Vol. 78 Wednesday, No. 191 October 2, 2013

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 Eastern Small-Footed Bat and the Northern Long- Eared Bat as Endangered or Threatened Species; Listing the Northern Long-Eared Bat as an Endangered Species; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61046 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Rules link to locate this document. You modification, or curtailment of its may submit a comment by clicking on habitat or range; (B) overutilization for Fish and Wildlife Service ‘‘Comment Now!’’ If your comments commercial, recreational, scientific, or will fit in the provided comment box, educational purposes; (C) disease or 50 CFR Part 17 please use this feature of http:// predation; (D) the inadequacy of [Docket No. FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024; www.regulations.gov, as it is most existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) 4500030113] compatible with our comment review other natural or manmade factors procedures. If you attach your affecting its continued existence. We RIN 1018–AY98 comments as a separate document, our have determined that the northern long- Endangered and Threatened Wildlife preferred file format is Microsoft Word. eared bat is in danger of extinction, and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a If you attach multiple comments (such predominantly due to the threat of Petition To List the Eastern Small- as form letters), our preferred format is white-nose syndrome (Factor C). Footed Bat and the Northern Long- a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. However, other threats (Factors A, B, E) (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail Eared Bat as Endangered or when combined with white-nose or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Threatened Species; Listing the syndrome heighten the level of risk to Processing, Attn: FWS–R5–ES–2011– Northern Long-Eared Bat as an the species. 0024; Division of Policy and Directives Endangered Species We will seek peer review. We are Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife seeking comments from knowledgeable AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS individuals with scientific expertise to Interior. 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. review our analysis of the best available ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month We request that you send comments science and application of that science finding. only by the methods described above. and to provide any additional scientific We will post all information received on information to improve this proposed SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and http://www.regulations.gov. This rule. Because we will consider all Wildlife Service (Service), announce a generally means that we will post any comments and information we receive 12-month finding on a petition to list personal information you provide us during the comment period, our final the eastern small-footed bat (Myotis (see the Information Requested section determination may differ from this leibii) and the northern long-eared bat below for more details). proposal. (Myotis septentrionalis) as endangered FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information Requested or threatened under the Endangered Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor, U.S. Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) Fish and Wildlife Service, Green Bay We intend that any final action and to designate critical habitat. After Ecological Services Office, 2661 Scott resulting from this proposed rule will be review of the best available scientific Tower Dr., New Franken, Wisconsin, based on the best scientific and and commercial information, we find 54229; by telephone (920) 866–3650 or commercial data available and be as that listing the eastern small-footed bat by facsimile (920) 866–1710. mailto: If accurate and as effective as possible. is not warranted but listing the northern you use a telecommunications device Therefore, we request comments or long-eared bat is warranted. for the deaf (TDD), please call the information from other concerned Accordingly, we propose to list the Federal Information Relay Service Federal and State agencies, the scientific northern long-eared bat as an (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. community, or any other interested endangered species throughout its range SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: party concerning this proposed rule. We under the Act. We also determine that particularly seek comments regarding critical habitat for the northern long- Executive Summary the northern long-eared bat concerning: eared bat is not determinable at this Why we need to publish a rule. Under (1) The species’ biology, range, and time. This proposed rule, if finalized, the Act, if a species is determined to be population trends, including: would extend the Act’s protections to an endangered or threatened species (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, the northern long-eared bat. The Service throughout all or a significant portion of breeding, and sheltering; seeks data and comments from the its range, we are required to promptly (b) Genetics and taxonomy; public on this proposed listing rule for publish a proposal in the Federal (c) Historical and current range, the northern long-eared bat. Register and make a determination on including distribution patterns; DATES: We will consider comments our proposal within one year. Listing a (d) Historical and current population received or postmarked on or before species as an endangered or threatened levels, and current and projected trends; December 2, 2013. Comments submitted species can only be completed by and electronically using the Federal issuing a rule. (e) Past and ongoing conservation eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES This document consists of: measures for the species, its habitat, or section, below) must be received by • Our status review and finding that both. 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing listing is warranted for the northern (2) Any information on the biological date. We must receive requests for a long-eared bat and not warranted for the or ecological requirements of the public hearing, in writing, at the address eastern small-footed bat. species, and ongoing conservation shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION • A proposed rule to list the northern measures for the species and its habitat. CONTACT section by November 18, 2013. long-eared bat as an endangered species. (3) Biological, commercial trade, or ADDRESSES: You may submit comments This rule assesses best available other relevant data concerning any by one of the following methods: information regarding the status of and threats (or lack thereof) to this species (1) In the Search box, enter Docket threats to the northern long-eared bat. and regulations that may be addressing No. FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024, which is The basis for our action. Under the those threats. the docket number for this rulemaking. Act, we can determine that a species is (4) Current or planned activities in the Then, in the Search panel on the left an endangered or threatened species areas occupied by the species and side of the screen, under the Document based on any of five factors: (A) The possible impacts of these activities on Type heading, click on the Proposed present or threatened destruction, this species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61047

(5) Additional information regarding You may submit your comments and as a ‘‘category-2 candidate’’ for listing the threats to the species under the five materials concerning this proposed rule under the Act. However, on December 5, listing factors, which are: by one of the methods listed in 1996 (50 FR 64481), the Service (a) The present or threatened ADDRESSES. We request that you send discontinued the practice of destruction, modification, or comments only by the methods maintaining a list of species regarded as curtailment of its habitat or range; described in the ADDRESSES section. If ‘‘category-2 candidates,’’ that is, taxa for (b) Overutilization for commercial, you submit information via http:// which the Service had insufficient recreational, scientific, or educational www.regulations.gov, your entire information to support issuance of a purposes; submission—including any personal proposed listing rule. (c) Disease or predation; identifying information—will be posted On January 21, 2010, we received a (d) The inadequacy of existing on the Web site. If your submission is petition from the Center for Biological regulatory mechanisms; and made via a hardcopy that includes Diversity, requesting that the eastern (e) Other natural or manmade factors personal identifying information, you small-footed bat and northern long- affecting its continued existence. may request at the top of your document eared bat be listed as endangered or (6) The reasons why areas should or that we withhold this information from threatened and that critical habitat be should not be designated as critical public review. However, we cannot designated under the Act. The petition habitat as provided by section 4 of the guarantee that we will be able to do so. clearly identified itself as such and Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including We will post all hardcopy submissions included the requisite identification the possible risks or benefits of on http://www.regulations.gov. Please information for the petitioner, as designating critical habitat, including include sufficient information with your required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a risks associated with publication of comments to allow us to verify any February 19, 2010, letter to the maps designating any area on which scientific or commercial information petitioner, we acknowledged receipt of this species may be located, now or in you include. the petition and stated that we would the future, as critical habitat. Comments and materials we receive, review the petitioned request for listing (7) The following specific information as well as supporting documentation we and inform the petitioner of our on: used in preparing this proposed rule, determination upon completion of our (a) The amount and distribution of will be available for public inspection review. On June 23, 2010, we received habitat for northern long-eared bat; (b) What areas, that are currently on http://www.regulations.gov, or by a notice of intent to sue (NOI) from the occupied and that contain the physical appointment, during normal business petitioner for failing to make a timely and biological features essential to the hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 90-day finding. In a letter dated July 20, conservation of this species, should be Service, Green Bay, Wisconsin Field 2010, we responded to the NOI, stating FOR FURTHER INFORMATION included in a critical habitat designation Office (see that we had assigned lead for the two and why; CONTACT). bat species to the Services’ Midwest and Northeast Regions, and that although (c) Special management Background considerations or protection that may be completing the 90-day finding within Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires needed for the essential features in the 90 days following our receipt of the that, for any petition to revise the potential critical habitat areas, including petition was not practicable, the Regions Federal Lists of Threatened and managing for the potential effects of were recently allocated funding to work Endangered Wildlife and Plants that climate change; on the findings and had begun review (d) What areas not occupied at the contains substantial scientific or of the petition. On June 29, 2011, we time of listing are essential for the commercial information that listing a published in the Federal Register (76 conservation of this species and why; species may be warranted, we make a FR 38095) our finding that the petition (e) The amount of forest removal finding within 12 months of the date of to list the eastern small-footed bat and occurring within known summer habitat receipt of the petition on whether the northern long-eared bat presented for this species; petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted; substantial information indicating that (f) Information on summer roost (b) warranted; or (3) warranted, but the the requested action may be warranted, habitat requirements that are essential immediate proposal of a regulation and we initiated a status review of the for the conservation of the species and implementing the petitioned action is species. On July 12, 2011, the Service why; and precluded by other pending proposals to filed a proposed settlement agreement (g) Information on species winter determine whether any species is with the Center for Biological Diversity habitat (hibernacula) features and endangered or threatened, and in a consolidated case in the U.S. requirements for the species. expeditious progress is being made to District Court for the District of (8) Information on the projected and add or remove qualified species from Columbia. The settlement agreement reasonably likely impacts of changing the Federal Lists of Endangered and was approved by the court on environmental conditions resulting from Threatened Wildlife and Plants. In this September 9, 2011. As part of this climate change on the species and its document, we have determined that the settlement agreement, the Service habitat. petitioned action to list the eastern agreed to complete a status review for Please note that submissions merely small-footed bat is not warranted, but the eastern small-footed bat and stating support for or opposition to the listing the northern long-eared bat is northern long-eared bat by September action under consideration without warranted and; therefore, we are 30, 2013, and if warranted for listing, providing supporting information, publishing a proposed rule to list the publish a proposed listing rule also by although noted, will not be considered northern long-eared bat. that date. in making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that Previous Federal Actions Species Information determinations as to whether any On September 18, 1985 (50 FR 37958), Eastern Small-Footed Bat species is an endangered or threatened November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58804), and species must be made ‘‘solely on the November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982), the Taxonomy and Species Description basis of the best scientific and Service issued notices of review The eastern small-footed bat (Myotis commercial data available.’’ identifying the eastern small-footed bat leibii) belongs to the Order Chiroptera,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61048 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Suborder Microchiroptera, and Family species of bats in its range, eastern less frequently than other bat species. Vespertilionidae (Best and Jennings small-footed bats are considered From 1995 to 2011, of the 7,007 bat 1997, p. 1). The eastern small-footed bat uncommon (Best and Jennings 1997, p. mist-net surveys conducted in is considered monotypic, whereby no 3). They historically have been Pennsylvania, only 104 surveys (2 subspecies has been recognized (van considered rare because of their patchy percent) include eastern small-footed Zyll de Jong 1984, p. 2525). This species distribution and generally low bat captures, representing only 0.3 has been identified by different population numbers (Mohr 1932, p. percent of the total bats captured scientific names: Vespertilio leibii 160). In areas with abundant summer (Butchkoski 2011, unpublished data). Of (Audubon and Bachman 1842, p. 284) habitat, however, they have been found the other states within the species’ and Myotis subulatus (Miller and Allen to be relatively common (Brack et al., range, seven states (Alabama, 1928, p. 164). This species also has been unpublished manuscript). Johnson et al. Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, identified by different common names: (2011, p. 99) observed that capture Massachusetts, Mississippi, and Rhode Leib’s bat (Audubon and Bachman 1842, success decreased as the distance Island) have no summer records, and of p. 284), least brown bat (Mohr 1936, p. increased from suitable roosting habitat. those States with summer records, the 62), and Leib’s masked bat or least bat Eastern small-footed bats have also been most have fewer than 20 capture (Hitchcock 1949, p. 47). The Service noted for their ability to detect and locations (Service, unpublished data). agrees with the treatment in Best and avoid mist nets, which are typically Illustrating the potential for under- Jennings (1997, p. 1) regarding the relied upon for summer bat surveys representation of the species during scientific and common names and will (Barbour and Davis 1974, p. 84), hibernacula surveys, the following is an refer to this species as eastern small- suggesting their numbers could be example from one state. From 1939 to footed bat and recognizes it as a listable underrepresented (Tyburec 2012). 1944, over 100 caves were surveyed in entity under the Act. Eastern small-footed bats have most Pennsylvania (and a portion of West The eastern small-footed bat is one of often been detected during winter Virginia), and out of these, eastern the smallest North American bats, hibernacula (the areas where the bats small-footed bats were observed at only weighing from 3 to 8 grams (g) (0.1 to hibernate during winter; primarily caves 7 sites, totaling 363 individuals. In 1978 0.3 ounces (oz)) (Merritt 1987, p. 94). and mines) surveys (Barbour and Davis and 1979, the same seven caves were Total body length is from 73 to 85 1969, p. 103). Two-hundred eighty-nine surveyed again, and no eastern small- millimeters (mm) (2.9 to 3.4 inches (in)), hibernacula (includes cave and footed bats were observed (Felbaum et tail length is from 31 to 34 mm (1.2 to abandoned mine features only) have al. 1995, p. 24). However, surveys 1.3 in), forearm length is from 30 to 36 been identified across the species’ conducted from 1980 to 1988, found mm (1.2 to 1.4 in), and wingspan is from range, though most contain just a few eastern small-footed bats inhabiting 21 212 to 248 mm (8.4 to 9.8 in) (Barbour individuals. The majority of known hibernacula from an 8-county area in and Davis 1969, p. 103; Merritt 1987, p. hibernacula occur in Pennsylvania Pennsylvania (Dunn and Hall 1989, p. 94; Erdle and Hobson 2001, p. 6; (n=55), New York (n=53), West Virginia 169), and by 2011, surveys had Amelon and Burhans 2006, p. 57). (n=50), Virginia (n=33), Kentucky confirmed presence at 55 sites in a 14- Eastern small-footed bats are recognized (n=26), and North Carolina (n=25), but county area (Pennsylvania Game by their short hind feet (less than 8 mm hibernacula are also known from Commission, unpublished data). This (0.3 in)), short ears (less than 15 mm Tennessee (approximately 12), Arkansas example is typical of the species’ (0.6 in)), black facial mask, black ears, (n=9), Maryland (n=7), Vermont (n=6), potential for fluctuation throughout its keeled calcar (a spur of cartilage that Missouri (n=3), Maine (n=2), range. helps spread the wing membrane), and Massachusetts (n=2), New Hampshire small flattened skull (Barbour and Davis (n=2), New Jersey (n=2), Indiana (n=1), Habitat 1969, p. 103; Best and Jennings 1997, p. and Oklahoma (n=1). In Vermont, Winter Habitat 1). The wings and interfemoral eastern small-footed bats were membrane (the wing membrane between consistently found in very small Eastern small-footed bats have been the tail and hind legs) are black. The numbers and often not detected at all observed most often overwintering in dorsal fur is black at the roots and during periodic surveys of hibernacula hibernacula that include caves and tipped with light brown, giving it a dark (Trombulak et al. 2001, pp. 53–57). abandoned mines (e.g., limestone, coal, yellowish-brown appearance. The Their propensity for hibernating in iron). Because they tolerate colder ventral fur is gray at the roots and cracks and crevices in cave and mine temperatures more so than other Myotis tipped with yellowish-white (Audubon floors and ceilings may also mean they bats, they are most often encountered and Bachman 1842, pp. 284–285). are more often overlooked than other close to cave or mine entrances where cave-hibernating bat species. The largest humidity is low and temperature Distribution and Abundance number of hibernating individuals ever fluctuations may be high relative to The eastern small-footed bat occurs reported for the species was 2,383, more interior areas (Hitchcock 1949, p. from eastern Canada and New England which were found in a mine in Essex 53; Barbour and Davis 1969, p. 104; Best south to Alabama and Georgia and west County, New York (Herzog 2013, pers. and Jennings 1997, pp. 2–3; Veilleux to Oklahoma. The species’ range comm.). 2007, p. 502). On occasion, however, includes 26 states and 2 Canadian In Pennsylvania, eastern small-footed they have been observed hibernating provinces, including Alabama, bats were observed at 55 of 480 (12 deep within cave interiors (Hitchcock Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, percent) hibernacula from 1984 to 2011, 1965, p. 9; Gunier and Elder 1973, p. Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, accounting for only 0.1 percent of the 490). In Pennsylvania, caves containing Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, total bats observed during winter wintering populations of eastern small- Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, hibernacula surveys. The number of footed bats have been found in hemlock- New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, eastern small-footed bats observed per dominated forests in the foothills of Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode site fluctuates annually and ranges from mountains that rise to 610 meters (m) Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, 1 to 46 (mean = 4, median = 1). Summer (2000 feet (ft)) (Mohr 1936, p. 63). Dunn Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, mist-net surveys also confirm that and Hall (1989, p. 169) noted that 52 Ontario, and Quebec. Relative to other eastern small-footed bats are observed percent of Pennsylvania hibernacula

