fish and Game Code, the habitat at another location for the not occur (CDFG 2003, p. 3). The survey CDFG is charged with ensuring that any Mohave ground squirrel. Thus, for every protocol, including the trapping action it authorizes does not jeopardize discretionary project with positive component of the protocol, may result the continued existence of the species. survey results, implementation of the in a false negative finding (e.g., the Therefore, the CDFG is not allowed by proposed development with mitigation Mohave ground squirrels may be regulation to issue a permit that would yields a net loss of acres of habitat for present but the available data from the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62246 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

survey protocol indicates they are not exemptions to CEQA which exempt energy NCCP is finalized and present). The purpose of the survey proposed projects that are undertaken, implemented, some areas inhabited by protocol is to determine presence and funded, or permitted by local or State the Mohave ground squirrel would be therefore if take will occur. Its purpose agencies from the requirements of included in the plan area. is not to provide population information public disclosure and mitigation. These In addition to these laws and on population size, status, or trend. include certain mass transit projects, regulations, California also manages In summary, CESA provides some certain planning documents, certain lands in the range of the Mohave ground protection for the Mohave ground pipeline projects, certain ministerial squirrel for native habitat. These lands squirrel from take and habitat loss. (non-discretionary) projects (Title 14 include about 22,000 ac (8,900 ha) However, the benefit of CESA to the California Code of Regulations, chapter managed by the California Department squirrel may depend on the ability to 3, Article 18, sections 15260 to 15285), of Parks and Recreation and 15,000 ac detect the species on a proposed grazing (Rebecca Jones 2010, in litt.), (6,070 ha) managed by the CDFG. development site. If squirrels are and in-fill development projects (Article Federal Laws and Regulations present on a site but not detected with 19, sections 15300 to 15333). Also the survey protocol, which is known to exempt are projects that are approved by Federal agencies are responsible for occur based on subsequent observations, popular vote that do not involve a managing approximately 66 percent of then the project is implemented with no public agency-sponsored initiative (Title the range of the Mohave ground squirrel mitigation for the Mohave ground 14 California Code of Regulations, (Defenders of Wildlife and Stewart squirrel under CESA. If a project chapter 3, Article 20, section 15378). 2005, pp. 39–40). The Federal agencies proponent assumes presence of the The exemption of ministerial- with the largest land management Mohave ground squirrel at a project site permitted projects is an important authority for these lands are the BLM or if squirrels are detected during the consideration in evaluating the level of and the DOD (see Table 1 and Factor A). survey protocol, then CESA requires protection of the Mohave ground Several Federal laws and regulations mitigation for the take of the Mohave squirrel and its habitat afforded by that may benefit the Mohave ground ground squirrel. Thus, CESA provides CEQA. On private land, CEQA applies squirrel include the National some benefit to the Mohave ground only to discretionary actions, such as Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 squirrel and its habitat. major changes in zoning or requests for U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as amended CEQA is a regulatory mechanism that a conditional use permit. Building or (NEPA); Federal Land Policy and affords protection for the Mohave grading permits or other development Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. ground squirrel in certain projects with minor, or no, changes to 1701 et seq.) (FLPMA); Public circumstances. CEQA requires review of existing land use or zoning designations Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 environmental impacts for any proposed are considered ministerial by the local (43 U.S.C. 1752 et seq.); Wild Horse and discretionary project that is undertaken, development agencies and are not Burro Protection Act of 1971 (16 U.S.C. funded, or permitted by a State or local subject to CEQA. Although minor on an 1331 et seq.); and the Sikes Act governmental agency, and public individual basis, cumulatively, these Improvement Act (16 U.S.C. 670a– disclosure of these findings. Section activities can result in the take of the 670o), as amended (Sikes Act). These 15065 of the CEQA guidelines requires species and the loss, fragmentation, and laws provide authority to conserve a finding of significance if the project degradation of habitat with no habitat and mitigate for adverse impacts has the potential to ‘‘reduce the number mitigation under CEQA. These to habitat, including habitat for the or restrict the range of a rare activities, however, would still be Mohave ground squirrel. In addition, if (threatened) or endangered plant or subject to the requirements of CESA. the Mohave ground squirrel occurs on animal.’’ The Mohave ground squirrel is Another California law that could the same patch of habitat as a federally such a species, because as stated above benefit the Mohave ground squirrel is listed species (e.g., desert tortoise it is listed as threatened by the State of the Natural Communities Conservation (Gopherus agassizii) or Astragalus California. In general, if a proposed Planning Act (NCCPA). NCCPA jaegerianus (Lane Mountain milk- project in Mohave ground squirrel provides for voluntary cooperation vetch)), the Mohave ground squirrel habitat requires a discretionary permit among the CDFG, landowners, and other may benefit from the protections from a State or local agency, that public interested parties to develop natural afforded these species under the Act. agency is required to prepare a public community conservation plans (NCCPs) document under CEQA that analyzes that provide for early coordination of Bureau of Land Management the impacts of the proposed action on efforts to protect listed species or About 37 percent of the land the species and requires mitigation for species that are not yet listed. NCCPA (1,804,139 ac (730,112 ha)) within the the impacts. However, if economic, identifies and provides for the regional range of the Mohave ground squirrel is social, or other conditions make it or area-wide protection of plants, administered by the BLM (Defenders of infeasible to mitigate one or more animals, and their habitats, including Wildlife and Stewart 2005, pp. 39–40). significant effects of a project on the listed species, while allowing As a Federal agency, whenever BLM species, the project may nonetheless be compatible and appropriate proposes to implement or authorize any carried out or approved at the discretion development activity. NCCPA could not action on lands that it manages, it must of a public agency if the project is only benefit the Mohave ground comply with NEPA. NEPA requires all otherwise permissible under applicable squirrel, but could also benefit local Federal agencies to formally document laws and regulations (CEQA Guidelines communities in the western Mojave and publicly disclose the environmental section 15093), even though the project Desert, which, under the NCCPA, could impacts of their proposed actions and may cause significant environmental obtain authorization to take the Mohave management decisions. damage, such as destruction of a listed ground squirrel while allowing for In addition, 40 CFR 1500.2 requires species or its habitat. reasonable development. There is no all Federal agencies, to the fullest extent Although CEQA may provide NCCP for the Mohave ground squirrel at possible, to use all practicable means, protection for the Mohave ground this time; however, there is one under consistent with the requirements of squirrel in certain circumstances, there development for renewable energy in NEPA and other essential are several statutory and categorical the California desert. If the renewable considerations of national policy, to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62247