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61049

used by eastern small-footed bats were they may be doing so is largely 1968, p. 779; McDaniel et al. 1982, p. small caves of less than 150 m (500 ft) unknown. 93; Agosta et al. 2005, p. 1213; in length. Before it was commercialized, Reynolds, pers. comm.). Summer Habitat the cave in Fourth Chute, Ontario was Summer foraging habitat used by home to a relatively large number of In the summer, eastern small-footed eastern small-footed bats includes hibernating eastern small-footed bats (n bats are dependent on emergent rock rivers, streams, riparian forests, upland = 434) and is described in Hitchcock habitats for roosting and on the forests, clearings, strip mines, and (1949, pp. 47–54) as follows: ‘‘the cave immediately surrounding forests for ridgetops (Chenger 2003, pp. 14–23; is in a limestone outcropping on the foraging (Johnson et al. 2009, p. 5). Chenger 2008a, pp. 10 and 69–71; north bank of the Bonnechere River, at Eastern small-footed bats have been Chenger 2008b, p. 6; Hauser and an elevation of 425 ft (130 m). Sinkholes observed roosting singly or in small Chenger 2010; Johnson et al. 2009, p. 3; and large openings to passages make maternity colonies in talus fields and Mumma and Capouillez 2011, p. 24; this cave conspicuous. Most of the land slopes, rock-outcrops, rocky ridges, Brack et al., unpublished manuscript). immediately surrounding the cave area sandstone boulders, shale rock piles, Biology is open field or pasture, with wooded limestone spoil piles, rocky terrain of hills beyond. The part utilized by bats strip mine areas, and cliff crevices, but Hibernation have also been found on humanmade for hibernation lies farthest from the Eastern small-footed bats hibernate river, and is entered from one of the structures such as buildings and expansion joints of bridges (Barbour and during the winter months to conserve large, outside passageways through a energy from increased thermoregulatory narrow opening; the main passages are Davis 1969, p. 103; McDaniel et al. 1982, p. 93; Merritt 1987, p. 95; demands and reduced food resources. well ventilated by a through draft; the To increase energy savings, individuals forests near Fourth Chute are mixed, MacGregor and Kiser 1998, p. 175; Roble 2004, p. 43; Amelon and Burhans enter a state of torpor where internal with spruce and white cedar body temperatures approach ambient predominating among the conifers.’’ 2006, p. 58; Chenger 2008a, p. 10; Chenger 2008b, p. 6; Johnson et al. temperature, metabolic rates are Eastern small-footed bats were found in significantly lowered, and immune cold, dry, drafty locations at Fourth 2011, p. 100; Johnson and Gates 2008, p. 456; Hauser and Chenger 2010; function declines (Thomas et al. 1990, Chute, usually in narrow cracks in the p. 475; Thomas and Geiser 1997, p. 585; cave wall or roof (Hitchcock 1949, p. Sanders 2010; Mumma and Capouillez 2011, p. 24; Thomson and O’Keefe 2011; Bouma et al. 2010, p. 623). Periodic 53). Brack et al., unpublished manuscript). arousal from torpor naturally occurs in Winter habitat used by eastern small- Other humanmade features exploited by all hibernating mammals (Lyman et al. footed bats may also include non-cave eastern small-footed bats include rocky 1982, p. 92), although arousals remain or non-mine features, such as rock dams, road cuts, rocky mine lands, among the least understood of outcrops and stone highway culverts. In mines, and rock fields within hibernation phenomena (Thomas and Pennsylvania, eastern small-footed bats transmission-line and pipeline clearings Geiser 1997, p. 585). Numerous factors were observed hibernating multiple (Sanders 2011, pers. comm.; Johnson et (e.g., reduction of metabolic waste, body years during the months of January and al. 2011, p. 99; Thomson and O’Keefe temperature theories, and water balance March in a rock outcrop located high 2011). Roost sites are most often located theory) have been proposed to account above the Juniata River. The bats were in areas with full solar exposure, but for the occurrence and frequency of found in small cracks and crevices at have also been found in areas with arousals (Thomas and Geiser 1997, p. the back of a 4.6-m (15-ft) depression in moderate to extensive canopy cover 585). Each time a bat arouses from the rock outcrop. Big brown bats (Johnson et al. 2011, p. 100; Brack et al. torpor, it uses a significant amount of (Eptesicus fuscus) were also present. unpublished manuscript, pp. 9–15; energy to warm its body and increase its Temperatures within the cracks where Thomson and O’Keefe 2012). In New metabolic rate. The cost and number of bats were hibernating ranged from 1.7 to Hampshire, eastern small-footed bats arousals are the two key factors that 8.3 °C (35 to 47 °F). Observers noted that have been observed roosting between determine energy expenditures of it seemed a cold, unstable site for boulder crevices along the southern hibernating bats in winter (Thomas et al. hibernating bats (Pennsylvania Game outflow of the Surry Mountain Reservoir 1990, p. 475). For example, little brown Commission, unpublished data). In (Veilleux and Reynolds 2006, p. 330). In bats (Myotis lucifugus) used as much fat West Virginia, an eastern small-footed Vermont, one summer colony, during a typical arousal from bat was observed in a crack in a rock containing approximately 30 eastern hibernation as would be used during 68 outcrop about 1.5 to 1.8 m (5 to 6 ft) small-footed bats, was located in a slate days of torpor, and arousals and above the ground in February (Stihler roof of a house (Darling and Smith 2011, subsequent activity may constitute 84 2012, pers. comm.). Sasse et al. (in p. 4). Tuttle (1964, p. 149) reported two percent of the total energy used by press) reported a single female eastern individuals found in April in Tennessee hibernating bats during the winter small-footed bat hibernating inside a under a large flat rock at the edge of a (Thomas et al. 1990, pp. 477–478). stone highway culvert underneath a quarry surrounded by woods and cow Of all hibernating bats, eastern small- highway in Arkansas. Mohr (1936, p. pastures (elevation 549 m (1,800 ft)). In footed bats are among the last to enter 64) noted fluctuations in the number of Ontario, a colony of approximately 12 hibernacula and the first to emerge in eastern small-footed bats observed at bats was found in July behind a shed the spring (Barbour and Davis 1969, p. hibernacula during winter surveys door (Hitchcock 1955, p. 31). In 104). Hibernation is approximately mid- conducted 2 to 3 weeks apart, addition, small numbers of adult and November to March (Barbour and Davis suggesting bats left caves and mines juvenile eastern small-footed bats have 1969, p. 104; Dalton 1987, p. 373); during warmer winter periods only to been observed using caves and mines as however, there are indications that return when it became colder. roosting habitat during the summer eastern small-footed bats are active Consequently, eastern small-footed bats months in Maryland, Pennsylvania, during mild winter weather (Mohr 1936, may be utilizing non-cave or non-mine Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia, and p. 64; Fenton 1972, p. 5). Fenton (1972, rock features during mild or milder Virginia (Davis et al. 1965, p. 683; p. 5) observed that when temperatures portions of winters, but to what extent Krutzsch 1966, p. 121; Hall and Brenner at hibernation sites rose above 4°