restore and enhance the quality of the for the CDCA that provides for the (207,976 ha)), the Desert Tortoise human environment and avoid or immediate and future protection and Research Natural Area (DTNA), which is minimize any possible adverse effects of administration of the public lands in the contained within the Fremont-Kramer their actions upon the quality of the California desert within the framework DWMA, and the Superior-Cronese human environment. When of a program of multiple-use and DWMA (641,917 ac (259,776 ha)) (BLM implementing NEPA within the range of sustained yield, and the maintenance of et al. 2005, chapter 2, p. 13). About 55 the Mohave ground squirrel, all Federal environmental quality. Within the range percent of the Fremont-Kramer, 59 agencies must consider their potential of the Mohave ground squirrel, the percent of the Superior-Cronese, and 92 impacts on the species and identify and current BLM land management percent of the DTNA lands within the consider appropriate mitigation documents are the California Desert ACEC boundaries are BLM lands. The measures. Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan 1980, as BLM manages these ACECs at a greater FLPMA is the primary Federal law amended (BLM 1999) and other level of protection for wildlife and governing most land uses on BLM lands. amendments to the CDCA Plan, habitat than the MGSCA. It does not FLPMA established a public land policy including the WEMO Plan and EIS allow certain land uses, such as solar for the BLM; it provides for the (BLM et al. 2005). The WEMO Plan is energy development, in ACECs, and management, protection, development, the RMP for the western portion of the acquires private land within DWMA and enhancement of the BLM lands. CDCA. boundaries in areas that overlap the Public lands are managed for multiple The Mohave ground squirrel is range of the Mohave ground squirrel use and sustained yield. Under its designated as a sensitive species on (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, pp. 28, 70). multiple use mandate, the BLM allows BLM lands. The management guidance The Mohave ground squirrel will benefit grazing, mining, OHV use, energy for special status species under BLM from the management of these three production, and other uses on public Manual 6840–Special Status Species ACECs and the MGSCA because they lands. The BLM also has the flexibility Management states that ‘‘Bureau are contiguous with each other, which under FLPMA to establish and sensitive species will be managed will facilitate management of these implement special management areas consistent with species and habitat lands as blocks of unfragmented habitat such as ACECs and research natural management objectives in land use and outside military bases (see Map 2). areas, where the BLM can limit or implementation plans to promote their The Public Rangelands Improvement exclude surface disturbance activities conservation and to minimize the Act established a national policy and that adversely affect sensitive species, likelihood and need for listing under the commitment to improve the conditions such as the Mohave ground squirrel. ESA’’ (BLM 2008, p. 05V). BLM Manual on public rangelands. Its goal is to FLPMA directs the development and 6840 further requires that RMPs should improve range condition, which relates implementation of resource address sensitive species, and that to wildlife habitat and plant management plans (RMPs), which direct implementation ‘‘should consider all communities. The BLM has specific management at a local level, and site-specific methods and procedures regulatory authority for grazing requires public notice and participation needed to bring species and their management provided at 43 CFR 4100 in the formulation of such plans and habitats to the condition under which (Regulations on Grazing Administration programs for the management of BLM management under the Bureau sensitive Exclusive of Alaska). Livestock grazing lands. RMPs authorize and establish species policies would no longer be permits and leases contain terms and allowable resource uses, resource necessary’’ (BLM 2008, p. 2A1). conditions to achieve management and condition goals and objectives to be The WEMO Plan is the up to 30-year resource condition objectives on the attained, program constraints, general RMP whose boundary includes most of BLM lands, and to ensure that habitats management practices and sequences, the current habitat of the Mohave are, or are making significant progress intervals and standards for monitoring ground squirrel. One of the purposes of toward, being restored or maintained for and evaluating RMPs to determine the WEMO Plan was to develop and BLM special status species (43 CFR effectiveness, and the need for implement management strategies that 4180.1(d)), which include the Mohave amendment or revision (43 CFR 1601.0– would conserve the Mohave ground ground squirrel. Examples of the actions 5(k)). squirrel throughout the western Mojave BLM has taken to accomplish this goal Section 601 of FLPMA was written Desert (BLM et al. 2005, p. ES–1). This include: Closing some sheep allotments, specifically for the CDCA, which RMP contains specific measures removing sheep from allotments in the includes the western Mojave Desert. In pertinent to the management of the MGSCA when ephemeral plants are no this section, Congress noted the fragility Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat. longer the primary forage used by sheep, of the California desert ecosystem that is The BLM designated the MGSCA, a eliminating ephemeral grazing for cattle ‘‘easily scarred and slow to heal; the wildlife habitat management area in the DWMAs, and excluding cattle historical, scenic, archeological, (WHMA), on BLM lands in the northern grazing in the spring in DWMAs when environmental, biological, cultural, part of the species’ range (BLM et al. annual plant productivity is low (BLM scientific, educational, recreational, and 2005, chapter 2, p. 203; LaPre 2009, in et al. 2005 chapter 2, pp. 131–135). economic resources in the California litt.). Within the MGSCA boundary, land In 1964, Congress enacted the desert; and that certain rare and ownership is BLM (1,308,877 ac Wilderness Act, with the intent of endangered species of wildlife, plants, (529,686 ha)) with private land (420,000 establishing a National Wilderness and fishes, and numerous archeological ac (169,969 ha)) scattered among the Preservation System composed of and historic sites, are seriously BLM land (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, federally owned wilderness areas to be threatened by air pollution, inadequate p. 203). Thus, about 75 percent of the protected in their natural condition for Federal management authority, and land within the MGSCA is subject to the the use and enjoyment of the people of pressures of increased use, particularly BLM’s management protections for the the United States. A variety of activities recreational use, which are certain to MGSCA. are prohibited by the Wilderness Act intensify because of the rapidly growing Within the central and southern within designated wilderness areas. population of southern California.’’ portion of the range of the Mohave As mentioned under Factor A, part or Congress charged the BLM with ground squirrel are three ACECs, the all of 14 designated wilderness areas are developing and implementing an RMP Fremont-Kramer DWMA (513,918 ac on BLM lands and in the range of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62248 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Mohave ground squirrel. The chapter 3, p. 170) as it reduces impacts or entirely on these DOD lands (see Map Wilderness Act protects these areas to the Mohave ground squirrel and its 2). Part of the Coso Range-Olancha from various forms of development and habitat from OHV recreation in the Plan important population area is on NAWS, human activities that are stressors for area. part of the Coolgardie Mesa-Superior the Mohave ground squirrel; however, Both FLPMA and the Mineral Leasing Valley important population area is on the areas designated as wilderness Act give the BLM the legal authority to Fort Irwin, and the EAFB important within the range of the Mohave ground regulate and condition energy permits. population area is within this military squirrel comprise about 4.6 percent of The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 base. the species’ range and are not U.S.C. 15801 et seq.) orders the As Federal agencies, these DOD bases contiguous. These areas include steep identification of renewable energy must formally document and publicly slopes and rocky substrates that would sources and provides incentives for disclose the environmental impacts of not provide suitable habitat for the their development (42 U.S.C. 15851). their proposed actions and management Mohave ground squirrel but would This law and Presidential Executive decisions. Fort Irwin recently expanded contribute to connectivity among Order 13121 direct the production, its boundaries. Much of the expansion squirrel habitat. purchase, and facilitation of area is in the range of the Mohave The Wild Horse and Burro Protection development of renewable energy ground squirrel. During the NEPA Act directs the BLM to protect these products by Federal entities and land process, DOD identified that the animals on public lands where they management agencies. The ‘‘Energy proposed expansion would impact occurred when the law was enacted, Development’’ section of Factor A about 123,000 ac (49,777 ha) of desert and to manage them by removing excess describes the development and tortoise habitat, of which, about 83,000 animals to restore a thriving natural operation of renewable energy projects, ac (33,589 ha) is in designated critical ecological balance to the range. This law including recent increases in solar, habitat and within the Superior-Cronese enables the BLM to remove nonnative wind, and geothermal energy DWMA (Charis 2005, p. ES–9). Of the wild horses and burros that are development. All of these activities four known populations of Lane degrading or destroying habitat within require ground disturbance, Mountain milk-vetch, the expansion the range of the Mohave ground infrastructure, and ongoing human and operation of the NTC would not squirrel. activities that could adversely affect the impact the 1,283 ac (519 ha) NASA– To manage motorized access on BLM Mohave ground squirrel on the Goldstone population, but would lands within the range of the Mohave landscape. impact 66 percent of the 5,499 ac (2,225 ground squirrel, the FLPMA and its In summary, the BLM manages about ha) Brinkman Wash-Montana Mine implementing regulations direct the one-third of the range of the Mohave population and 20.25 percent of the BLM to locate trails in a manner to ground squirrel. Under FLPMA, the 4,796 ac (1,941 ha) Paradise Valley minimize impacts to the physical BLM has designated three ACECs and a population (U.S. Fish and Wildlife resources (i.e., soils, watershed, MGSCA, which are contiguous and will Service 2004, pp. 24, 53). The 9,775 ac vegetation, air, and other resources), and facilitate management of these lands (3,956 ha) Coolgardie Mesa population to minimize harassment of wildlife or (see Factor E). The BLM has a mandate is located outside the Fort Irwin significant disruption of wildlife to manage BLM lands for multiple-use, boundary. habitats (43 CFR 8342.1). To manage for and has broad regulatory authority to To help offset the loss of habitat of the the Mohave ground squirrel and other plan and manage all land use activities desert tortoise and Lane Mountain milk- species, the BLM has implemented a on public lands, including energy vetch, the Army established two program of OHV route obliteration and development, OHV recreation, grazing, conservation areas for the Lane restoration and the signing of open and other activities. As described in Mountain milk-vetch totaling 6,770 ac routes to keep OHV activities aligned Factor A, these activities have the (2,740 ha) (Charis 2005, pp. 4–21 and 4– with what is permitted. In the central potential to impact the Mohave ground 22); acquired private lands in the portion of the Mohave ground squirrel’s squirrel and its habitat. The BLM has Fremont-Kramer and Superior-Cronese range, the BLM implemented the Rand developed mitigation measures for DWMAs (Fort Irwin 2003, pp. 2–31); Mountain Fremont Valley Plan (Rand many of these activities that will reduce and purchased fee land and associated Plan) on 65,020 ac (26,313 ha) between or eliminate the magnitude and severity assets and improvements associated Ridgecrest and California City, which of the impacts to Mohave ground with the 26,314 ac (10,649 ha) Harper includes an area popular with OHV squirrel habitat. In some cases, the BLM Dry Lake grazing allotment and retired enthusiasts. The Rand Plan adopted a limits or prohibits activities on BLM cattle grazing on these lands (Fort Irwin motorized vehicle access network, lands with special designations because 2003 pp. 2–34). The acquired private expanded the Rand ACEC by 13,120 ac of incompatibility with those lands in the Fremont-Kramer and (5,309 ha), reduced the multiple use designations. Superior-Cronese DWMAs (see Map 2) class from Class M to Class L, acquired and the grazing allotment comprise 8.2 private lands, and withdrew land from Department of Defense and 0.5 percent of the range of the mineral entry. Class L lands are The U.S. Army’s Fort Irwin, the U.S. Mohave ground squirrel, respectively, intended to support limited use by Navy’s NAWS, and the U.S. Air Force’s whereas the expansion area comprises activities that degrade the value of the EAFB include about 1,683,095 ac 75,300 ac (30,473 ha) or 1.4 percent of land and to protect sensitive, natural, (681,127 ha) or 31.6 percent of the the range of the Mohave ground squirrel scenic, ecological, and cultural resource Mohave ground squirrel range. and the NTC including the expansion values. Class M lands have moderate Additional DOD lands in the Mohave area within the range of the Mohave use, and provide for a controlled ground squirrel range (Air Force Plant ground squirrel comprises 435,978 ac balance between higher intensity uses 42 in Palmdale and Cuddeback Lake Air (176,435 ha) or 8.2 percent of the range and resource protection (BLM et al. Force Range northeast of EAFB) of the Mohave ground squirrel (see 2005, chapter 3, p. 3). The BLM comprises about 0.1 percent of the Factor A, ‘‘Military Operations’’). When considered implementing the Rand Plan species’ habitat. Three of the Mohave the total area of the acquired mitigation a high priority for Mohave ground ground squirrel important population lands is compared to the total area of squirrel conservation (BLM et al. 2005, areas (Leitner 2008, p. 34) occur partly expansion lands, the mitigation ratio of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62249