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61050 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Celsius (C) (39.2 °F (F)), eastern small- p. 5) commonly observed eastern small- and observed that females and males footed bats, along with big brown bats, footed bats hibernating in physical switched roosts on average every 1.1 aroused and departed from caves and contact with big brown bats, usually in days. Males traveled an average of 41 m mines. Whether these bats departed to small clusters of fewer than five bats, (135 ft) between consecutive roosts. take advantage of prey availability but never close to or in contact with Females traveled an average of 67 m during mild winter spells or seek out little brown or Indiana bats. Eastern (218 ft) between consecutive roosts, and other hibernation sites was never small-footed bats often hibernate in a roosts were closer to ephemeral water determined. Frequent oscillations in horizontal position, tucked between sources than those used by males. microclimate near cave or mine cracks and crevices, unlike most Myotis Johnson et al. 2011 (p. 103) entrances may contribute to frequent bats, which hang in the open (Merritt hypothesized that roost selection is arousals from torpor by eastern small- 1987, p. 95). When suspended, however, based on either avoiding detection by footed bats (Hitchcock 1965, p. 8). the position of the forearm is unique in predators or minimizing energy Frequent arousals may deplete energy that, instead of hanging parallel to the expenditures. They observed that roosts reserves at a faster rate than would more body, as in other Myotis bats, the were located within 15 m (50 ft) from continuous torpor characteristic of other forearms are somewhat extended vegetation or forest edge and in areas cave-hibernating bats, contributing to a (Banfield 1974, p. 52). Like most bat with low canopy cover, which lower survival rate compared to other species, eastern small-footed bats consequently provided a short distance Myotis bats (Hitchcock et al. 1984, p. exhibit high site fidelity to hibernacula, to protective cover and high solar 129). Eastern small-footed bats lose up with individuals returning to the same exposure. It appears eastern small- to 16 percent of their body weights site year after year (Gates et al. 1984, p. footed bats exhibit fidelity to their during hibernation (Fenton 1972, p. 5). 166). summer roosting areas, as demonstrated Eastern small-footed bats often by the recapture of banded bats in hibernate solitarily or in small groups Migration and Homing successive years at the Surry Mountain and have been found hibernating in the Eastern small-footed bats have been Reservoir and Acadia National Park open, in small cracks in cave walls and observed migrating up to 19 kilometers (Divoll et al. 2013; Veilleux and ceilings, in rock crevices in cave or (km) (12 miles (mi)) (Hitchcock 1955, p. Moosman, unpublished data). mine floors, and beneath rocks 31) and as little as 0.1 km (0.06 mi) from Reproduction (Hitchcock 1949, p. 53; Davis 1955, p. winter hibernacula to summer roost 130; Martin et al. 1966, p. 349; Barbour sites (Johnson and Gates 2008, p. 456). Available data regarding the eastern and Davis 1969, p. 104; Banfield 1974, The distance traveled is probably small-footed bat suggest that females of p. 52; Dalton 1987, p. 373). Martin et al. influenced by the availability of this species form small summer (1966, p. 349) observed up to 30 eastern hibernacula and roosting sites across the colonies, with males roosting singly or small-footed bats hanging from the landscape (Johnson and Gates 2008, p. in small groups (Erdle and Hobson ceilings of two mines in New York. 457). But in general, data suggest that 2001, p. 10; Johnson et al. 2011, p. 100). From one small fissure, Hitchcock this species hibernates in proximity to Small maternity colonies of 12 to 20 (1949, p. 53) extracted 35 eastern small- its summer range (van Zyll de Jong individuals occurring in buildings have footed bats that were packed so tightly 1985, p. 119; Divoll et al. 2011). Eastern been reported (Merritt 1987, p. 95). that it appeared almost impossible for small-footed bats show a definite Eastern small-footed bats are thought to those farthest in to get air. This homing ability (Best and Jennings 1997, be similar to sympatric Myotis that propensity for hibernating in narrow p. 4). Marked bats were present in the breed in the fall; spermatozoa are stored cracks and crevices may mean they are same cave in consecutive winters, and in the uterus of hibernating females sometimes overlooked by surveyors. In when moved to a different cave during until spring ovulation, and a single pup Maryland, for example, far fewer eastern the winter, they returned to the original is born in May or June (Barbour and small-footed bats were observed by cave the following winter (Mohr 1936, Davis 1969, p. 104; Amelon and surveyors during internal hibernacula p. 64). In the Mammoth Cave region of Burhans 2006, p. 58). Brack et al. surveys than were caught in traps Kentucky, eastern small-footed bats are (unpublished manuscript) captured two during spring emergence (Maryland fairly common in late summer in the female eastern small-footed bats in the Department of Natural Resources 2011, groups of migrating bats, although the fall that appeared to have recently unpublished data). whereabouts of these bats at other mated as noted by fluids around the Eastern small-footed bats have been seasons is unknown (Barbour and Davis vagina. Two female eastern small-footed observed hibernating in caves that also 1969, p. 104). bats caught on June 20 and 24 were contain little brown bats, big brown pregnant, and 16 female bats caught Summer Roosts bats, northern long-eared bats (Myotis from June 23 to July 15 were lactating septentrionalis), Indiana bats (Myotis Both males and females change (Brack et al., unpublished manuscript). sodalis), tri-colored bats (Perimyotis summer roost sites often, even daily, Adult longevity is estimated to be up subflavus), Virginia big-eared bats although they typically are moving short to 12 years in the wild (Hitchcock 1965, (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus), distances within a general area (Chenger p. 11). Estimated mean annual survival gray bats (Myotis grisescens), and 2003, pp. 14–23; Johnson et al. 2011, p. is low compared to other Myotis, and Rafinesque’s big-eared bats 100; Brack et al., unpublished survival rates are significantly lower for (Corynorhinus rafinesquii rafinesquii), manuscript). Chenger (2009, p. 7) females than for males, 42 and 75 and approximately equal numbers of suggests that eastern small-footed bats percent, respectively (Hitchcock et al. males and females occupy the same roost in low numbers over a wide area, 1984, p. 128). The lower rate of survival areas and cluster together such as talus fields, as a predator- of females may be a result of a indiscriminately (Hitchcock 1949, pp. avoidance strategy (Chenger 2009, p. 7). combination of factors: The greater 48–49; Hitchcock 1965, pp. 6–8; Fenton Frequent roost-switching may be demands of reproduction on females; 1972, p. 3; Best and Jennings 1997, p. another means of avoiding potential the higher metabolic rates and less 3; Hemberger 2011, unpublished data; predators. Johnson et al. 2011 (pp. 98– frequent torpor; and the greater Graeter 2011, unpublished data; Graham 101) radiotracked five lactating female exposure to possible disease-carrying 2011, unpublished data). Fenton (1972, bats and five nonreproductive males parasites in maternity colonies

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61051

(Hitchcock et al. 1984, p. 127). Low frequency, and of low intensity, mm (0.2 in) beyond the muzzle (Caceres survivorship in combination with low characteristics that are difficult for some and Barclay 2000, p. 1). The tragus reproductive potential (i.e., one invertebrate prey to detect (Faure et al. (projection of skin in front of the offspring produced per year) (Best and 1993, p. 174). external ear) is long (average 9 mm (0.4 Jennings 1997, p. 2) may explain why in); Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. Species Information eastern small-footed bats are generally 207), pointed, and symmetrical uncommon (Hitchcock et al. 1984, p. Northern Long-Eared Bat (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, p. 87; 129). Taxonomy and Species Description Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. 207). Within its range, the northern long- Foraging Behavior and Home Range The northern long-eared bat belongs eared bat can be confused with the little Eastern small-footed bats have low to the order Chiroptera, suborder brown bat or the western long-eared wing loading and high, frequency- Microchiroptera, family myotis (Myotis evotis). The northern modulated echolocation calls, making Vespertilionidae, subfamily long-eared bat can be distinguished them capable of foraging efficiently in Vesperitilionae, genus Myotis, subgenus from the little brown bat by its longer cluttered forest interiors (Johnson et al. Myotis (Caceres and Barclay 2000, p. 1). ears, tragus, slightly longer tail, and less 2009, p. 5). Although some accounts The northern long-eared bat was glossy pelage (Caceres and Barclay 2000, state that this species emerges early in considered a subspecies of Keen’s long- p. 1). The northern long-eared bat can be the evening (van Zyll de Jong 1985, p. eared Myotis (Myotis keenii) (Fitch and distinguished from the western long- 119), Brack et al. (unpublished Schump 1979, p. 1), but was recognized eared myotis by its darker pelage and manuscript) found that activity peaked as a distinct species by van Zyll de Jong paler membranes (Caceres and Barclay well after dark, and low post-midnight in 1979 (1979, p. 993) based on 2000, p. 1). activities point to the possibility of a geographic separation and difference in bimodal activity period. Most morphology (as cited in Caceres and Distribution and Abundance observations indicate that eastern small- Pybus 1997 p. 1; Caceres and Barclay The northern long-eared bat ranges footed bats fly slow and close to the 2000, p. 1; Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, across much of the eastern and north ground, usually at heights from 0.6 to p. 87; Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, p. central United States, and all Canadian 3.5 m (2 to 11.5 ft) (Davis et al. 1965, 99; Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. 207; provinces west to the southern Yukon p. 683; Brack et al., unpublished Simmons 2005, p. 516). No subspecies Territory and eastern British Columbia manuscript). have been described for this species (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, p. 89; Using ridgelines, streams, and (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, p. 90; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 1; forested roads as travel corridors, Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. 214; Environment Yukon 2011, p. 10). In the eastern small-footed bats have been van Zyll de Jong 1985, p. 94). This United States, the species’ range reaches observed travelling from 0.8 to 13.2 km species has been recognized by different from Maine west to Montana, south to (0.5 to 8.2 mi) between daytime roost common names, such as: Keen’s bat eastern Kansas, eastern Oklahoma, sites and foraging areas (Chenger 2003, (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, p. 99), Arkansas, and east to the Florida pp. 14–23; Chenger 2008b, p. 6; Johnson northern myotis bat (Nagorsen and panhandle (Whitaker and Hamilton et al. 2009, p. 3; Mumma and Capouillez Brigham 1993, p. 87, Whitaker and 1998, p. 99; Caceres and Barclay 2000, 2011, p. 24). Considerable declines in Mumford 2009, p. 207), and the p. 2; Wilson and Reeder 2005, p. 516; eastern small-footed bat capture rates northern bat (Foster and Kurta 1999, p. Amelon and Burhans 2006, pp. 71–72). have been observed with increasing 660). For the purposes of this finding, The species’ range includes the distance from available rock habitat; and we refer to this species as the northern following 39 States (including the short distances between roosts and long-eared bat, and recognize it as a District of Columbia, which we count as capture sites suggest these bats have listable entity under the Act. one of the ‘‘States’’): Alabama, Arkansas, small home ranges (Johnson et al. 2011, A medium-sized bat species, the Connecticut, Delaware, the District of p. 104). Observed home range varies northern long-eared bat adult body Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, from 10.2 to 1,405 hectares (ha) (25 to weight averages 5 to 8 g (0.2 to 0.3 Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, 3,472 acres (ac)) (Johnson et al. 2009, p. ounces), with females tending to be Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, 3; Mumma and Capouillez 2011, p. 25), slightly larger than males (Caceres and Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, although core habitat for three male and Pybus 1997, p. 3). Average body length Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, two female eastern small-footed bats ranges from 77 to 95 mm (3.0 to 3.7 in), Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, ranged from 4 to 75 ha (10 to 185 ac) tail length between 35 and 42 mm (1.3 New York, North Carolina, North (50 percent fixed kernel utilization to 1.6 in), forearm length between 34 Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, distribution) (Mumma and Capouillez and 38 mm (1.3 to 1.5 in), and Rhode Island, South Carolina, South 2011, p. 25). wingspread between 228 and 258 mm Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Food habits of eastern small-footed (8.9 to 10.2 in) (Caceres and Barclay West Virginia, Wisconsin, and bats are those of a generalist, although 2000, p. 1; Barbour and Davis 1969, p. Wyoming. Historically, the species has moths (Lepidoptera), true flies (Diptera), 76). Pelage (fur) colors include medium been most frequently observed in the and beetles (Coleoptera) compose most to dark brown on its back, dark brown, northeastern United States and in of their diet (Johnson and Gates 2007, p. but not black, ears and wing Canadian Provinces, Quebec and 319; Moosman et al. 2007, p. 355; Brack membranes, and tawny to pale-brown Ontario, with sightings increasing et al., unpublished manuscript). fur on the ventral side (Nagorsen and during swarming and hibernation Presence of spiders (Araneae) and Brigham 1993, p. 87; Whitaker and (Caceres and Barclay 2000, p. 2). crickets (Gryllidae) in the diet suggest Mumford 2009, p. 207). As indicated by However, throughout the majority of the eastern small-footed bats capture some its common name, the northern long- species’ range it is patchily distributed, prey via gleaning (Moosman et al. 2007, eared bat is distinguished from other and historically was less common in the p. 358). Gleaning behavior is Myotis species by its long ears (average southern and western portions of the characterized by catching prey on 17 mm (0.7 in), Whitaker and Mumford range than in the northern portion of the surfaces via echolocation; calls are 2009, p. 207) that, when laid forward, range (Amelon and Burhans 2006, p. generally short in duration, high extend beyond the nose but less than 5 71).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61052 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Although they are typically found in hibernacula (Pennsylvania Game In West Virginia, northern long-eared low numbers in inconspicuous roosts, Commission, unpublished data, 2012). bats are found regularly in hibernacula most records of northern long-eared bats In Delaware, the species is rare and no surveys, but typically in small numbers are from winter hibernacula surveys hibernacula are documented within the (less than 20 individuals) in caves (Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 2) (for more State; however, there is a historical (Stihler 2012, unpublished data). The information on use of hibernacula, see record from Newcastle County in 1970 species has also been found in 41 Biology below). More than 780 (Niederriter 2012, pers. comm.). In abandoned coal mines in winter surveys hibernacula have been identified Connecticut, the northern long-eared bat conducted from 2002 to 2011 in the throughout the species’ range in the was historically one of the most New River Gorge National River and United States, although many commonly encountered bats in the State Gauley River National Recreation Area, hibernacula contain only a few (1 to 3) and had been documented statewide both managed by the National Park individuals (Whitaker and Hamilton (Dickson 2011, pers. comm.). In Maine, Service (NPS); the largest number 1998, p. 100). Known hibernacula (sites 3 hibernacula are known (all on private observed was 157 in one of the NPS with one or more winter records) land), and the species has also been mines (NPS 2011, unpublished data). include: Arkansas (n=20), Connecticut found in the summer in Acadia National Northern long-eared bats are considered (n=5), Georgia (n=1), Illinois (n=36), Park (DePue 2012, unpublished data) common in summer surveys in West Indiana (n=25), Kentucky (n=90), Maine where northern long-eared bats were Virginia; in summer records from 2006– (n=3), Maryland (n=11), Massachusetts found to be fairly common in 2009– 2011 northern long-eared bat captures (n=7), Michigan (n=94), Minnesota 2010 (242 northern long-eared bats comprised 46 to 49 percent of all bat (n=11), Missouri (n=>111), Nebraska captured comprising 27 percent of the captures (Stihler 2012, pers. comm.). (n=2), New Hampshire (n=9), New total captures for the areas surveyed) Northern long-eared bats have been Jersey (n=8), New York (n=58), North (NPS 2010). observed in 58 hibernacula in Carolina (n=20), Oklahoma (n=4), Ohio In Maryland, three of seven known abandoned mines, caves, and tunnels in (n=3), Pennsylvania (n=112), South hibernacula for the species are railroad New York. They have also been observed in summer mist net and Carolina (n=2), South Dakota (n=7), tunnels, and no summer mist net or acoustic surveys. Summer mist-net Tennessee (n=11), Vermont (n=13 (23 acoustic surveys have been conducted surveys in New York from 2003–2008 historical)), Virginia (n=8), West for the species (Feller 2011, resulted in a range of 0.21–0.47 bats/net Virginia (n=104), and Wisconsin (n=45). unpublished data). In Massachusetts, night and declined to 0.012 bats/net Other states within the species’ range there are 7 known hibernacula, 42 night in 2011 (Herzog 2012, have no known hibernacula (due to no percent of which are privately owned. unpublished data). They have also been suitable hibernacula present or lack of In New Hampshire, northern long-eared observed on Fort Drum in New York, survey effort). They are typically found bats are known to inhabit at least nine roosting in small crevices or cracks on where acoustic surveys (2003–2010) and mines and two World War II bunkers cave or mine walls or ceilings, thus are mist net surveys (1999, 2007) have and have been found in summer easily overlooked during surveys and monitored the summer population surveys, including at Surry Mountain usually observed in small numbers (Dobony 2011, unpublished data). There Dam (Brunkhurst 2012, unpublished (Griffin 1940, pp. 181–182; Barbour and are no known hibernacula in Rhode data). In the White Mountain National Davis 1969, p. 77; Caire et al. 1979, p. Island; however, there were 6 records Forest in New Hampshire in 1993–1994, 405; Van Zyll de Jong 1985, p. 9; from 2011 mist-net surveys in northern long-eared was one of the most Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 2; Whitaker Washington County (Brown 2012, common species captured (27 percent) and Mumford 2009, pp. 209–210). unpublished data). The U.S. portion of the northern long- (Sasse and Pekins 1996, pp. 93–95). In Midwest Population eared bat’s range can be described in New Jersey, one of the seven known four parts, as discussed below: the hibernacula is a cave, and the remainder The northern long-eared bat is eastern population, Midwestern are mines (Markuson 2011, unpublished commonly encountered in summer population, the southern population, data). Northern long-eared bats mist-net surveys throughout the and the western population. consisted of 6 to 14 percent of total majority of the Midwest and is number of captures at Wallkill River considered fairly common throughout Eastern Population National Wildlife Refuge in New Jersey much of the region. However, the Historically, the northern long-eared from 2006–2010 (Kitchell and Wight species is often found infrequently and bat was most abundant in the eastern 2011). in small numbers in hibernacula portion its range (Caceres and Barclay In Vermont, prior to 2009, the species surveys throughout most of the 2000, p. 2). Northern long-eared bats was found in 23 hibernacula, totaling an Midwest. In Missouri, northern long- have been consistently caught during estimated 595 animals, which was eared bats were listed as a State species summer mist nets surveys and detected thought to be an under-estimate due to of conservation concern until 2007, after during acoustic surveys in eastern the species’ preference for hibernating which it was decided the species was populations. Large numbers of northern in hibernacula cracks and crevices. more common than previously thought long-eared bats have been found in Summer capture data (2001–2007) because they were commonly captured larger hibernacula in Pennsylvania (e.g., indicated that northern long-eared bats in mist net surveys (Elliot 2013, pers. an estimated 881 individuals in a mine comprised 19 percent of bats captured; comm.). Historically, the northern long- in Bucks County, Pennsylvania in 2004). it was considered the second most eared bat was considered quite common Fall swarm trapping conducted in common bat species in the State (Smith throughout much of Indiana, and was September–October 1988–1989, 1990– 2011, unpublished data). In Virginia, the fourth or fifth most abundant bat 1991, and 1999–2000 at two hibernacula they were historically considered ‘‘fairly species in the State in 2009. The species with large historical numbers of common’’ during summer mist net has been captured in at least 51 northern long-eared bats had total surveys; however, they are considered counties, is often captured in mist-nets captures ranging from 6 to 30 bats per ‘‘uncommon’’ during winter hibernacula along streams, and is the most common hour, which demonstrated that the surveys (Reynolds 2012, unpublished bat taken by trapping at mine entrances species was abundant at these data). (Whitaker and Mumford 2009, pp. 207–

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61053

208). The abundance of northern long- in 2011 there were eight records summer surveys (Hemberger 2012, pers. eared bats appears to vary within (including three lactating females) from comm.). The northern long-eared bat Indiana during the summer. For west-central Iowa (Howell 2011, can be found throughout the majority of example, during 3 summers (1990– unpublished data). In Minnesota, one Kentucky, with historical records in 91 1992) of mist-netting surveys in the mine in St. Louis County may contain of its 120 counties. Eighty-five counties northern half of Indiana, 37 northern a large number of individuals, possibly have summer records, and 68 of those long-eared bats were captured at 22 of over 3,000; however, this is a very rough include reproductive records (i.e., 127 survey sites, which represented 4 estimate since the majority of the mine captures of juveniles or pregnant, percent of all bats captured (King 1993, cannot be safely accessed for surveys lactating, or post-lactating adult p. 10). In contrast, northern long-eared (Nordquist 2012, pers. comm.). In Ohio, females) (Hemberger 2012, pers. bats were the most commonly captured there are three known hibernacula and comm.). In South Carolina, there are two bat species (38 percent of all bats the largest population in Preble County known hibernacula: one is a cave that captured) during three summers (2006– has had more than 300 bats. In general, had 26 bats present in 1995, but has not 2008) of mist netting on two State northern long-eared bats are also been surveyed since, and the other is a forests in south-central Indiana (Sheets regularly collected as incidental catches tunnel where only one bat was found in et al. 2013, p. 193). Indiana has 25 in mist-net surveys for Indiana bats in 2011 (Bunch 2011, unpublished data). hibernacula with winter records of one Ohio (Boyer 2012, pers. comm.). Northern long-eared bats are known or more northern long-eared bats. from 20 hibernacula in Arkansas, Southern Population However, it is very difficult to find although they are typically found in individuals in caves and mines during The northern long-eared bat is less very low numbers (Sasse 2012, hibernation in large numbers in Indiana common in the southern portion of its unpublished data). Surveys in the hibernacula (Whitaker and Mumford range than in the northern portion of the Ouachita Mountains of central Arkansas 2009, p. 208). range (Amelon and Burhans 2006, p. 71) from 2000–2005 tracked 17 males and In Michigan, the northern long-eared and, in the South, is considered more 23 females to 43 and 49 day roosts, bat is known from 25 counties and is common in states such as Kentucky and respectively (Perry and Thill 2007, pp. not commonly encountered in the State Tennessee, and more rare in the 221–222). The northern long-eared bat is except in parts of the northern Lower southern extremes of the range (e.g., known to occur in seven counties along Peninsula and portions of the Upper Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina). In the eastern edge of Oklahoma, Peninsula (Kurta 1982, p. 301; Kurta Alabama, the northern long-eared bat is (Stevenson 1986, p. 41). The species has 2013, pers. comm.). The majority of rare, while in Tennessee it is been recorded in 21 caves (7 of which hibernacula in Michigan are in the far uncommon (Amelon and Burhans 2006, occur on the Ozark Plateau National northern and western Upper Peninsula; pp. 71–72). In Tennessee, northern long- Wildlife Refuge) during the summer. therefore, there are very few cave- eared bats were found in summer mist- The species has regularly been captured hibernating bats in general in the net surveys conducted through summer in summer mist-net surveys at cave southern half of the Lower Peninsula of 2010 in addition to hibernacula entrances in Adair, Cherokee, Sequoyah, during the summer because the distance censuses. Northern long-eared bats were Delaware, and LeFlore counties, and are to hibernacula is too great (Kurta 2013, found in 11 caves surveyed in 2011 in often one of the most common bats pers. comm.). It is thought that the few Tennessee (Pelren 2011, pers. comm.). captured during mist-net surveys at cave bats that do spend the summer in the In 2000, during sampling of bat entrances in the Ozarks of northeastern southern half of the Lower Peninsula populations in the Kisatchie National Oklahoma (Stark 2013, pers. comm.). may hibernate in caves or mines in Forest, Louisiana, three northern long- Small numbers of northern long-eared neighboring states, such as Indiana eared bat specimens were collected; bats (typical range of 1–17 individuals) (Kurta 1982, pp. 301–302; Kurta 2013, these were the first official records of also have been captured during mist-net pers. comm.). the species from Louisiana (Crnkovic surveys along creeks and riparian zones In Wisconsin, the species is reported 2003, p. 715). In Georgia, northern long- in eastern Oklahoma. to be uncommon (Amelon and Burhans eared bats have been found at 1 of 5 2006, pp. 71–72). ‘‘Although the known hibernacula in the State and 24 Western Population northern long-eared bat can be found in summer records were found between The northern long-eared bat is many parts of Wisconsin, it is clearly 2007 and 2011. Mist-net surveys were generally less common in the western not abundant in any one location. The conducted in the Chattahoochee portion of its range than in the northern department has determined that the National Forest in 2001–2002 and 2006– portion of the range (Amelon and Northern long-eared bat is one of the 2007, with 51 total records for the Burhans 2006, p. 71) and is considered least abundant bats in Wisconsin species (Morris 2012, unpublished common in only small portions of the through cave and mine hibernacula data). Northern long-eared bats have western part of its range (e.g., Black counts, acoustic surveys, mist-netting in been found in 20 hibernacula within Hills of South Dakota) and uncommon summer foraging areas and harp trap North Carolina (Graeter 2011, or rare in the western extremes of the captures during the fall swarming unpublished data). In the summer of range (e.g., Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska) period’’ (Redell 2011, pers. comm.). 2007, (Morris et al. 2009, p. 356) six (Caceres and Barclay 2000, p. 2). The Northern long-eared bats are regularly northern long-eared bats were captured northern long-eared bat has been caught in mist-net surveys in the in Washington County, North Carolina. observed hibernating and residing Shawnee National Forest in southern Both adults and juveniles were during the summer and is considered Illinois (Kath 2013, pers. comm.). captured, suggesting that there is a abundant in the Black Hills National Further, the average number of northern reproducing resident population (Morris Forest in South Dakota. Capture and long-eared bats caught during surveys et al. 2009, p. 359). In Kentucky, banding data for survey efforts in the between 1999 and 2011 at Oakwood although typically found in small Black Hills of South Dakota and Bottoms in the Shawnee National Forest numbers, northern long-eared bats were Wyoming showed northern long-eared has been fairly consistent (Carter 2012, historically found in the majority of bats to be the second most common bat pers. comm.). In Iowa, there are only hibernacula in Kentucky and have been banded (159 of 878 total bats) during 3 summer mist net records for the species; a commonly captured species during years of survey effort (Tigner and Aney

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61054 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