acquired lands to expansion lands is Environmental Protection Agency Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat about 5.8:1. The Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. throughout its range, we find that, The DOD must comply with the Sikes 7401 et seq.) directs the EPA to develop cumulatively, when implemented, Act and its implementing regulations. and enforce regulations to protect the existing regulations provide for the This law requires the DOD to develop general public from exposure to long-term survival of the species. Our assessment of threats based on the best cooperative plans for conservation and airborne contaminants that are known to available scientific and commercial rehabilitation programs for natural be hazardous to human health. In 2007, information regarding the loss and resources on military bases and to the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that gases degradation of the range or habitat of the establish outdoor recreation facilities. that cause global climate change are Mohave ground squirrel under Factor A, Each base prepares an Integrated pollutants under the Clean Air Act, and and fragmentation and mortality as Natural Resources Management Plan the EPA has the authority to regulate discussed under Factor E lead us to (INRMP) that provides for fish and carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping conclude that the inadequacy of existing wildlife habitat improvements or gases (Massachusetts et al. v. EPA 2007 regulatory mechanisms is not a threat to modifications; range rehabilitation [Case No. 05–1120]). EPA policies to the Mohave ground squirrel. Therefore, where necessary to support wildlife; implement the Clean Air Act in based on our review of the best available control of OHV traffic; and specific addressing climate change caused by scientific and commercial information, habitat improvement projects and greenhouse gas emissions are still we conclude that the Mohave ground related activities and adequate evolving. However, our status review squirrel is not currently threatened by protection for species of fish, wildlife, did not reveal information that indicates inadequate regulatory mechanisms and plants considered threatened or that climate change is a significant throughout its range, nor do we endangered. threat to the Mohave ground squirrel anticipate inadequate regulatory Fort Irwin prepared an INRMP in throughout its range (see Factor A). 2006 that included conservation, mechanisms posing a threat in the protection, and management actions for Other Federal Agencies future. the Mohave ground squirrel. The Fort The USFS and NPS have management Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade Irwin INRMP recognized the expansion authority for less than 2 percent of the Factors Affecting the Continued would adversely affect the Mohave habitat of the Mohave ground squirrel. Existence of the Species ground squirrel (Fort Irwin 2006, pp. For the USFS, these lands are within 135–136) and proposed measures in Federal wilderness areas on the east Direct Mortality addition to the mitigation measures in side of the Sierra Nevada. For the NPS, As discussed in Factor A, several the Fort Irwin Expansion FEIS. Some of these lands are within Death Valley actions/stressors may result in mortality these measures included retiring a National Park. Under the Wilderness of the Mohave ground squirrel. Heavy grazing allotment near Harper Dry Lake Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131–1136), equipment used in the construction of in the central portion of the range of the motorized activities, including urban and rural development, roads, Mohave ground squirrel; continuing motorized travel, energy development, energy facilities, agricultural areas, and research on Mohave ground squirrel mining, and other mechanized mines may crush Mohave ground populations at Fort Irwin and the activities, are prohibited. Although squirrels above ground and in their Goldstone Complex, an area within Fort grazing may be permitted in Federal burrows. The intensive use of vehicles Irwin used by NASA and protected from wilderness areas, the USFS does not in OHV management areas and wheeled military activities; and surveying for the permit grazing in the Owens Peak and and tracked vehicles used off road in Mohave ground squirrel in the east Sacatar Trail wilderness areas, which military operations may have similar important population area (Fort Irwin are within the range of the Mohave impacts. Although we recognize that 2006, pp. 136–146). ground squirrel. mortality of Mohave ground squirrels NAWS is currently revising its The amount of USFS lands within the from these sources occurs, we found few INRMP. Its current INRMP states that its range of the Mohave ground squirrel is documented reports of Mohave ground objectives for the Mohave ground very small, about 4,400 ac (1,781 ha) or squirrels being run over by vehicles squirrel include ‘‘maintain[ing] viable 0.08 percent, and occurs at the west and (Threloff 2007, in litt.) or heavy populations’’ and ‘‘minimize[ing] northwest edge of the species’ range. A equipment and no reports of them being impacts and protect[ing] known and strip of about 44,026 ac (17,824 ha), killed in their burrows. The level of potential endangered and sensitive which is less than 1 percent of the range mortality is likely a function of a species habitats to the maximum extent of the Mohave ground squirrel, occurs number of complex variables including practicable’’ (NAWS 2000, pp. 126– on NPS land along the northeast edge of squirrel density, habitat quality, time of 127). the range of the species. year, and type and intensity of human The Air Force completed its INRMP activity. Mortality is probably highest in for EAFB in 2008. Based on this Summary of Factor D areas of preferred habitat where heavy document, the Air Force is continuing Several laws and regulations, equipment is used, habitat is cleared, its implementation of surveys for the including CEQA, CESA, FLPMA, Sikes and human activity is high (e.g., urban Mohave ground squirrel and Act, and NEPA, provide varying levels development, road construction), as the implementing specific management and aspects of protection of or beneficial entire area is graded and replaced with measures to minimize or eliminate measures for the Mohave ground man-made structures. Roads may be impacts to Mohave ground squirrel squirrel and its habitat at the local, another important source of direct habitat from ongoing military operations State, and Federal level. Many of these mortality, and depending on factors on the base (EAFB 2008a, pp. 73–76). regulatory mechanisms also encourage such as location, road width, and traffic Also, conservation measures for the habitat protection for the Mohave rates, roads could result in reduced federally threatened desert tortoise and ground squirrel and provide tools to Mohave ground squirrel abundance. its designated critical habitat included implement these habitat protections. However, Glista et al. (2008, p. 80) in the INRMP will benefit the Mohave Although no single law or regulation found that during a 17-month study in ground squirrel. provides overall protection of the Indiana, only 3 percent of the animals

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62250 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

killed on roads were mammals. Garland population may not be as able to survive management areas (e.g., Spangler Hills) and Bradley (1984, p. 52) found no environmental changes or stochastic are more likely to be major barriers than mortality within their study area during events; may experience changes in gene the smaller ones (e.g., Dove Springs). an 11-month study on the effects of a frequencies due to genetic drift, Regardless, there are relatively few highway on Mojave Desert rodent diminished genetic diversity, and/or intensively used OHV areas within the populations, including the round-tailed effects due to inbreeding (i.e., range of the Mohave ground squirrel, ground squirrel. Also, Rosa and inbreeding depression) (Lande 1995, p. and with the possible exception of Bissonette (2008, p. 565) found that in 786); and may eventually be extirpated. Spangler Hills, they do not limit a desert community in southern Utah, Animals from nearby populations are movement between the eight important roads (specifically I–15) did not appear unable to re-establish the lost population areas (maps 1 and 2). to affect small mammal abundance or population because the habitat is not Spangler Hills, the largest management diversity near or away from roads and accessible. The effects of fragmentation area, lies between two of the important concluded that the abundance and on a species such as the Mohave ground population areas and likely limits diversity of small mammals respond squirrel depend on a complex array of movement between them. However, more markedly to habitat quality and factors such as patch size, type of these two population areas, as well as complexity than to the presence of barrier, distance between populations, others, remain connected to the west roads. Thus, road mortality does not and condition of habitat between and south by BLM lands that are closed appear to affect the abundance of small patches. to cross-country OHV use, including a mammals, such as the Mohave ground Most urban and rural development in portion of the MGSCA, and to the east squirrel. the western Mojave Desert has occurred by a combination of BLM and NAWS In summary, although direct mortality in the southernmost portion of the range lands. Therefore, we conclude that OHV has likely occurred and will continue to of the Mohave ground squirrel. This use does not constitute a major barrier occur during construction, in high-use development has destroyed habitat, to Mohave ground squirrel movement. OHV areas, during military operations, leaving patches of various quality and Transportation infrastructure may and on highways, there is no evidence size of Mohave ground squirrel habitat cause or contribute to habitat that mortality is having an impact on interspersed among developed areas. In fragmentation when linear the Mohave ground squirrel or is a the southernmost portion of the range, developments (roads) or transportation significant threat to the species. habitat has been severely fragmented, corridors substantially reduce or Although road mortality has not been and we assume that any remaining prevent the movement of a species from studied for the Mohave ground squirrel, small patches of Mohave ground one location to another. Negative effects research on other species of small squirrel habitat in the southernmost of corridors include mortality of animals mammals has not found a relationship portion of the range that are surrounded along roadways (Rosen and Lowe 1994, between road mortality and abundance. by large areas of urban development no as cited in Lovich and Bainbridge 1998, Therefore, we conclude that direct longer support Mohave ground p. 331; Boarman and Sazaki 1996, as mortality is not currently a significant squirrels. However, none of the eight cited in Lovich and Bainbridge 1998, p. threat to the Mohave ground squirrel, important population areas is located in 331) and restriction of movements and nor do we anticipate it posing a threat the southernmost portion of the range, gene flow (Nicholson 1978, as cited in in the future. and all eight are at least in part Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, p. 313). interconnected by Federal land, where Habitat Fragmentation urban development is heavily restricted. Radio-collared Mohave ground As discussed in Factor A, urban and Also, urbanization outside the squirrels are known to have crossed rural development, OHV recreational southernmost portion of the range is four-lane, divided highways (Leitner use, transportation infrastructure, limited to only a few areas and is not pers. comm., as cited in Defenders of military operations, energy a major barrier. Wildlife and Stewart 2005, p. 22). development, and agriculture may cause Vehicular recreation, specifically in However, highways with high traffic or contribute to habitat fragmentation. OHV management and high-use areas, volume and multiple lanes (e.g., I–15 Habitat fragmentation is the separation may cause fragmentation. As mentioned and SR–14) (see Map 1) may reduce or splitting apart of previously in Factor A, impacts in OHV areas movements of Mohave ground squirrels contiguous, functional habitat include disturbance of soils and from one side to the other. Some components of a species. Habitat destruction of shrubs, both of which stretches of multi-lane highways (I–15 fragmentation can result from direct combine to reduce the number of native and portions of SR–14) that cross areas habitat loss that leaves the remaining spring annual plants, which in turn within the range of the Mohave ground habitat in noncontiguous patches, or reduces habitat suitability for the squirrel have, on average, over 36,000 from the alteration of habitat areas that Mohave ground squirrel. We presume vehicles pass over them daily, while render the altered patches unusable to a these areas are extensively degraded and other multi-lane highways (rural parts of species (i.e., functional habitat loss). provide little value to supporting SR–14) and the smaller, two-lane Alterations that can result in functional populations of Mohave ground squirrels highways within the species’ range have habitat loss include: disturbances that now, or in the future. However, some roughly 3,100 to 7,800 vehicles per day, change a habitat’s successional state or habitat remains within these areas as on average (Caltrans 2010c, pp. 33–34, remove one or more habitat functions, indicated by the occurrence of Mohave 36–37). We assume that the increased creation of physical barriers that ground squirrels in the Dove Springs level of vehicle traffic on the portions of preclude the use of otherwise suitable Open Area. The distance between the multi-lane highways, along with the areas, and activities that prevent squirrel populations, the distance greater number of physical hindrances animals from using suitable habitat between habitat patches that may that may result from multiple lanes, is patches due to behavioral avoidance. support squirrels, and the condition of more likely to serve as a barrier than the When a habitat patch becomes isolated, the area between patches are likely smaller, less-traveled two-lane the animal population is also isolated, primary influences on the ability of highways. In these cases, squirrels may and gene flow with other populations is squirrels to move through an OHV be limited to crossing under bridges and reduced or eliminated. A small, isolated management area. Therefore, the larger culverts.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62251