1994, p. 4). South Dakota contains seven Richland County (Montana Fish, Davis 1969, p. 77; Caceres and Pybus known hibernacula, five of which are Wildlife, and Parks 2012). In Kansas, the 1997, p. 2). Northern long-eared bats are abandoned mines. The largest number northern long-eared bat was first found typically found roosting in small of individuals was found in a in summer mist-net surveys in 1994 and crevices or cracks in cave or mine walls hibernaculum near Hill City, South 1995 in Osborne and Russell counties, or ceilings, often with only the nose and Dakota; 40 individuals were found in before which the species was thought to ears visible, thus are easily overlooked this mine in the winter of 2002–2003 only migrate through parts of the State during surveys (Griffin 1940, pp. 181– (Tigner and Stukel 2003, pp. 27–28). A (Sparks and Choate 1995, p. 190). 182; Barbour and Davis 1969 p.77; Caire summer population was found on the et al. 1979, p. 405; Van Zyll de Jong habitats in Dakota Prairie National Canada Population 1985, p.9; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 2; Grassland and Custer National Forest in The northern long-eared bat occurs Whitaker and Mumford 2009, pp. 209– 2005 (Lausen undated, unpublished throughout the majority of the forested 210). Caire et al. (1979, p. 405) and data). Also, northern long-eared bats regions of Canada, although it is found Whitaker and Mumford (2009, p. 208) have been captured during the summer in higher abundance in eastern Canada commonly observed individuals exiting along the Missouri River in South than in western Canada, similar to in caves with mud and clay on their fur, Dakota (Swier 2006, p. 5; Kiesow and the United States (Caceres Pybus 1997, also suggesting the bats were roosting in Kiesow 2010, pp. 65–66). Summer p. 6). However, the scarcity of records tighter recesses of hibernacula. They are surveys in North Dakota (2009–2011) in the western parts of Canada may be also found hanging in the open, documented the species in the Turtle due to more limited survey efforts. It has although not as frequently as in cracks Mountains, the Missouri River Valley, been estimated that approximately 40 and crevices (Barbour and Davis 1969, and in the Badlands (Gillam and percent of the northern long-eared bat’s p.77, Whitaker and Mumford 2009, pp. Barnhart 2011, pp. 10–12). No global range is in Canada; however, due 209–210). In 1968, Whitaker and hibernacula are known within North to the species being relatively common Mumford (2009, pp. 209–210) observed Dakota; however, there has been very and widespread, limited effort has been three northern long-eared bats roosting limited survey effort in the State (Riddle made to determine overall population in the hollow core of stalactites in a 2012, pers. comm.). size within Canada (COSEWIC 2012, small cave in Jennings County, Indiana. Northern long-eared bats have been p.9). The range of the northern long- To a lesser extent, northern long-eared observed at two quarries located in east- eared bat in Canada includes Alberta, bats have been found overwintering in central Nebraska, but there is no survey British Columbia, Manitoba, New other types of habitat that resemble cave data for either of these sites (Geluso Brunswick, Newfoundland and or mine hibernacula, including 2011, unpublished data). They are also Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova abandoned railroad tunnels, more known to summer in the northwestern Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Ontario, frequently in the northeast portion of parts of Nebraska, specifically Pine Quebec, Saskatchewan, and Yukon the range. Also, in 1952 three northern Ridge in Sheridan County (only males (COSEWIC 2012, p. 4). There are no long-eared bats were found hibernating have been documented), and a records of the species overwintering in near the entrance of a storm sewer in reproducing population has been Yukon and Northwest Territories central Minnesota (Goehring 1954, p. documented north of Valentine in (COSEWIC 2012, p. 9). 435). Kurta and Teramino (1994, pp. Cherry County (Benedict et al. 2000, pp. 410–411) found northern long-eared 60–61). During an acoustic survey Habitat bats hibernating in a hydro-electric dam conducted during the summer of 2012 Winter Habitat facility in Michigan. In Massachusetts, the species was common in Cass County northern long-eared bats have been (east-central Nebraska), but was Northern long-eared bats found hibernating in the Sudbury uncommon or absent from extreme predominantly overwinter in Aqueduct, a structure created in the late southeastern Nebraska (White et al. hibernacula that include caves and 1800s to transfer water, but that is rarely 2012, p. 2). The occurrence of this abandoned mines. Hibernacula used by used for this purpose today (French species in Cass County, Nebraska is northern long-eared bats are typically 2012, unpublished data). Griffin (1945, likely attributable to limestone quarries large, with large passages and entrances p. 22) found northern long-eared bats in in the region that are used as (Raesly and Gates 1987, p. 118), December in Massachusetts in a dry hibernacula by this species and others relatively constant, cooler temperatures well, and commented that these bats ° ° (White et al. 2012, p. 3). (0 to 9 C (32 to 48 F) (Raesly and Gates may regularly hibernate in During acoustic and mist net surveys 1987, p. 18; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. ‘‘unsuspected retreats’’ in areas where conducted throughout Wyoming in the 2; Brack 2007, p. 744), and with high caves or mines are not present. summers of 2008–2011, 27 separate humidity and no air currents (Fitch and observations of northern long-eared bats Shump 1979, p. 2; Van Zyll de Jong Summer Habitat were made in the northeast part of the 1985, p. 94; Raesly and Gates 1987 p. During the summer, northern long- State and breeding was confirmed 118; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 2). The eared bats typically roost singly or in (Wyoming Game and Fish Department sites favored by northern long-eared bats colonies underneath bark or in cavities 2012, unpublished data). To date, there are often in very high humidity areas, to or crevices of both live trees and snags are no known hibernacula in Wyoming such a large degree that droplets of (Sasse and Perkins 1996, p. 95; Foster and it is unclear if there are existing water are often observed on their fur and Kurta 1999, p. 662; Owen et al. hibernacula, although the majority of (Hitchcock 1949, p. 52; Barbour and 2002, p. 2; Carter and Feldhamer 2005, potential hibernacula (abandoned Davis 1969, p. 77). Northern long-eared p. 262; Perry and Thill 2007, p. 222; mines) within the State occur outside of bats typically prefer cooler and more Timpone et al. 2010, p. 119). Males and the northern long-eared bat’s range humid conditions than little brown bats, non-reproductive females’ summer roost (Tigner and Stukel 2003, p. 27; similar to the eastern small-footed bat sites may also include cooler locations, Wyoming Game and Fish Department and big brown bat, although the latter including caves and mines (Barbour and 2012). Montana has only one known two species tolerate lower humidity Davis 1969, p. 77; Amelon and Burhans record: a male collected in an than northern long-eared bats 2006, p. 72). Northern long-eared bats abandoned coal mine in 1978 in (Hitchcock 1949, p. 52–53; Barbour and have also been observed roosting in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61055

colonies in humanmade structures, such summer roosting habitat (Foster and months to conserve energy from as buildings, barns, a park pavilion, Kurta 1999, p. 662; Lacki and increased thermoregulatory demands sheds, cabins, under eaves of buildings, Schwierjohann 2001, p. 484; Menzel et and reduced food resources. In general, behind window shutters, and in bat al. 2002, p. 110; Owen et al. 2002, p. 2; northern long-eared bats arrive at houses (Mumford and Cope 1964, p. 72; Perry and Thill 2007, p. 222; Timpone hibernacula in August or September, Barbour and Davis 1969, p. 77; Cope et al. 2010, p. 119). enter hibernation in October and and Humphrey 1972, p. 9 ; Amelon and Canopy coverage at northern long- November, and leave the hibernacula in Burhans 2006, p. 72; Whitaker and eared bat roosts has ranged from 56 March or April (Caire et al. 1979, p. 405; Mumford 2009, p. 209; Timpone et al. percent in Missouri (Timone et al. 2010, Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, p. 100; 2010, p. 119; Joe Kath 2013, pers. p. 118), 66 percent in Arkansas (Perry Amelon and Burhans 2006, p. 72). comm.). and Thill 2007, p. 223), greater than 75 However, hibernation may begin as The northern long-eared bat appears percent in New Hampshire (Sasse and early as August (Whitaker and Rissler to be somewhat opportunistic in tree Pekins 1996, p. 95), to greater than 84 1992, p. 56). In Copperhead Cave in roost selection, selecting varying roost percent in Kentucky (Lacki and west-central Indiana, the majority of tree species and types of roosts Schwierjohann 2001, p. 487). Studies in bats enter hibernation during October, throughout its range, including tree New Hampshire and British Columbia and spring emergence occurs mainly species such as black oak (Quercus have found that canopy coverage around from about the second week of March to velutina), northern red oak (Quercus roosts is lower than in available stands mid-April (Whitaker and Mumford rubra), silver maple (Acer saccharinum), (Caceres 1998; Sasse and Pekins 1996, p. 2009, p. 210). In Indiana, northern long- black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), 95). Females tend to roost in more open eared bats become more active and start American beech (Fagus grandifolia), areas than males, likely due to the feeding outside the hibernaculum in sugar maple (Acer saccharum), increased solar radiation, which aids mid-March, evidenced by stomach and sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), and pup development (Perry and Thill 2007, intestine contents. This species also shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) (e.g., p. 224). Fewer trees surrounding showed spring activity earlier than little Mumford and Cope 1964, p. 72; Clark et maternity roosts may also benefit brown bats and tri-colored bat (Whitaker al. 1987, p. 89; Sasse and Pekins 1996, juvenile bats that are starting to learn to and Rissler 1992, pp. 56–57). In p. 95; Foster and Kurta 1999, p. 662; fly (Perry and Thill 2007, p. 224). northern latitudes, such as in upper Lacki and Schwierjohann 2001, p. 484; However, in southern Illinois, northern Michigan’s copper-mining district, Owen et al. 2002, p. 2; Carter and long-eared bats were observed roosting hibernation for northern long-eared bats Feldhamer 2005, p. 262; Perry and Thill in areas with greater canopy cover than and other myotis species may begin as 2007, p. 224; Timpone et al. 2010, p. in random plots (Carter and Feldhamer early as late August and may last for 8 119). Northern long-eared bats most 2005, p. 263). Roosts are also largely to 9 months (Stones and Fritz, 1969, p. likely are not dependent on a certain selected below the canopy, which could 81; Fitch and Shump 1979, p. 2). species of trees for roosts throughout be due to the species’ ability to exploit Northern long-eared bats have shown a their range; rather, certain tree species roosts in cluttered environments; their high degree of philopatry (using the will form suitable cavities or retain bark gleaning behavior suggests an ability to same site multiple years) for a and the bats will use them easily maneuver around obstacles hibernaculum (Pearson 1962, p. 30), opportunistically (Foster and Kurta (Foster and Kurta 1999, p. 669; Menzel although they may not return to the 1999, p. 668). Carter and Felhamer et al. 2002, p. 112). same hibernaculum in successive (2005, p. 265) speculated that structural Female northern long-eared bats seasons (Caceres and Barclay 2000, complexity of habitat or available typically roost in tall, large-diameter p. 2). roosting resources are more important trees (Sasse and Pekins 1996, p. 95). Typically, northern long-eared bats factors than the actual tree species. Studies have found that the diameter-at- Many studies have documented the are not abundant and compose a small breast height (dbh) of northern long- northern long-eared bat’s selection of proportion of the total number of bats eared bat roost trees was greater than live trees and snags, with a range of 10 hibernating in a hibernaculum (Barbour random trees (Lacki and Schwierjohann to 53 percent selection of live roosts and Davis 1969, p. 77; Mills 1971, p. 2001, p. 485) and others have found found (Sasse and Perkins 1996, p. 95; 625; Caire et al. 1979, p. 405; Caceres both dbh and height of selected roost Foster and Kurta 1999, p. 668; Lacki and and Barclay 2000, pp. 2–3). Although Schwierjohann 2001, p. 484; Menzel et trees to be greater than random trees usually found in small numbers, the al. 2002, p. 107; Carter and Feldhamer (Sasse and Pekins 1996, p. 97; Owen et species typically inhabits the same 2005, p. 262; Perry and Thill 2007, p. al. 2002 p. 2). However, other studies hibernacula with large numbers of other 224; Timpone et al. 2010, p. 118). Foster have found that roost tree mean dbh and bat species, and occasionally are found and Kurta (1999, p. 663) found 53 height did not differ from random trees in clusters with these other bat species. percent of roosts in Michigan were in (Menzel et al. 2002, p. 111; Carter and Other species that commonly occupy living trees, whereas in New Hampshire, Feldhamer 2005, p. 266). Lacki and the same habitat include: little brown 34 percent of roosts were in snags (Sasse Schwierjohann (2001, p. 486) have also bat, big brown bat, eastern small-footed and Pekins 1996, p. 95). The use of live found that northern long-eared bats bat, tri-colored bat, and Indiana bat trees versus snags may reflect the roost more often on upper and middle (Swanson and Evans 1936, p. 39; Griffin availability of such structures in study slopes than lower slopes, which 1940, p. 181; Hitchcock 1949, pp. 47– areas (Perry and Thill 2007, p. 224) and suggests a preference for higher 58; Stones and Fritz 1969, p. 79; Fitch the flexibility in roost selection when elevations due to increased solar and Shump 1979, p. 2). Whitaker and there is a sympatric bat species present heating. Mumford (2009, pp. 209–210), however, (e.g., Indiana bat) (Timpone et al. 2010, Biology infrequently found northern long-eared p. 120). In tree roosts, northern long- bats hibernating beside little brown bats, eared bats are typically found beneath Hibernation Indiana bats, or tri-colored bats, since loose bark or within cavities and have Similar to the eastern small-footed bat they found few hanging on side walls or been found to use both exfoliating bark description above, the northern long- ceilings of cave passages. Barbour and and crevices to a similar degree for eared bats hibernate during the winter Davis (1969, p. 77) found that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61056 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

species is never abundant and rarely 2000, p. 2). Banding studies in Ohio, Male northern long-eared bats have been recorded in concentrations of over 100 Missouri, and Connecticut show return found to more readily use smaller in a single hibernaculum. rates to hibernacula of 5.0 percent (Mills diameter trees for roosting than females, Northern long-eared bats often move 1971, p. 625), 4.6 percent (Caire et al. suggesting males are more flexible in between hibernacula throughout the 1979, p. 404), and 36 percent (Griffin roost selection than females (Lacki and winter, which may further decrease 1940, p. 185), respectively. An Schwierjohann 2001, p. 487; Broders population estimates (Griffin 1940, p. experiment showed an individual bat and Forbes 2004, p. 606; Perry and Thill 185; Whitaker and Rissler 1992b, p. 131; returned to its home cave up to 32 km 2007, p. 224). In the Ouachita Caceres and Barclay 2000 pp. 2–3). (20 mi) away after being removed 3 days Mountains of Arkansas, both sexes Whitaker and Mumford (2009, p. 210) prior (Stones and Branick 1969, p. 158). primarily roosted in snags, although found that this species flies in and out Individuals have been known to travel females roosted in snags surrounded by of some of the mines and caves in between 56 and 97 km (35 and 60 mi) fewer midstory trees than did males southern Indiana throughout the winter. between caves during the spring (Caire (Perry and Thill 2007, p. 224). In New In particular, the bats were active at et al. 1979, p. 404; Griffin 1945, p. 20). Brunswick, Canada, Broders and Forbes Copperhead Cave periodically all (2004, pp. 606–607) found that there Summer Roosts winter, with northern long-eared bats was spatial segregation between male being more active than other species Northern long-eared bats switch and female roosts, with female (such as little brown bat and tri-colored roosts often (Sasse and Perkins 1996, p. maternity colonies typically occupying bat) hibernating in the cave. Though 95), typically every 2–3 days (Foster and more mature, shade-tolerant deciduous northern long-eared bats fly outside of Kurta 1999, p. 665; Owen et al. 2002, p. tree stands and males occupying more the hibernacula during the winter, they 2; Carter and Feldhamer 2005, p. 261; conifer-dominated stands. In do not feed; hence the function of this Timpone et al. 2010, p. 119). In northeastern Kentucky, males do not behavior is not well understood Missouri, the longest time spent use colony roosting sites and are (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, p. 101). roosting in one tree was 3 nights; typically found occupying cavities in However, it has been suggested that bat however, the up to 11 nights spent live hardwood trees, while females form activity during winter could be due in roosting in a humanmade structure has colonies more often in both hardwood part to disturbance by researchers been documented (Timpone et al. 2010, and softwood snags (Lacki and (Whitaker and Mumford 2009, pp. 210– p. 118). Similarly, Carter and Feldhamer Schwierjohann 2001, p. 486). 211). (2005, p. 261) found that the longest a The northern long-eared bat is Northern long-eared bats exhibited northern long-eared bat used the same comparable to the Indiana bat in terms significant weight loss during tree was 3 days; in West Virginia, the of summer roost selection, but appears hibernation. In southern Illinois, weight average time spent at one roost was 5.3 to be more opportunistic (Carter and loss during hibernation was found in days (Menzel et al. 2002, p. 110). Bats Feldhamer 2005, pp. 265–266; Timpone male northern long-eared bats, with switch roosts for a variety of reasons, et al. 2010, p. 120–121). In southern individuals weighing an average of 6.6 including, temperature, precipitation, Michigan, northern long-eared bats used g (0.2 ounces) prior to 10 January, and predation, parasitism, and ephemeral cavities within roost trees, living trees, those collected after that date weighing roost sites (Carter and Feldhamer 2005, and roosts with greater canopy cover an average of 5.3 g (0.2 ounces) (Pearson p. 264). Ephemeral roost sites, with the more often than does the Indiana bat, 1962, p. 30). Whitaker and Hamilton need to proactively investigate new which occurred in the same area (Foster (1998, p. 101) reported a weight loss of potential roost trees prior to their and Kurta 1999, p. 670). Similarly, in 41–43 percent over the hibernation current roost tree becoming northeastern Missouri, Indiana bats period for northern long-eared bats in uninhabitable (e.g., tree falls over), may typically roosted in snags with Indiana. In eastern Missouri, male be the most likely scenario (Kurta et al. exfoliating bark and low canopy cover, northern long-eared bats lost an average 2002, p. 127; Carter and Feldhamer whereas northern long-eared bats used of 3 g (0.1 ounces) during the 2005, p. 264; Timpone et al. 2010, p. the same habitat in addition to live hibernation period (late October through 119). In Missouri, Timpone et al. (2010, trees, shorter trees, and trees with March), and females lost an average of p. 118) radiotracked 13 northern long- higher canopy cover (Timpone et al. 2.7 g (0.1 ounces) (Caire et al. 1979, p. eared bats to 39 roosts and found the 2010 pp. 118–120). Although northern 406). mean distance between the location long-eared bats are more opportunistic where captured and roost tree was 1.7 than Indiana bats, there may be a small Migration and Homing km (1.1 mi) (range 0.07–4.8 km (0.04– amount of roost selection overlap While the northern long-eared bat is 3.0 mi), and the mean distance traveled between the two species (Foster and not considered a long-distance between roost trees was 0.67 km (0.42 Kurta 1999, p. 670; Timpone et al. 2010, migratory species, short migratory mi) (range 0.05–3.9 km (0.03–2.4 mi)). pp. 120–121). movements between summer roost and In Michigan, the longest distance the winter hibernacula between 56 km (35 same bat moved between roosts was 2 Reproduction mi) and 89 km (55 mi) have been km (1.2 mi) and the shortest was 6 m (20 Breeding occurs from late July in documented (Nagorsen and Brigham ft) (Foster and Kurta 1999, p. 665). In northern regions to early October in 1993 p. 88; Griffith 1945, p. 53). New Hampshire, the mean distance southern regions and commences when However, movements from hibernacula between foraging areas and roost trees males begin to swarm hibernacula and to summer colonies may range from 8 to was 602 m (1975 ft) (Sasse and Pekins initiate copulation activity (Whitaker 270 km (5 to 168 mi) (Griffin 1945, p. 1996, p. 95). In the Ouachita Mountains and Hamilton 1998, p. 101; Whitaker 22). of Arkansas, Perry and Thill (2007, p. and Mumford 2009, p. 210; Caceres and Several studies show a strong homing 22) found that individuals moved Barclay 2000, p. 2; Amelon and Burhans ability of northern long-eared bats in among snags that were within less than 2006, p. 69). Copulation occasionally terms of return rates to a specific 2 ha (5 ac). occurs again in the spring (Racey 1982, hibernaculum, although bats may not Some studies have found tree roost p. 73). Hibernating females store sperm return to the same hibernaculum in selection to differ slightly between male until spring, exhibiting a delayed successive winters (Caceres and Barclay and female northern long-eared bats. fertilization strategy (Racey 1979, p.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61057

392; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 4). Hampshire and Indiana (Sasse and occurs above the understory, 1 to 3 m Ovulation takes place at the time of Pekins 1996, p. 95; Whitaker and (3 to 10 ft) above the ground, but under emergence from the hibernaculum, Mumford 2009, p. 213), and August in the canopy (Nagorsen and Brigham followed by fertilization of a single egg, Nebraska (Benedict 2004, p. 235). 1993, p. 88) on forested hillsides and resulting in a single embryo (Cope and Juvenile volancy (flight) occurs by 21 ridges, rather than along riparian areas Humphrey 1972, p. 9; Caceres and days after parturition (Krochmal and (Brack and Whitaker 2001, p. 207; LaVal Pybus 1997, p. 4; Caceres and Barclay Sparks 2007, p. 651, Kunz 1971, p. 480) et al. 1977, p. 594). This coincides with 2000, p. 2); gestation is approximately and as early as 18 days after parturition data indicating that mature forests are 60 days (Kurta 1994, p. 71). Males are (Krochmal and Sparks 2007, p. 651). an important habitat type for foraging reproductively inactive until late July, Subadults were captured in late June in northern long-eared bats (Caceres and with testes descending in most males Missouri (Caire et al. 1979, p. 407), early Pybus 1998, p. 2). Occasional foraging during August and September (Caire et July in Iowa (Sasse and Pekins 1996, p. also takes place over forest clearings and al. 1979, p. 407; Amelon and Burhans 95), and early August in Ohio (Mills water, and along roads (Van Zyll de Jong 2006, p. 69). 1971, p. 625). 1985, p. 94). Foraging patterns indicate Maternity colonies, consisting of Adult longevity is estimated to be up a peak activity period within 5 hours females and young, are generally small, to 18.5 years (Hall 1957, p. 407), with after sunset followed by a secondary numbering from about 30 (Whitaker and the greatest recorded age of 19 years peak within 8 hours after sunset (Kunz Mumford 2009, p. 212) to 60 individuals (Kurta 1995, p. 71). Most mortality for 1973, p. 18–19). Brack and Whitaker (Caceres and Barclay 2000, p. 3); northern long-eared and many other (2001, p. 207) did not find significant however, one group of 100 adult females species of bats occurs during the differences in the overall diet of was observed in Vermilion County, juvenile stage (Caceres and Pybus 1997, northern long-eared bats between Indiana (Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. 4). morning (3 a.m. to dawn) and evening p. 212). In West Virginia, maternity Foraging Behavior and Home Range (dusk to midnight) feedings; however colonies in two studies had a range of there were some differences in the The northern long-eared bat has a 7–88 individuals (Owen et al. 2002, p. consumption of particular prey orders diverse diet including moths, flies, 2) and 11–65 individuals, with a mean between morning and evening feedings. leafhoppers, caddisflies, and beetles size of 31 (Menzel et al. 2002, p. 110). Additionally, no significant differences (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, p. 88; Lacki and Schwierjohann (2001, p. 485) existed in dietary diversity values Brack and Whitaker 2001, p. 207; found that the population size of colony between age classes or sex groups (Brack Griffith and Gates 1985, p. 452), with roosts declined as the summer and Whitaker 2001, p. 208). progressed with pregnant females using diet composition differing Female home range size may range the largest colonies (mean=26) and post- geographically and seasonally (Brack from 19 to 172 ha (47–425 acres) (Lacki lactating females using the smallest and Whitaker 2001, p. 208). Feldhamer et al. 2009, p. 5). Owen et al. (2003, p. colonies (mean=4), with the largest et al. (2009, p. 49) noted close overall reported colony size of 65 bats. similarities of all Myotis diets in 353) estimated average maternal home Other studies have also found that the southern Illinois, while Griffith and range size to be 65 ha (161 ac). Home number of individuals within a Gates (1985, p. 454) found significant range size of northern long-eared bats in maternity colony typically decreases differences in the diets of northern long- this study site was small relative to from pregnancy to post-lactation (Foster eared bat and little brown bat. The most other bat species, but this may be due and Kurta 1999, p. 667; Lacki and common insects found in the diets of to the study’s timing (during the Schwierjohann 2001, p. 485; Garroway northern long-eared bats are maternity period) and the small body and Broders 2007, p. 962; Perry and lepidopterans (moths) and coleopterans size of M. septentrionalis (Owen et al. Thill 2007, p. 224; Johnson et al. 2012, (beetles) (Feldhamer et al. 2009, p. 45; 2003, pp. 354–355). The mean distance p. 227). Female roost site selection, in Brack and Whitaker 2001, p. 207) with between roost trees and foraging areas of terms of canopy cover and tree height, arachnids (spiders) also being a radio-tagged individuals in New changes depending on reproductive common prey item (Feldhamer et al. Hampshire was 620 m (2034 ft) (Sasse stage; relative to pre- and post-lactation 2009, p. 45). and Pekins 1996, p. 95). periods, lactating northern long-eared Foraging techniques include hawking Summary of Factors Affecting the bats have been shown to roost higher in (catching insects in flight) and gleaning Species tall trees situated in areas of relatively in conjunction with passive acoustic less canopy cover and tree density cues (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, p. Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), (Garroway and Broders 2008, p. 91). 88; Ratcliffe and Dawson 2003, p. 851). and its implementing regulations at 50 Adult females give birth to a single Observations of northern long-eared bats CFR part 424, set forth the procedures pup (Barbour and Davis 1969). Birthing foraging on arachnids (Feldhamer et al. for adding species to the Federal Lists within the colony tends to be 2009, p. 49), presence of green plant of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife synchronous, with the majority of births material in their feces (Griffith and and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the occurring around the same time Gates 1985, p. 456), and non-flying prey Act, we may list a species based on any (Krochmal and Sparks 2007, p. 654). in their stomach contents (Brack and of the following five factors: (A) The Parturition (birth) likely occurs in late Whitaker 2001, p. 207) suggest present or threatened destruction, May or early June (Caire et al. 1979, p. considerable gleaning behavior. modification, or curtailment of its 406; Easterla 1968, p. 770; Whitaker and Northern long-eared bats have the habitat or range; (B) overutilization for Mumford 2009, p. 213), but may occur highest frequency call of any bat species commercial, recreational, scientific, or as late as July (Whitaker and Mumford in the Great Lakes area (Kurta 1995, p. educational purposes; (C) disease or 2009, p. 213). Broders et al. (2006, p. 71). Gleaning allows this species to gain predation; (D) the inadequacy of 1177) estimated a parturition date of a foraging advantage for preying upon existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) July 20 in New Brunswick. Lactating moths because moths are less able to other natural or manmade factors and post-lactating females were detect these high frequency affecting its continued existence. Listing observed in mid-June in Missouri (Caire echolocation calls (Faure et al. 1993, p. actions may be warranted based on any et al. 1979, p. 407), July in New 185). Emerging at dusk, most hunting of the above threat factors, singly or in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61058 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