Depending on how roads are from accessing populations in the in only two areas within the range of the constructed, they may serve as physical Goldstone Complex (see Map 1), thus squirrel, and few new geothermal hindrances to the movement of Mohave isolating the Goldstone area (Defenders projects have been proposed. Thus, with ground squirrels. For example, a road of Wildlife and Stewart 2005, p. 21). only a few renewable energy proposals with a roadway divider (e.g., K-rail) may However, access for Mohave ground on DOD land and limited development contribute to making a roadway a squirrels between the Goldstone in the MGSCA and DWMAs, physically impassible barrier for Complex and other areas is available to connectivity will not be significantly Mohave ground squirrels. Although the west and north through NAWS. degraded. there are no studies on the impacts of Access from Coolgardie Mesa and On non-Federal land, which roads specific to the Mohave ground Superior Valley to the west and south is comprises about one-third of the range squirrel, studies on other small available through the Superior-Cronese of the Mohave ground squirrel, several mammals, including other species of DWMA and NAWS (see Map 2). solar and wind energy projects have squirrels in desert habitat, have found Although ground forces training will been proposed that would encompass the following: roads may have a neutral impact part of the Coolgardie Mesa- about 1.2 percent of the range of the or slightly positive effect on small Superior Valley important population squirrel. However, many of these mammals species; roads do not appear area, access to this area from the north, projects are on lands previously to affect small mammal abundance or west, and south would not be disrupted converted to agriculture or are along the diversity near or away from them; and by ground forces training. western edge of the Mohave ground the abundance and diversity of small Several renewable energy projects squirrel’s range on ridges and hilltops, mammals responds more markedly to have been constructed in the range of which is not preferred habitat. Based on habitat quality and complexity than to the Mohave ground squirrel; these the best scientific and commercial the presence of roads (Rosa and projects encompass about 2.2 percent of information available on current Bissonette 2007, p. 565). In addition, the squirrel’s range. Additional management designations, development bridges and culverts, especially those renewable energy projects have been limitations, and required mitigation, we with larger-sized openings, may allow proposed in the western Mojave Desert, conclude that fragmentation of Mohave Mohave ground squirrels to cross under and depending on their size and ground squirrel habitat is not likely to roads (Painter and Ingraldi 2007, p. 17). location, they could reduce the ability of occur from energy development. Although it is not known whether the the Mohave ground squirrel to move Agricultural development in the openings under such structures are used between populations. western Mojave Desert is concentrated regularly by the Mohave ground We know that future renewable in the western Antelope Valley, on the squirrel, it is likely that undercrossings energy projects on Federal lands, which north side of the San Gabriel Mountains, with natural substrates created by larger make up about two-thirds of the range and from the Mojave River Valley to the culverts and bridges are used to some of the Mohave ground squirrel, are Lucerne Valley. New agricultural extent. likely to be limited. Renewable energy development is limited by the Although the amount of contact projects proposed on DOD lands make availability and cost of water to produce needed to maintain population up less than 0.01 percent of the range of crops. We recognize that past connectivity of Mohave ground squirrels the Mohave ground squirrel. The BLM agricultural development may have is not known, Mills and Allendorf has received applications that, if all contributed to fragmentation of Mohave (1996, p. 1517) suggested that if 1 to 10 were built, would encompass an ground squirrel habitat (see Factor A, individuals per generation successfully additional 2.5 percent of the range of the ‘‘Agriculture’’) and that agriculture in cross, that level of movement is likely Mohave ground squirrel. However, this combination with other activities sufficient to maintain the connection is an overestimate because many of fragmented the habitat of the Mohave between populations, provided the these proposals overlap and many ground squirrel in the Mojave River and overall population is of sufficient size. would be constructed in areas that are Lucerne Valleys. However, we do not Thus, a potential barrier would have to not suitable habitat for squirrels. Also, believe that agriculture constitutes an almost entirely eliminate Mohave energy development within the DWMAs absolute barrier to squirrel movement ground squirrel movement throughout or the MGSCA would be extremely because habitat requirements for its length and at all times for it to be a limited because of the 1 percent cap on dispersing or moving through an area complete barrier. In addition, Bell et al. development and the 5:1 mitigation are likely very different than for those (2006, pp. 18, 39, and 40) found low ratio. The mitigation in these areas and needed for long-term occupancy. genetic diversity throughout the range of the 1:1 mitigation the BLM requires Mohave ground squirrels are known to the species, suggesting that gene flow outside of these areas means that, forage along the edges of alfalfa fields occurs throughout the range and roads although Mohave ground squirrel (Hoyt 1972, p. 10) and are therefore are not complete barriers to Mohave habitat may be lost, habitat would be likely able to disperse through such ground squirrel movement. acquired to add to the large blocks of fields. Military operations, such as intense habitat for the squirrel in the DWMAs The BLM and DOD have taken actions ground forces training activities on the and MGSCA or enhanced to increase the to reduce the impact of habitat NTC portion of Fort Irwin, may habitat value of the DWMAs and fragmentation on Mohave ground contribute to fragmentation of Mohave MGSCA. In addition, solar projects on squirrels on Federal lands. The BLM ground squirrel habitat. The recent BLM land may be more likely to occur recently designated the MGSCA as a expansion at Fort Irwin will bring the in one of the four proposed SEZs, which WHMA, two DWMAs as ACECs, and impacts of ground forces training are all outside the range of the squirrel. expanded the size of the DTNA, all of activities into part of the Coolgardie Most of the current and proposed wind which are within the range of the Mesa-Superior Valley important energy projects are located along the Mohave ground squirrel (see Map 2). population area identified by Leitner western edge of the range of the Mohave The DOD bases have ‘‘off-limits’’ areas (2008, p. 1) (see Factor A, ‘‘Military ground squirrel, and many will be in Mohave ground squirrel habitat, Operations’’). Ground forces training in situated on ridges and hilltops, which which reduce or eliminate ground the expansion area may restrict Mohave are not the preferred habitat of the disturbance from military activities. ground squirrel populations to the south squirrel. Geothermal energy is available Under the Sikes Act, the DOD bases are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62252 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