combination. Each of these factors is entrance. After the wall was removed, may alter known hibernacula, are discussed below. the number of Indiana bats increased considered threats to northern long- We have carefully assessed the best markedly over the next 14 years (Richter eared bats within Kentucky (Hemberger scientific and commercial information et al. 1993, p. 412; Brack et al. 2003, p. 2011, unpublished data). In States available regarding the past, present, 67). In an eastern small-footed bat surveyed for effects to northern long- and future threats to the eastern small- example, the construction associated eared bats by hibernacula collapse, footed and northern long-eared bats. with commercializing the Fourth Chute responses varied, with the following Effects to both the eastern small-footed Cave in Ontario, Canada, eliminated the number of hibernacula in each State bat and northern long-eared bat from circulation of cold air in one of the reported as susceptible to collapse: 1 (of these factors are discussed together unvisited passages where a relatively 7) in Maryland, 3 (of 11) in Minnesota, where the species are affected similarly. large number of eastern small-footed 1 (of 5) in New Hampshire, 4 (of 15) in There are several factors presented bats hibernated. These bats were North Carolina, 1 (of 2) in South below that affect both the eastern small- completely displaced as a result of the Carolina, and 1 (of 13) in Vermont footed and the northern long-eared bats warmer microclimate produced (Mohr (Service 2011, unpublished data). to a greater or lesser degree; however, 1972, p. 36). Correctly installed gates, Before current cave protection laws, we have found that no other threat is as however, at other locations (e.g., Aitkin there were several reported instances severe and immediate to the northern Cave, Pennsylvania) have led to where mines were closed while bats long-eared bat’s persistence as the increases in eastern small-footed bat were hibernating and entombing entire disease, white-nose syndrome (WNS), populations (Butchkoski 2012, pers. colonies (Tuttle and Taylor 1998, p. 8). discussed below in Factor C. WNS is comm.). An example of northern long- Several caves were historically sealed or currently the predominant threat to the eared bats likely being affected occurred mined in Maryland prior to cave species, and if WNS had not emerged or when John Friend Cave in Maryland protection laws, although bat was not affecting the northern long- was filled with large rocks in 1981, populations were undocumented (Feller eared bat populations to the level that which closed the only known entrance 2011, unpublished data). For both the it has, we presume the species’ would to the cave (Gates et al. 1984, p. 166). eastern small-footed and northern long- not be experiencing the dramatic In addition to the direct access eared bats, loss of potential winter declines that it has since WNS emerged. modifications to caves discussed above, habitat through mine closures has been Therefore, although we have included debris buildup at entrances or on cave noted as a concern in Virginia, although brief discussions of other factors gates can also significantly modify the visual inspections of openings are affecting both species, the focus of the cave or mine site characteristics through typically conducted to determine discussion below is on WNS. restricting airflow, altering the whether gating is warranted (Reynolds temperature of hibernacula, and 2011, unpublished data). In Nebraska, Factor A. The Present or Threatened restricting water flow. Water flow closing quarries, and specifically sealing Destruction, Modification, or restriction could lead to flooding, thus quarries in Cass and Sapry Counties, is Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range drowning hibernating bats (Amelon and considered a potential threat to northern Hibernation Habitat Burhans 2006, p. 72; Hemberger 2011, long-eared bats (Geluso 2011, unpublished data). In Minnesota, 5 of 11 unpublished data). Modifications to bat hibernacula by known northern long-eared bat In general, threats to the integrity of erecting physical barriers (e.g., doors, hibernacula are known to flood, bat hibernacula have decreased since gates) to control cave access and mining presenting a threat to hibernating bats the Indiana bat was listed as endangered can affect the thermal regime of the (Nordquist 2012, pers. comm.). In in 1967, and since the implementation habitat, and thus the ability of the cave Massachusetts, one of the known of Federal and State cave protection or mine to support hibernating bats, hibernacula for northern long-eared bats laws. Increasing awareness about the including the northern long-eared and, is a now unused aqueduct that on very importance of cave and mine in some cases, the eastern small-footed rare occasions may fill up with water microclimates to hibernating bats and bat. For example, the Service’s Indiana and make the hibernaculum unusable regulation under the Act have helped to Bat Draft Recovery Plan (2007, pp. 71– (French 2012, unpublished data). alleviate the destruction or modification 74) presents a discussion of well- Flooding has been noted in hibernacula of hibernation habitat, at least where the documented examples of these type of in other States within the range of the Indiana bat is present (Service 2007, p. effectss to cave-hibernating species that northern long-eared bat, but to a lesser 74). The eastern small-footed bat and are also applicable to our discussion degree. Although modifications to northern long-eared bat have likely here. Modifications to cave and mine hibernacula can lead to mortality of benefitted from the protections given to entrances, such as the addition of gates both species, it has not had population- the Indiana bat and its winter habitat, as or other structures intended to exclude level effects. both species’ ranges overlap humans, not only restricts flight and Mining operations, mine passage significantly with the Indiana bat’s movement (Hemberger 2011, collapse (subsidence), and mine range. unpublished data), but also changes reclamation activities can also affect airflow and alters internal bats and their hibernacula. Internal and Disturbance of Hibernating Bats microclimates of the caves and mines external collapse of abandoned coal Human disturbance of hibernating and eliminating their utility as mines was identified as one of the bats has long been considered a threat hibernacula. For example, Richter et al. primary threats to eastern small-footed to cave-hibernating bat species like the (1993, p. 409) attributed the decline in and northern long-eared bat hibernacula eastern small-footed and northern long- the number of Indiana bats at at sites located within the New River eared bats, and is discussed in detail in Wyandotte Cave, Indiana (which Gorge National River and Gauley River the Service’s Indiana Bat Draft Recovery harbors one of the largest known National Recreation Area in West Plan (2007, pp. 80–85). The primary population of hibernating Indiana bats), Virginia (Graham 2011, unpublished forms of human disturbance to to an increase in the cave’s temperature data). Collapse of hibernacula entrances hibernating bats result from cave resulting from restricted airflow caused or areas within the hibernacula, as well commercialization (cave tours and other by a stone wall erected at the cave’s as quarry and mining operations that commercial uses of caves), recreational

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61059

caving, vandalism, and research-related addition to unintended effects of sited in forested habitats, effects from activities (Service 2007, p. 80). Arousal commercial and recreational caving, wind-energy development may include during hibernation causes the greatest intentional killing of bats in caves by forest-clearings associated with turbine amount of energy depletion in shooting, burning, and clubbing has placement, road construction, turbine hibernating bats (Thomas et al. 1990, p. been documented, although there are no lay-down areas, transmission lines, and 477). Human disturbance at data suggesting that eastern small-footed substations. In Maryland, wind power hibernacula, specifically non-tactile bats have been killed by these activities development has been proposed in areas disturbance such as changes in light and (Tuttle 1979, pp. 4, 8). Intentional with documented eastern small-footed sound, can cause bats to arouse more killing of northern long-eared bats has bat and northern long-eared bat summer frequently, causing premature energy been documented at a small percentage habitat (Feller 2011, unpublished data). store depletion and starvation, as well of hibernacula (e.g., several cases of In Pennsylvania, the majority of wind- as increased tactile disturbance of bats vandalism at hibernacula in Kentucky, energy projects are located in habitats to other individuals (Thomas et al. one case of shooting disturbance in characterized as mountain ridge-top, 1995, p. 944; Speakman et al. 1991, p. Maryland, one case of bat torching in cliffs, steep slopes, or isolated hills with 1103), leading to marked reductions in Massachusetts where approximately 100 steep, often vertical sides (Mumma and bat populations (Tuttle 1979, p. 3). Prior bats (northern long-eared bats and other Capouillez 2011, pp. 11–12). Eastern to the outbreak of WNS, Amelon and species) were killed) (Service, small-footed bats were confirmed Burhans (2006, p. 73) indicated that unpublished data), but we do not have through bat mist-net surveys at 7 of 34 ‘‘the widespread recreational use of evidence that this is happening on a proposed wind-energy project sites in caves and indirect or direct disturbance large enough scale to have population- Pennsylvania, and northern long-eared by humans during the hibernation level effects. bats were confirmed at all 34 proposed period pose the greatest known threat to In summary, while there are isolated wind project sites (Mumma and this species (northern long-eared bat).’’ incidents of previous disturbance to Capouillez 2011, pp. 62–63). See Factor Olson et al. (2011, p. 228), hypothesized both bat species due to recreational use E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors that decreased visits by recreational of caves in both species, we conclude Affecting Its Continued Existence for a users and researchers were related to an that there is no evidence suggesting that discussion on effects to bats from the increase in the hibernating bat this threat in itself has led to population operation of wind turbines. population (including northern long- declines in either species. Another activity that may modify or destroy eastern small-footed bat roosting eared bats) at Cadomin Cave in Alberta, Summer Habitat Canada. Disturbance during hibernation habitat is mined-land reclamation, could cause movements within or Eastern small-footed bats roost in a whereby rock habitats (e.g., rock piles, between caves (Beer 1955, p. 244). variety of natural and manmade rock cliffs, spoil piles) are removed from Human disturbance is a potential features, whereas northern long-eared previously mined lands. The Office of threat at approximately half of the bats roost predominantly in trees and to Surface Mining Reclamation and known eastern small-footed bat a lesser extent in manmade structures, Enforcement and its partners are hibernacula in the States of Kentucky, as discussed in detail in the Species responsible for reclaiming and restoring Maryland, North Carolina, Vermont, and Information section above. We know of lands degraded by mining operations. West Virginia (Service, unpublished only one documented account where Mining sites eligible for restoration are data). Of the States in the northern long- vandals were responsible for destroying numerous in the States of Pennsylvania, eared bat’s range that assessed the a portion of an eastern small-footed bat Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky. possibility of human disturbance at bat roost located in Maryland (Feller 2011, Reclaiming these sites often involves the hibernacula, 93 percent (13 of 14) unpublished data). More commonly, removal of exposed rock habitats that identified potential effects from human roost habitat for both the eastern small- may be used as eastern small-footed bat disturbance for at least 1 of the known footed bat and northern long-eared bat roost habitat (Sanders 2011, pers. hibernacula for this species in their state is at risk of modification or destruction. comm.). The number of potential roost (Service, unpublished data). Eight of In Pennsylvania, for example, highway sites that have been destroyed or that these 14 States (Arkansas, Kentucky, construction, commercial development, may be destroyed in the future and the Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and several wind-energy projects may potential effect of this destruction on North Carolina, South Carolina, and remove eastern small-footed bat roosting eastern small-footed bat populations are Vermont) indicated the potential for habitat (Librandi-Mumma 2011, pers. largely unknown. Despite the potential human disturbance at over 50 percent of comm.). Some of the highest rates of negative effects of this activity, there are the known hibernacula in that State. development in the conterminous no data available suggesting a decrease Nearly all States without WNS United States are occurring within the in the number of eastern small-footed identified human disturbance as the range of eastern small-footed and bats from mined-land reclamation primary threat to hibernating bats, and northern long-eared bats (Brown et al. activities. Since northern long-eared all others (including WNS-positive 2005, p. 1856) and contribute to loss of bats are not known to use exposed rock States) noted human disturbance as a forest habitat. habitat for roost sites, mined-land secondary threat (WNS was Wind-energy development is rapidly reclamation does not affect this species. predominantly the primary threat in increasing throughout the eastern small- Surface coal mining is also common these States) or of significant concern footed bat and northern long-eared bats’ in the central Appalachian region, (Service, unpublished data). ranges, particularly in the States of New which includes portions of The threat of commercial use of caves Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, and mines during the hibernation and Massachusetts. As well, Iowa, Kentucky, and Tennessee, and is one of period has decreased at many sites Illinois, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and the major drivers of land cover change known to harbor Indiana bats, and we North Dakota are within the top 10 in the region (Sayler 2008, believe that this also applies to eastern States for wind power capacity (in unpaginated). Surface coal mining also small-footed and northern long-eared megawatts) (installed projects) in the may destroy forest habitat in parts of the bats. However, effects from recreational United States (American Wind Energy Illinois Basin in southwest Indiana, caving are more difficult to assess. In Association 2012, p. 6). If projects are western Kentucky, and Illinois (King

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61060 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

2013, pers. comm.). One major form of conservation efforts for the eastern shared roost trees, which may lead to surface mining is mountaintop mining, small-footed bat. less communication between bats in which is widespread throughout eastern Although there is still much to learn addition to less disease transmission Kentucky, West Virginia, and about the effects of forest removal on (Johnson et al. 2012, p. 230). In the southwestern Virginia (Palmer et al. northern long-eared bats and their Appalachians, Ford et al. (2006, p. 20) 2010, p. 148). Mountaintop mining associated summer habitat, studies to assessed that northern long-eared bats involves the clearing of upper elevation date have found that the northern long- may be a suitable management indicator forests, stripping of topsoil, and use of eared bat shows a varied degree of species for assessing mature forest explosives to break up rocks to access sensitivity to timber harvesting ecosystem integrity, since they found buried coal. The excess rock is practices. Several studies (as discussed male bats using roosts in mature forest sometimes pushed into adjacent valleys, in the Species Information section stands of mostly second growth or where it buries existing streams (Palmer above) have found that the species uses regenerated forests. et al. 2010, p. 148). Hartman et al. (2005, a wide range of tree species for roosting, There is conflicting information on suggesting that forest succession may p. 96) reported significant reductions in sensitivities of male versus female play a larger role in roost selection (than insect densities in streams affected with northern long-eared bats to forestry tree species) (Silvis et al. 2012, p. 6). fill material, including lower densities practices and resulting fragmentation. In Studies have found that female bat Arkansas, Perry and Thill (2007, p. 225) of coleopterans, a primary food source roosts are more often (i.e., greater than of eastern small-footed and northern found that male northern long-eared what would be expected from random bats seem to prefer more dense stands long-eared bats (Griffith and Gates 1985, chance) located in areas with partial for summer roosting, with 67 percent of p. 452; Johnson and Gates 2007, p. 319; harvesting than in random sites, which male roosts occurring in unharvested Moosman et al. 2007, p. 355; Feldhamer may be due to trees located in more sites versus 45 percent of female roosts. et al. 2009, p. 45). The effect of open habitat receiving greater solar The greater tendency of females to roost mountaintop mining on eastern small- radiation and therefore speeding in more open forested areas than males footed bat and northern long-eared bat development of young (Menzel et al. may be due to greater solar radiation populations is largely unknown. 2002, p. 112; Perry and Thill 2007, pp. experienced in these openings, which 224–225). In the Appalachians of West The effect of forest removal related to could speed growth of young in Virginia, diameter-limit harvests (70–90 the eastern small-footed bat is poorly maternity colonies (Perry and Thill understood. Forest management can year-old stands, with 30–40 percent of the basal area removed in the past 10 2007, p. 224). Lacki and Schwierjohann influence the availability and (2001, p. 487) stated that silvicultural characteristics of non-tree roost sites, years) rather than intact forest was the habitat type most selected by northern practices could meet both male and such as those used by eastern small- female roosting requirements by footed bats, although the resulting long-eared bats (Owen et al. 2003, p. 356). Cryan et al. (2001, p. 49) found maintaining large-diameter snags, while effects on bats and bat populations are allowing for regeneration of forests. poorly known (Hayes and Loeb 2007, p. several northern long-eared bat roost areas in recently harvested (less than 5 However, Broders and Forbes (2004, p. 215). Since eastern small-footed bats 608) found that timber harvest may have often forage in forests immediately years) stands in the Black Hills of South Dakota, although the largest colony negative effects on female bats since surrounding roost sites, forest they use forest interiors at small scales management may affect the quality of (n=41) was found in a mature forest stand that had not been harvested in (less than 2 km (1.2 mi) from roost foraging habitat (Johnson et al. 2009, p. sites). They also found that males are 5). Scientific evidence and anecdotal over 50 years. In intensively managed forests in the central Appalachians, not as limited in roost selection and observations support the hypotheses they do not have the energetic cost of that bats respond to prey availability, Owen et al. (2002, p. 4) found roost availability was not a limiting factor for raising young; therefore males may be that prey availability is influenced by the northern long-eared bat, since bats less affected than females (Broders and forest management, and that influences often chose black locust and black Forbes 2004, p. 608). Henderson et al. of forest management on prey cherry as roost trees, which were quite (2008, p. 1825) also found that forest populations affect bat populations abundant since these trees often fragmentation effects northern long- (Hayes and Loeb 2007, p. 219). In regenerate quickly after disturbance eared bats at different scales based on addition, forest management activities (e.g., timber harvest). sex; females require a larger that influence tree density directly alter It is possible that this flexibility in unfragmented area with a large number the amount of vegetative clutter (e.g., roosting habits allows northern long- of suitable roost trees to support a tree density) in an area. As a result, eared bats to be adaptable in managed colony, whereas males are able to use forest management can directly forests, which allows them to avoid smaller areas (more fragmented). influence habitat suitability for bats competition for roosting habitat with Henderson and Broders (2008, pp. 959– through changes in the amount of more specialized species, such as the 960) examined how female northern vegetative clutter (Hayes and Loeb 2007, Indiana bat (Timpone et al. 2010, p. long-eared bats use the forest- p. 217). Eastern small-footed bats are 121). However, the northern long-eared agricultural landscape on Prince capable of foraging in cluttered forest bat has shown a preference for Edward Island, Canada, and found that interiors, but as discussed in the Species contiguous tracts of forest cover for bats were limited in their mobility and Information section above, they have foraging (Owen et al. 2003, p. 356; Yates activities are constrained where suitable also been found foraging in clearings, in and Muzika 2006, p. 1245). Jung et al. forest is limited. However, they also strip mine areas, and over water. (2004, p. 333) found that it is important found that bats in relatively fragmented Johnson and Gates (2008, p. 459) suggest to retain snags and provide for areas used a building for colony that a better understanding of the recruitment of roost trees during roosting, which suggests an alternative required spatial extent and structure of selective harvesting in forest stands that for a colony to persist in an area with forest cover along ridgelines and rock harbor bats. If roost networks are fewer available roost trees. Although we outcrops, as well as additional foraging disturbed through timber harvesting, are still learning about the effect of activity requirements, is needed to aid there may be more dispersal and fewer forest removal on northern long-eared