obligated to develop cooperative land buffers will help connect the throughout the rest of the range of the management plans that reflect the Mohave ground squirrel habitat on the Mohave ground squirrel, which will mutual agreement of the CDFG military installations with the DWMAs largely remain undeveloped. These ‘‘concerning conservation, protection, and MGSCA and increase the area being lands support key Mohave ground and management of fish and wildlife managed, in part, for the Mohave squirrel population areas, including the resources,’’ which includes the Mohave ground squirrel. This activity is another eight important population areas, and ground squirrel (see Factor D). The means of ensuring connectivity among provide connectivity throughout much locations of these designated and ‘‘off- the northern, central, and southern of the range of the Mohave ground limits’’ areas form a contiguous area portions of the range of the Mohave squirrel, both among these important from the northern portion of the range ground squirrel and reducing the population areas and from the northern of the Mohave ground squirrel to the likelihood of fragmentation in the portion through the central and southern portion. The MGSCA is future. southern portions of the squirrel’s range. contiguous with the NAWS and the In summary, severe fragmentation as This connectivity helps ensure Fremont-Kramer DWMA, which a result of urban and rural development exchange of genetic material among the connects with the DTNA, EAFB, the has occurred in the southernmost populations of Mohave ground squirrels Superior-Cronese DWMA, and the portion of the Mohave ground squirrel’s and prevents the deleterious effects of Goldstone Complex (BLM et al. 2005, range, and movement of the species in small population dynamics such as Map 2–1) (see Map 2). Therefore, at a that area is greatly diminished or has inbreeding depression. Renewable landscape scale, the major Federal land been eliminated. However, urban and energy projects are proposed for BLM management agencies have identified rural development in the rest of the land, but these will likely be very large, contiguous blocks of habitat from range has occurred in only a few areas limited in the MGSCA and DWMAs in the northern to the southern portion of and has been more limited in extent. which development of all types is the range with management Other activities that may result in limited to 1 percent of the areas. Much prescriptions to help conserve the habitat fragmentation (e.g., OHV of the range of the Mohave ground Mohave ground squirrel (see Map 2 and recreational use, transportation squirrel has not been developed, is not Table 1). infrastructure, military operations, and proposed for development at this time, On private lands, we have no energy development) affect smaller or cannot be developed because of information about any landscape-scale areas within the range of the Mohave restrictions imposed by the BLM and plan that considers the Mohave ground ground squirrel and do not constitute DOD. squirrel (e.g., NCCP Plan). Absent such major barriers to movement, especially Therefore, based on our review of the a plan, private lands within the range of between the eight important population best available scientific and commercial the Mohave ground squirrel will likely areas, all of which are at least in part information, we conclude that the continue to be developed on a case-by- interconnected by Federal land where Mohave ground squirrel is not currently case basis in the future. Most of the development that would be a barrier to threatened by other natural or manmade development will likely occur near movement is not likely to occur. The factors throughout its range, nor do we existing urban areas in the southernmost ability of squirrels to move between anticipate other natural or manmade portion of the range of the Mohave populations is further indicated by factors posing a threat in the future. ground squirrel, an area which has recent genetic research that found low Finding already been heavily fragmented. genetic diversity throughout the range of However, none of the eight important the species, which could suggest that As required by the Act, we considered population areas are located in the gene flow occurs throughout the range the five factors in assessing whether the southernmost portion of the range, and (Bell et al. 2006, pp. 18, 39, 40). We Mohave ground squirrel is threatened or all eight are at least in part therefore conclude that habitat endangered throughout all or a interconnected by Federal land, where fragmentation is currently not a threat to significant portion of its range. We have development is limited. Urbanization the Mohave ground squirrel, nor do we assessed the best scientific and outside the southernmost portion of the anticipate it posing a threat in the commercial information available range is limited to only a few areas and future. regarding threats faced by the Mohave is not a major barrier. ground squirrel. We have reviewed the Future development on BLM lands is Summary of Factor E petition, scientific literature, directed by the WEMO Plan, which Although direct mortality has likely information available in our files, and limits development within the MGSCA occurred and will continue to occur all information submitted to us and the DWMAs to 1 percent. The three during construction, in high-use OHV following our 90-day petition finding DOD bases have not identified plans to areas, during military operations, and (75 FR 22063, April 27, 2010). We also increase their boundaries for future on highways, there is no evidence that consulted with recognized Mohave military missions. Rather, the DOD mortality is having an impact on the ground squirrel experts, Federal and recently identified a growing conflict Mohave ground squirrel or is a State land managers, and local between implementing their military significant threat to the species. governments to assess potential threats missions and incompatible residential/ Although road mortality has not been to the habitat and range of the species commercial development adjacent to studied for the Mohave ground squirrel, relative to current and planned land their boundaries. These areas are within research on other species of small uses and occurrences of the species. the range of the Mohave ground squirrel mammals has not found a relationship We analyzed the potential threats to and most include native desert plant between road mortality and abundance. the Mohave ground squirrel including: communities used by Mohave ground Severe habitat fragmentation as a Habitat loss and habitat degradation squirrels. Because much of the land on result of urban and rural development from urban and rural development, the DOD bases is not developed and not has occurred in the southernmost OHV recreational use, transportation expected to be developed in the future, portion of the range of the Mohave infrastructure, military operations, and the military installations’ INRMPs ground squirrel and will likely continue energy development, livestock grazing, have provisions to manage for Mohave to occur in that area. However, large, agriculture, mining, and climate change; ground squirrel habitat, establishing contiguous tracts of Federal land occur predation by native species and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62253

domestic dogs and cats; the inadequacy leaves most of the area and habitat on the ability of permittees to voluntarily of regulatory mechanisms to control these two large bases ‘‘off limits’’ to relinquish cattle and sheep allotments. land use and development on private, ground forces operations. The Goldstone Over time, these changes are likely to State, and Federal lands; direct Complex is also off limits to such provide increased foraging mortality; and habitat fragmentation. We operations. There is limited opportunities for the Mohave ground found that the Mohave ground squirrel development at the small cantonment squirrel and reduce the overall amount continues to be present throughout a area at each military base, OHV use is of time that livestock spend within large portion of its historical and current restricted to designated areas that total these areas, thus reducing impacts to range. about 0.2 percent of the range of the soils, vegetation, and dietary overlap. Land ownership within the range of Mohave ground squirrel, and two Potential threats associated with the Mohave ground squirrel is about military bases have announced plans to climate change are a concern, but we do one-third private land, one-third DOD construct renewable energy projects that not have evidence to conclude that the land, and one-third BLM land. While could impact about 0.3 percent of the threats rise to the level of potentially much of the private land in the range of the Mohave ground squirrel. threatening the Mohave ground squirrel southernmost portion of the range of the Mining is prohibited on military land. within the foreseeable future. Mohave ground squirrel has been Recently, the BLM has undertaken Overall, we estimate that in the next developed or used for agriculture, little several conservation measures specific 20–30 years about one-third of the range of the squirrel’s range has been to the Mohave ground squirrel and its of the Mohave ground squirrel could developed in the central and northern habitat or measures that benefit the potentially be lost. However, because of portions of its range where most is species on its lands. The BLM a general lack of information on the under Federal jurisdiction and is not designated the Fremont-Kramer and species and uncertainty over future subject to development. Superior-Cronese DWMAs as ACECs, development we based this estimate on Sources of threats on non-Federal increased the size of the DTNA and a series of worst-case assumptions (e.g., lands include urban and rural Rand ACEC, and established the we double-counted impacts, assumed development, transportation MGSCA. These designations place impacts existed or were worse than the infrastructure, renewable energy, additional restrictions on land use and available information indicated, agriculture, and mining. We estimate require the BLM to manage these lands assumed all habitat within a project that current and future development in part for Mohave ground squirrel boundary would be lost), and we expect will comprise about 9–10 percent of the habitat. One such restriction is a 1 that the actual loss during this range of the Mohave ground squirrel, percent cap on total new development timeframe will be much less. In with most occurring in the incorporated within the MGSCA and DWMAs under addition, we did not include the areas. Although there is no information the WEMO Plan with the requirement mitigation for the Mohave ground specific to the Mohave ground squirrel, for 5:1 mitigation. On BLM land, cross- squirrel that would be implemented for roads are known in some cases to affect country OHV use is limited to a few project implementation. Even if the species and their habitat beyond the loss specific areas, and the number of open worst case occurs, we expect that most of habitat from construction of the road roads and trails within the range of the of the remaining area will remain itself. As a worst case, we calculated a Mohave ground squirrel has been relatively undisturbed and in the same road-effect zone of about 0.7 percent of reduced. The BLM is restoring habitat in condition as it is today. More than 80 the range for the construction of a new areas with closed routes, signing open percent of the remaining land is Federal, major highway and the expansion of and closed routes, increasing much of which (e.g., EAFB, NAWS, two existing major highways. However, enforcement of route designations, and Goldstone Complex, DWMAs, and research indicates that the effects of implementing a monitoring plan to MGSCA) is managed, at least in part, for roads on small mammals in the desert determine compliance with route the Mohave ground squirrel and its are neutral to slightly positive; thus, closures and to identify whether any habitat. Of particular importance to the there may be no negative road-effect new illegal routes are being created. status of the Mohave ground squirrel, zone for the Mohave ground squirrel. Future energy development is restricted much of the remaining lands are Several renewable energy projects have or limited in its location and areal contiguous and provide connectivity been proposed on private land, which extent in much of the range of the from the northern end of the range to would encompass about 1.2 percent of Mohave ground squirrel. The BLM’s 1 well south of SR–58 in the southern the Mohave ground squirrel’s range, but percent cap on total new development portion of the range. More importantly, many of these are proposed for land that within the MGSCA and DWMAs, these lands contain most or all the has already been converted to including energy projects, limits the habitat within the eight important agriculture. Although we estimate that impacts of proposed or future projects population areas and include habitat about 1 percent of the range of the in much of the range of the Mohave that provides for connectivity among the Mohave ground squirrel has been ground squirrel. eight areas. Therefore, we conclude that converted to agriculture, because of Livestock grazing on BLM land has the present or threatened destruction, increasing costs for water and economic been reduced with the BLM’s recent modification, or curtailment of the incentives to use this land for other implementation of public land health habitat or range of the Mohave ground purposes, agricultural lands are being standards and guidelines for grazing. squirrel is not a significant threat to this converted to urban or rural The BLM has implemented a 33 percent species now or in the foreseeable future. development. There are few large mines reduction in the area authorized for We found no information that over- on private land in the range of the grazing in the range of the Mohave collection or overutilization for Mohave ground squirrel. ground squirrel, eliminated ephemeral commercial, recreational, scientific, or On military lands, the impacts to the grazing for cattle in the DWMAs, educational purposes is a threat or will Mohave ground squirrel are mainly from eliminated sheep grazing in most of the become a threat to the species in the the training of ground forces at the NTC DWMAs, excluded cattle grazing in the future. Therefore, we conclude that along the eastern portion of the species’ spring in DWMAs in years when annual overutilization for commercial, range. EAFB and NAWS conduct plant productivity is low, excluded recreational, scientific, or educational aircraft and weapons testing, which cattle grazing on NAWS, and authorized purposes does not threaten the Mohave

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62254 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

ground squirrel now or in the squirrel population areas, including the (2) The significance of the population foreseeable future. eight important population areas, and segment to the species to which it We also found no evidence suggesting provide connectivity throughout much belongs; and that disease is affecting the Mohave of the range of the Mohave ground (3) The population segment’s ground squirrel, and therefore, conclude squirrel both among these important conservation status in relation to the that disease does not threaten the population areas and from the northern Act’s standards for listing, delisting, or Mohave ground squirrel. Similarly, we portion through the central and reclassification (i.e., is the population found no information suggesting that southern portions of the squirrel’s range. segment endangered or threatened). predation by domestic dogs or cats is This connectivity helps ensure Under the DPS Policy, we must first affecting the Mohave ground squirrel. exchange of genetic material among the determine whether the population Information on the rate of predation by populations of Mohave ground squirrels qualifies as a DPS; this requires a a native predator (coyote) was inferred and prevents the deleterious effects of finding that the population is both: (1) in one study, but it did not show this small population dynamics such as Discrete in relation to the remainder of rate to be a threat to the Mohave ground inbreeding depression. Renewable the species to which it belongs; and (2) squirrel. Although the number of energy projects are proposed for BLM biologically and ecologically significant common ravens in the western Mojave land, but these will likely be very to the species to which it belongs. If the Desert has increased substantially in the limited in the MGSCA and DWMAs in population meets the first two criteria past few decades, we found no which development of all types is under the DPS policy, we then proceed information suggesting that predation by limited to 1 percent of the areas. Much to the third element in the process, the common raven on the Mohave of the range of the Mohave ground which is to evaluate the population ground squirrel has increased or is squirrel has not been developed, is not segment’s conservation status in relation adversely affecting the squirrel. proposed for development at this time, to the Act’s standards for listing as an Therefore, we conclude that disease or or cannot be developed because of endangered or threatened species. The predation are not significant threats to restrictions imposed by the BLM and DPS evaluation in this finding concerns the Mohave ground squirrel now or in the Mohave ground squirrel that we the foreseeable future. DOD. We conclude that other natural or manmade factors are not significant were petitioned to list as threatened or The Mohave ground squirrel is listed endangered. as threatened by the State of California threats to the Mohave ground squirrel under the CESA. There are other now or in the foreseeable future. Discreteness regulatory mechanisms in place, such as Our review of the best available Under the DPS Policy, a population CEQA, FLPMA, and Sikes Act that, scientific and commercial information segment of a vertebrate taxon may be when implemented, provide protections pertaining to the five factors, does not considered discrete if it satisfies either from threats to the Mohave ground support a conclusion that there are one of the following conditions: squirrel on Federal, State, and private independent or cumulative threats of (1) It is markedly separated from other land. On Federal lands, agencies such as sufficient imminence, intensity, or populations of the same taxon as a the BLM and DOD have implemented magnitude to indicate that the Mohave consequence of physical, physiological, actions under these laws that provide ground squirrel is in danger of ecological, or behavioral factors. for the conservation of the Mohave extinction (endangered), or likely to Quantitative measures of genetic or ground squirrel on much of the lands become endangered within the morphological discontinuity may that they manage. We conclude the foreseeable future (threatened), provide evidence of this separation. inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms is throughout its range. Therefore, listing (2) It is delimited by international not a significant threat to the Mohave the Mohave ground squirrel as governmental boundaries within which ground squirrel now or in the endangered or threatened is not differences in control of exploitation, foreseeable future. warranted at this time. management of habitat, conservation We considered direct mortality as a status, or regulatory mechanisms exist potential threat, and although direct Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment that are significant in light of section mortality has likely occurred and will 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. continue to occur during construction, After assessing whether the species is in high-use OHV areas, during military endangered or threatened throughout its Markedly Separated From Other operations, and on roads, there is no range, we next consider whether any Populations of the Taxon evidence that mortality is having an distinct vertebrate populations segment As described previously (see Species impact on the Mohave ground squirrel (DPS) exists and meets the definition of Information above), the Mohave ground or is a significant threat to the species. endangered or is likely to become squirrel extends throughout the range Although road mortality has not been endangered in the foreseeable future except where the habitat has been lost studied for the Mohave ground squirrel, (threatened). Under the Service’s Policy due to human activities, primarily along research on other species of small Regarding the Recognition of Distinct the southern and eastern portion of its mammals has not found a relationship Vertebrate Population Segments Under range. We found no information that between road mortality and abundance. the Endangered Species Act (61 FR any Mohave ground squirrel population Severe habitat fragmentation as a 4722; February 7, 1996), three elements is markedly separated from other result of urban and rural development are considered in the decision populations as a consequence of has occurred in the southernmost concerning the establishment and physical, physiological, ecological, or portion of the range of the Mohave classification of a possible DPS. These behavioral factors. ground squirrel and will likely continue are applied similarly for additions to or There are no international to occur in that area. However, large, removal from the Federal List of governmental boundaries associated contiguous tracts of Federal land occur Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. with this species that are significant. throughout the rest of the range of the These elements include: The Mohave ground squirrel is found Mohave ground squirrel, which will (1) The discreteness of a population in wholly within the United States. largely remain undeveloped. These relation to the remainder of the species Because this element is not relevant in lands support many Mohave ground to which it belongs; this case for a finding of discreteness, it

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62255

was not considered in reaching the ground squirrel have been lost or inconsistent with the Act’s definition of determination. degraded from human activity (see ‘‘species.’’ The courts concluded that We did not find any information that Factor A), the boundary of the current once a determination is made that a would indicate any DPS exists. range is larger than reported by Howell species (i.e., species, subspecies, or Therefore, we determine, based on a in 1938, and may even be larger than DPS) meets the definition of review of the best available information, now defined by the Service, as there ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened that there are no portions of the species’ have been recent sightings beyond the species,’’ it must be placed on the list range that meet the discreteness area defined by the Service as the range in its entirety and the Act’s protections criterion of the Service’s DPS policy. of the Mohave ground squirrel (see applied consistently to all members of The DPS policy is clear that significance ‘‘Range and Distribution’’ section).’’ that species (subject to modification of is analyzed only when a population Therefore, there is no lost historical protections through special rules under segment has been identified as discrete. range of the Mohave ground squirrel sections 4(d) and 10(j) of the Act). Because both discreteness and that could constitute a significant Consistent with that interpretation, significance are required to satisfy the portion of the range of the species. and for the purposes of this finding, we DPS policy, we have determined that interpret the phrase ‘‘significant portion there are no populations of the Mohave Current Range of its range’’ in the Act’s definitions of ground squirrel that qualify as a DPS The Act defines ‘‘endangered species’’ ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened under our policy. As a result, no further as any species which is ‘‘in danger of species’’ to provide an independent analysis under the DPS policy is extinction throughout all or a significant basis for listing: a species may be necessary. portion of its range,’’ and ‘‘threatened endangered or threatened throughout all species’’ as any species which is ‘‘likely of its range; or a species may be Significant Portion of the Range to become an endangered species within endangered or threatened in only a Analysis the foreseeable future throughout all or significant portion of its range. If a Having determined that the Mohave a significant portion of its range.’’ The species is in danger of extinction ground squirrel is not in danger of definition of species is also relevant to throughout an SPR, it, the species, is an extinction or likely to become this discussion. The Act defines ‘‘endangered species.’’ The same endangered within the foreseeable ‘‘species’’ as follows: ‘‘The term analysis applies to ‘‘threatened species.’’ future throughout all of its range, we ‘species’ includes any subspecies of fish Based on this interpretation and must next consider whether there are or wildlife or plants, and any distinct supported by existing case law, the any significant portions of the range population segment [DPS] of any consequence of finding that a species is where the Mohave ground squirrel is in species of vertebrate fish or wildlife endangered or threatened in only a danger of extinction or is likely to which interbreeds when mature.’’ The significant portion of its range is that the become endangered in the foreseeable phrase ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ entire species shall be listed as future. (SPR) is not defined by the statute, and endangered or threatened, respectively, Decisions by the Ninth Circuit Court we have never addressed in our and the Act’s protections shall be of Appeals in Defenders of Wildlife v. regulations: (1) The consequences of a applied across the species’ entire range. Norton, 258 F.3d 1136 (2001) and determination that a species is either We conclude, for the purposes of this Tucson Herpetological Society v. endangered or likely to become so finding, that interpreting the SPR phrase Salazar, 566 F.3d 870 (2009) found that throughout a significant portion of its as providing an independent basis for the Act requires the Service, in range, but not throughout all of its listing is the best interpretation of the determining whether a species is range; or (2) what qualifies a portion of Act because it is consistent with the endangered or threatened throughout a a range as ‘‘significant.’’ purposes and the plain meaning of the significant portion of its range, to Two recent district court decisions key definitions of the Act; it does not consider whether lost historical range of have addressed whether the SPR conflict with established past agency a species (as opposed to its current language allows the Service to list or practice (i.e., prior to the 2007 range) constitutes a significant portion protect less than all members of a Solicitor’s Opinion), as no consistent, of the range of that species. While this defined ‘‘species’’: Defenders of Wildlife long-term agency practice has been is not our interpretation of the statute, v. Salazar, 729 F. Supp. 2d 1207 (D. established; and it is consistent with the we first address the lost historical range Mont. 2010), concerning the Service’s judicial opinions that have most closely before addressing the current range. delisting of the Northern Rocky examined this issue. Having concluded Mountain gray wolf (74 FR 15123, Apr. that the phrase ‘‘significant portion of Historical Range 12, 2009); and WildEarth Guardians v. its range’’ provides an independent Available information provides no Salazar, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105253 basis for listing and protecting the entire evidence of a significant loss of the (D. Ariz. Sept. 30, 2010), concerning the species, we next turn to the meaning of historical range of the Mohave ground Service’s 2008 finding on a petition to ‘‘significant’’ to determine the threshold squirrel. Although the petition to list the list the Gunnison’s prairie dog (73 FR for when such an independent basis for Mohave ground squirrel indicated that 6660, Feb. 5, 2008). The Service had listing exists. the western Antelope Valley was no asserted in both of these determinations Although there are potentially many longer part of the species’ current range, that it had authority, in effect, to protect ways to determine whether a portion of suitable habitat still remains in much of only some members of a ‘‘species,’’ as a species’ range is ‘‘significant,’’ we the western Antelope Valley and may be defined by the Act (i.e., species, conclude, for the purposes of this connected to habitat currently occupied subspecies, or DPS), under the Act. Both finding, that the significance of the by the Mohave ground squirrel. This courts ruled that the determinations portion of the range should be information is supported by recent were arbitrary and capricious on the determined based on its biological visual observations of Mohave ground grounds that this approach violated the contribution to the conservation of the squirrels in the western Antelope Valley plain and unambiguous language of the species. For this reason, we describe the (see ‘‘Range and Distribution’’ section). Act. The courts concluded that reading threshold for ‘‘significant’’ in terms of Additionally, although areas of natural the SPR language to allow protecting an increase in the risk of extinction for habitat within the range of the Mohave only a portion of a species’ range is the species. We conclude that a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62256 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

biologically based definition of We recognize that this definition of portion that rises to that level of ‘‘significant’’ best conforms to the ‘‘significant’’ (a portion of the range of biological significance, then we should purposes of the Act, is consistent with a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its conclude that the species is in fact judicial interpretations, and best contribution to the viability of the imperiled throughout all of its range, ensures species’ conservation. Thus, for species is so important that without that and that we would not need to rely on the purposes of this finding, and as portion, the species would be in danger the SPR language for such a listing.) explained further below, a portion of the of extinction) establishes a threshold Rather, under this interpretation we ask range of a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its that is relatively high. On the one hand, whether the species would be contribution to the viability of the given that the consequences of finding endangered everywhere without that species is so important that without that a species to be endangered or threatened portion, i.e., if that portion were portion, the species would be in danger in an SPR would be listing the species completely extirpated. In other words, of extinction. throughout its entire range, it is the portion of the range need not be so We evaluate biological significance important to use a threshold for important that even the species being in based on the principles of conservation ‘‘significant’’ that is robust. It would not danger of extinction in that portion biology using the concepts of resiliency, be meaningful or appropriate to would be sufficient to cause the species redundancy, and representation. establish a very low threshold whereby in the remainder of the range to be Resiliency describes the characteristics a portion of the range can be considered endangered; rather, the complete of a species and its habitat that allow it ‘‘significant’’ even if only a negligible extirpation (in a hypothetical future) of to recover from periodic disturbance. increase in extinction risk would result the species in that portion would be Redundancy (having multiple from its loss. Because nearly any portion required to cause the species in the populations distributed across the of a species’ range can be said to remainder of the range to be landscape) may be needed to provide a contribute some increment to a species’ endangered. margin of safety for the species to viability, use of such a low threshold The range of a species can withstand catastrophic events. would require us to impose restrictions theoretically be divided into portions in Representation (the range of variation and expend conservation resources an infinite number of ways. However, found in a species) ensures that the disproportionately to conservation there is no purpose to analyzing species’ adaptive capabilities are benefit: listing would be rangewide, portions of the range that have no conserved. Resiliency, redundancy, and even if only a portion of the range of reasonable potential to be significant or representation are not independent of minor conservation importance to the to analyzing portions of the range in each other, and some characteristic of a species is imperiled. On the other hand, which there is no reasonable potential species or area may contribute to all it would be inappropriate to establish a for the species to be endangered or three. For example, distribution across a threshold for ‘‘significant’’ that is too threatened. To identify only those wide variety of habitat types is an high. This would be the case if the portions that warrant further indicator of representation, but it may standard were, for example, that a consideration, we determine whether also indicate a broad geographic portion of the range can be considered there is substantial information distribution contributing to redundancy ‘‘significant’’ only if threats in that indicating that: (1) The portions may be (decreasing the chance that any one portion result in the entire species’ ‘‘significant,’’ and (2) the species may be event affects the entire species), and the being currently endangered or in danger of extinction there or likely to become so within the foreseeable future. likelihood that some habitat types are threatened. Such a high bar would not less susceptible to certain threats, Depending on the biology of the species, give the SPR phrase independent contributing to resiliency (the ability of its range, and the threats it faces, it meaning, as the Ninth Circuit held in the species to recover from disturbance). might be more efficient for us to address Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 258 None of these concepts is intended to be the significance question first or the F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2001). mutually exclusive, and a portion of a status question first. Thus, if we species’ range may be determined to be The definition of ‘‘significant’’ used in determine that a portion of the range is ‘‘significant’’ due to its contributions this finding carefully balances these not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to under any one or more of these concerns. By setting a relatively high determine whether the species is concepts. threshold, we minimize the degree to endangered or threatened there; if we For the purposes of this finding, we which restrictions will be imposed or determine that the species is not determine if a portion’s biological resources expended that do not endangered or threatened in a portion of contribution is so important that the contribute substantially to species its range, we do not need to determine portion qualifies as ‘‘significant’’ by conservation. But we have not set the if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ In asking whether without that portion, the threshold so high that the phrase ‘‘in a practice, a key part of the determination resiliency, redundancy, or significant portion of its range’’ loses that a species is in danger of extinction representation of the species would be independent meaning. Specifically, we in a significant portion of its range is so impaired that the species would have have not set the threshold as high as it whether the threats are geographically an increased vulnerability to threats to was under the interpretation presented concentrated in some way. If the threats the point that the overall species would by the Service in the Defenders to the species are essentially uniform be in danger of extinction (i.e., would be litigation. Under that interpretation, the throughout its range, no portion is likely ‘‘endangered’’). Conversely, we would portion of the range would have to be to warrant further consideration. not consider the portion of the range at so important that current imperilment Moreover, if any concentration of issue to be ‘‘significant’’ if there is there would mean that the species threats to the species occurs only in sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and would be currently imperiled portions of the species’ range that representation elsewhere in the species’ everywhere. Under the definition of clearly would not meet the biologically range that the species would not be in ‘‘significant’’ used in this finding, the based definition of ‘‘significant,’’ such danger of extinction throughout its portion of the range need not rise to portions will not warrant further range if the population in that portion such an exceptionally high level of consideration. of the range in question became biological significance. (We recognize Through our range-wide analysis, we extirpated (extinct locally). that if the species is imperiled in a found that there is not one individual

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 62257

impact that occurs throughout the range agriculture including the Antelope species in such a way as to capture the of the species, that is, the threats are not Valley and Mojave River Basin environmental variability found within uniform throughout the species’ range, (Gustafson 1993, p. 24). The known the range of the species. A portion of the and that some areas receive a greater losses in urban and rural development range of a species may make an essential number of impacts, although the and agriculture are about 6.4 percent of contribution to the resiliency of the magnitude may vary. After reviewing the range of the Mohave ground species if the area is relatively large and the potential threats throughout the squirrel, but the actual losses would be contains particularly high-quality range of the Mohave ground squirrel, we larger when including the habitat, or if its location or determine that there may be two unincorporated areas of development. characteristics make it less susceptible portions of the squirrel’s range that This urban and rural development and to certain threats than other portions of could be considered to have agriculture are mostly located along the the range. When evaluating whether or concentrated threats for the species southern edge of the range of the how a portion of the range contributes there: one area is in the southern Mohave ground squirrel (Map 2). Their to resiliency of the species, we evaluate portion of the range and the other is the locations would not inhibit the the historical value of the portion and central portion of the range where Fort movement of the Mohave ground how frequently the portion is used by Irwin is located. Impacts in the southern squirrel among the important the species, if possible. In addition, the portion of the species’ range include population areas. portion may contribute to resiliency for urban and rural development, Central Portion of the Range: The other reasons—for instance, it may recreation, transportation network, second area where impacts are contain an important concentration of military operations, energy concentrated is the Fort Irwin NTC, certain types of habitat that are development, livestock grazing, including the expansion area. The area necessary for the species to carry out its agriculture, and mining. In the central is about 435,978 ac (176,435 ha) life-history functions, such as breeding, portion, the impacts include urban and including the expansion area, or about feeding, migration, dispersal, or rural development, OHV recreational 8.2 percent of the range of the Mohave wintering. use, military operations, energy ground squirrel. However, not all of this Resiliency, as a measure of a portion development, livestock grazing, and area is used for ground forces training of the range’s contribution to the mining. Below, we outline the elevated so the area of impact is less. One of the viability of the species, may apply if a threats found in these portions. We then Mohave ground squirrel important portion occurs in an environment that is assess whether these portions of the population areas, the Coolgardie Mesa- meaningfully different from the rest; species’ range may meet the biologically Superior Valley core area, is located on that is, representing differences to based definition of ‘‘significant,’’ that is, lands managed by the BLM and Fort capture the environmental variability whether the contributions of these Irwin (expansion area and Goldstone within the range of the species. We portions of the Mohave ground Complex). Although part of this found that there was a large, contiguous squirrel’s range to the viability of the important population area will be area with management guidance for the species is so important that without subject to ground forces training, part is Mohave ground squirrel (e.g. the those portions, the species would be in an off-limits area to these impacts MGSCA, NAWS, Fremont-Kramer danger of extinction. (Charis 2005, chapter 4, p. 14), part is DWMA and DTNA, Superior-Cronese located on lands managed by the BLM DWMA, Goldstone Complex, and EAFB) Southern Portion of the Range: The that include an ACEC for the federally (see Map 2). This area occurs from the impacts of urban and rural development endangered Lane Mountain milk-vetch northern portion through the southern and agriculture are concentrated in the (Astragalus jaegerianus), and the desert portion of the species’ range, and southern portion of the range of the tortoise (BLM et al. 2005, chapter 2, pp. represents a variety of latitudes, Mohave ground squirrel. This area is 15, 214–215), and part is in the elevations, rainfall, temperatures, soils, south of the Fremont-Kramer DWMA, Goldstone Complex which is off-limits and vegetation. Based on a review of the south of EAFB, and south of SR–138 to military training. The Army has best available scientific and commercial (see Maps 1 and 2). This area is the designated areas within the expansion information, we find no indication that location of much of the urban and rural area that combined total 6,704 ac (2,713 any geographic area is different from the development and agriculture in the ha) as off-limits ground forces training rest of the range of the Mohave ground western Mojave Desert. Much of the (Charis 2005, chapter 4, pp. 11, 21, 22). squirrel regarding environmental western portion of the Antelope Valley For this analysis, we will look at the variability, or that one portion of the south of SR–138, the area south of significance question first (i.e., whether Mohave ground squirrel’s range exhibits Littlerock and Pearblossom, and the the concentration of these threats ecological or environmental Mojave River Valley have been applies to portions of the range that are characteristics that differ from another developed for intensive agriculture so important to the viability of the portion. Therefore, we conclude that the (USGS 2000. p. 1). In addition, most of species that without those portions, the Southern and the Central portions of the the human population in the western species would be in danger of range of the Mohave ground squirrel, Mojave Desert is located in this area. As extinction). To do so, we conduct an individually and in combination, do not mentioned in the ‘‘Urban and Rural evaluation of resiliency, redundancy, provide an essential contribution to the Development’’ section, about 300,000 ac and representation. The terms resiliency of the species. (121,406 ha) south of SR–58, which is ‘‘resiliency,’’ ‘‘redundancy,’’ and Redundancy of populations may be about 5.6 percent of the range of the ‘‘representation’’ are intended to be needed to provide a margin of safety for Mohave ground squirrel, is incorporated indicators of the conservation value of the species to withstand catastrophic (BLM 2005a, p. 3–2) and subject to portions of the range. events. This does not mean that any future development. Additional acreage Resiliency of a species allows the portion that provides redundancy is has been affected by rural development species to recover from periodic necessarily a significant portion of the along the southern portion of the range disturbance. A species will likely be range of a species. The idea is to of the Mohave ground squirrel, but data more resilient if large populations exist conserve enough areas of the range such on this area are unavailable. More than in high-quality habitat that is that random perturbations in the system 39,000 ac (15,700 ha) has been lost to distributed throughout the range of the act on only a few populations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 62258 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Therefore, each area must be examined environmental changes. A peripheral that those portions of the Mohave based on whether that area provides an population may provide an essential ground squirrel’s range that may have increment of redundancy that is contribution to representation if there is concentrated threats (the Southern and important to the conservation of the evidence that it provides genetic the Central portions of the range) do not species. diversity due to its location on the contribute to the resiliency, Redundancy is a measure to ensure margin of the species’ habitat redundancy, and representation of the that a species is able to withstand requirements. Mohave ground squirrel such that catastrophic events. If sufficiently large Representation includes the genetic without these portions, the species enough areas of the species are diversity of the species. We found that, would be in danger of extinction. conserved, then random events would using mitochondrial DNA (a maternally Accordingly, we find that the Mohave impact only a small portion of the inherited genetic marker), estimates of ground squirrel is not endangered or species. Researchers have identified gene flow among the past few threatened in a significant portion of its eight important population areas where generations were low between some range. Mohave ground squirrels are known to populations (Coolgardie Mesa and We do not find that the Mohave occur consistently (Leitner 2008, pp. EAFB) but not others (Olancha and ground squirrel is in danger of 10–12). Mohave ground squirrels are Freeman Gulch, Freeman Gulch and extinction now, nor is it likely to also known to occur in many other EAFB) (Bell 2006, pp. 42–44). This become endangered within the areas, although less is known about reduced gene flow may have been foreseeable future throughout all or a those populations. These important caused by the recent drought years in significant portion of its range. areas occur throughout much of the the western Mojave Desert or limited Therefore, listing the Mohave ground range of the Mohave ground squirrel movements of female Mohave ground squirrel as endangered or threatened including the southern, central, and squirrels. However, when using nuclear under the Act is not warranted at this northern portions of the species’ range. DNA, which is inherited from both time. There may be more important parents rather than just the mother, the We request that you submit any new population areas for the Mohave ground results did not show that gene flow was information concerning the status of, or squirrel that have not been identified low between populations of Mohave threats to, the Mohave ground squirrel because much of the range of the species ground squirrels. Bell’s genetic analysis to our Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office has not been surveyed to determine of long-term levels of gene flow among (see ADDRESSES section) whenever it population location and trend. Based on Mohave ground squirrel populations becomes available. New information the best available scientific and found low levels of subdivision among will help us monitor this species and commercial information, we find that Mohave ground squirrel populations encourage its conservation. If an there is a large area being managed for including between Coolgardie Mesa and emergency develops for this or any the species (see Map 2) and that the EAFB (Bell 2006, pp. 43, 72), indicating other species, we will act to provide eight important population areas and that gene flow among Mohave ground immediate protection. other potentially important population squirrel populations including from the areas are well distributed across the Coolgardie Mesa population west to References Cited species’ range. Thus, there is no portion EAFB has occurred over the long term. A complete list of references cited is of the range of the Mohave ground In addition, we did not find any available on the Internet at http:// squirrel identified as being necessary to information that indicates the www.regulations.gov and upon request conserve the species in case there is a population in the southern portion, from the Ventura Fish and Wildlife catastrophic event. Therefore, we where impacts are concentrated, Office (see ADDRESSES section). conclude that the Southern and the provides genetic diversity to the species Central portions of the range of the as a whole. Bell (2006, pp. 18, 39, 40) Author Mohave ground squirrel, individually found low genetic diversity throughout The primary authors of this notice are and in combination, do not provide an the range of the species, indicating that staff members of the Ventura Fish and essential contribution to the redundancy gene flow occurs throughout the range. Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section). of the species. Therefore, we conclude that the Adequate representation ensures that Authority: The authority for this action is Southern and the Central portions of the section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of the species’ adaptive capabilities are range of the Mohave ground squirrel, 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). conserved. Specifically, the portion individually and in combination, do not should be evaluated to see how it provide an essential contribution to the Dated: September 23, 2011. contributes to the genetic diversity of representation of the species. Gregory E. Siekaniec, the species. The loss of genetically Based on the discussion above, we Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife based diversity may substantially have determined that the Mohave Service. reduce the ability of the species to ground squirrel does not face elevated [FR Doc. 2011–25473 Filed 10–5–11; 8:45 am] respond and adapt to future threats in most portions of its range, and BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCP3.SGM 06OCP3 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3