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61061

bats and their associated summer footed bats. One of the threats to bats in Factor C. Disease or Predation habitat, studies to date have found that Michigan is the closure of unsafe mines Disease the northern long-eared bat shows a in such a way that bats are trapped varied degree of sensitivity to timber within or excluded; however, there have White-Nose Syndrome harvesting practices and the amount of been efforts by the Michigan White-nose syndrome is an emerging forest removal occurring varies by State. Department of Natural Resources and infectious disease responsible for Natural gas development from shale is others to work with landowners who unprecedented mortality in some expanding across the United States, have open mines to encourage them to hibernating insectivorous bats of the particularly throughout the range of the install bat-friendly gates to close mines northeastern United States (Blehert et northern long-eared and eastern small- to humans, but allow access to bats al. 2009, p. 227), and poses a footed bat. Natural gas extraction (Hoving 2011, unpublished data). The considerable threat to several involves fracturing rock formations and NPS has proactively taken efforts to hibernating bat species throughout uses highly pressurized fluids minimize effects to bat habitat resulting North America (Service 2010, p. 1). consisting of water and various Since its first documented appearance chemicals to do so (Hein 2012, p. 1). from vandalism, recreational activities, and abandoned mine closures (Plumb in New York in 2006, WNS has spread Natural gas extraction, particularly rapidly throughout the Northeast and is across the Marcellus Shale region, and Budde 2011, unpublished data). In expanding through the Midwest. As of which includes large portions of New addition, the NPS is properly gating, August 2013, WNS has been confirmed York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West using a ‘‘bat-friendly design, abandoned in 22 States (Alabama, Connecticut, Virginia, is expected to expand over the coal mine entrances as funding permits Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, coming years. In Pennsylvania, for (Graham 2011, unpublished data). All Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, example, nearly 2,000 Marcellus natural known hibernacula within national Massachusetts, Missouri, New gas wells have already been drilled or grasslands and forestlands of the Rocky Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, permitted, and as many as 60,000 more Mountain Region of the U.S. Forest North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, could be built by 2030, if development Service are closed during the winter South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, trends continue (Johnson 2010, pp. 8, hibernation period, primarily due to the Virginia, and West Virginia) and 5 13). Habitat loss and degradation due to threat of white-nose syndrome, although Canadian provinces (New Brunswick, this practice could occur in the form of this will reduce disturbance to bats in forest clearing for well pads and Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward general inhabiting these hibernacula Island, and Quebec). Four additional associated infrastructure (e.g., roads, (U.S. Forest Service 2013, unpaginated). pipelines, and water impoundments), States (Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, and Concern over the importance of bat Oklahoma) are considered suspect for which would decrease the amount of roosts, including hibernacula, fueled suitable interior forest habitat available WNS based on the detection of the efforts by the American Society of causative fungus on bats within those to northern long-eared and eastern Mammalogists to develop guidelines for small-footed bats for establishing States, but with no associated disease to protection of roosts, many of which date. Service biologists and partners maternity colonies and for foraging, in have been adopted by government addition to further isolating populations estimate that at least 5.7 million to 6.7 agencies and special interest groups and, therefore, potentially decreasing million bats of several species have now (Sheffield et al. 1992, p. 707). genetic diversity (Johnson 2010, p. 10; died from WNS (Service 2012, p. 1). Hein 2012, p. 6). Since northern long- Summary of the Present or Threatened Dzal et al. (2011, p. 393) documented a 78-percent decline in the summer eared bats and eastern small-footed bats Destruction, Modification, or activity of little brown bats in New York have philopatric tendencies, loss or Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range alteration of forest habitat for natural gas State, coinciding with the arrival and development may also put additional We have identified several activities, spread of WNS, suggesting large-scale stress on females when returning to such as constructing physical barriers at population effects. Turner et al. (2011, summer roost or foraging areas after cave accesses, mining, flooding, p. 22) reported an 88-percent decline in hibernation if females were forced to vandalism, development, and timber the number of hibernating bats at 42 find new roosting or foraging areas harvest, that may modify or destroy sites from the States of New York, (expend additional energy) (Hein 2012, habitat for the eastern small-footed bat Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and pp. 11–12). and northern long-eared bat. Although West Virginia. Furthermore, Frick et al. (2010, p. 681) predicted that the little Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat such activities occur, these activities alone do not have significant, brown bat, formerly the most common Destruction, Modification, or bat in the northeastern United States, Curtailment of Its Range population-level effects on either species. will likely become extinct in the region Although there are various forms of by 2026 (potential loss of some 6.5 habitat destruction and disturbance that Factor B. Overutilization for million bats) if current trends continue. present potential adverse effects to the Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Similarly, Thogmartin et al. (2013, p. northern long-eared bat, this is not Educational Purposes 171) predicted that WNS is likely to considered the predominant threat to extirpate the federally endangered the species. Even if all habitat-related There are very few records of either Indiana bat over large parts of its range. stressors were eliminated or minimized, species being collected specifically for These predicted trends in little brown the significant effects of WNS on the commercial, recreational, scientific, or bats and Indiana bats may or may not northern long-eared bat would still be educational purposes, and thus we do also be indicative of population trends present. Therefore, below we present a not consider such collection activities to in other bat species like the eastern few examples, but not a comprehensive pose a threat to either species. small-footed and northern long-eared list, of conservation efforts that have Disturbance of hibernating bats as a bats. been undertaken to lessen effects from result of recreational use and scientific The first evidence of WNS was habitat destruction or disturbance to research activities in hibernacula is documented in a photograph taken from northern long-eared and eastern small- discussed under Factor A. Howes Cavern, 52 km (32 mi) west of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61062 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Albany, New York, on February16, 2006 may be more susceptible to WNS, but and 1 tri-colored bat) had an appreciable (Blehert et al. 2009, p. 227). Prior to the further research is needed to confirm degree of fat stores (Courtin et al. 2010, arrival of WNS, surveys of six species of this hypothesis. Declines in Indiana bats p. 4). hibernating bats in New York State have been greater under more humid Boyles and Willis (2010, pp. 92–98) revealed that populations had been conditions, suggesting that growth of the hypothesized that infection by stable or increasing in recent decades fungus and either intensity or Geomyces destructans alters the normal (Service 2010, p. 1). Decreases in some prevalence of infections are higher in arousal cycles of hibernating bats, species of bats at WNS-infected more humid conditions (Langwig et al. particularly by increasing arousal hibernacula have ranged from 30 to 99 2012a, p. 1055). Although G. frequency, duration, or both. In fact, percent (Frick et al. 2010, p. 680). destructans has been isolated from five Reeder et al. (2012, p. 5) and Warnecke The pattern of spread has generally bat species from Europe, research et al. (2012, p. 2) did observe an followed predictable trajectories along suggests that bat species in Europe may increase in arousal frequency in recognized migratory pathways and be immunologically or behaviorally laboratory studies of hibernating bats overlapping summer ranges of resistant, having coevolved with the infected with G. destructans. A hibernating bat species. Therefore, Kunz fungus (Wibbelt et al. 2010, p. 1241). disruption of this torpor-arousal cycle and Reichard (2010, p. 12) assert that Pikula et al. (2012, p. 210), however, could easily cause bats to metabolize fat WNS is spread mainly through bat-to- confirmed that bats found dead in the reserves too quickly, thereby leading to bat contact; however, evidence suggests Czech Republic exhibited lesions starvation. For example, skin irritation from the fungus might cause bats to that fungal spores can be transmitted by consistent with WNS infection. In addition to the presence of the remain out of torpor for longer than humans (United States Geologic Survey white fungus, initial observations normal to groom, thereby exhausting (USGS) National Wildlife Health Center, showed that bats affected by WNS were their fat reserves prematurely (Boyles Wildlife Health Bulletin 2011–05), and characterized by some or all of the and Willis 2010, p. 93). bats can also become infected by coming following: (1) Depleted fat reserves by Due to the unique physiological into contact with contaminated cave mid-winter; (2) a general importance of wings to hibernating bats substrate (Darling 2012, pers. comm.). unresponsiveness to human in relation to the damage caused by Six North American hibernating bat disturbance; (3) an apparent lack of Geomyces destructans, Cryan et al. species (little brown bat, Indiana bat, immune response during hibernation; (2010, pp. 1–8) suggests that mortality northern long-eared bat, eastern small- (4) ulcerated, necrotic, and scarred wing may be caused by catastrophic footed bat, big brown bat, and tri- membranes; and (5) aberrant behaviors, disruption of wing-dependent colored bat), are known to be affected by including shifts of large numbers of bats physiological functions. The authors WNS; however, the effect of WNS varies in hibernacula to roosts near the hypothesize that G. destructans may by species. The fungus that causes WNS entrances or unusually cold areas, large cause unsustainable dehydration in has been detected on three additional numbers of bats dispersing during the water-dependent bats, trigger thirst- species; the southeastern bat (Myotis day from hibernacula during mid- associated arousals, cause significant austroriparius), and gray bat (Myotis winter, and large numbers of fatalities, circulatory and thermoregulatory grisescens), and cave bat (Myotis velifer). either inside the hibernacula, near the disturbance, disrupt respiratory gas White-nose syndrome is caused by the entrance, or in the immediate vicinity of exchange, and destroy wing structures recently described psychrophilic (cold- the entrance (WNS Science Strategy necessary for flight control (Cryan et al. loving) fungus, currently known as Report 2008, p. 2; Service 2010, p. 2). 2010, p. 7). The wings of winter- Geomyces destructans. Geomyces Although the exact process by which collected WNS-affected bats often reveal destructans may be nonnative to North WNS leads to death remains signs of infection, whereby the degree of America, and only recently arrived on undetermined, it is likely that the damage observed suggests functional the continent (Puechmaille et al. 2011, immune function during torpor impairment. Emaciation is a common p. 8). The fungus grows on and within compromises the ability of hibernating finding in bats that have died from WNS exposed tissues of hibernating bats bats to combat the infection (Bouma et (Cryan et al. 2010, p. 3). Cryan et al. (Lorch et al. 2011, p. 376; Gargas et al. al. 2010, p. 623; Moore et al. 2011, p. (2010, p. 3) hypothesized that 2009, pp. 147–154)), and the diagnostic 10). disruption of physiological homeostasis, feature is the white fungal growth on Early hypotheses suggested that WNS potentially caused by G. destructans muzzles, ears, or wing membranes of may affect bats before the hibernation infection, may be sufficient to result in affected bats, along with epidermal season begins, causing bats to arrive at emaciation and mortality. The authors (skin) erosions that are filled with hibernacula with insufficient fat to hypothesized that wing damage caused fungal hyphae (branching, filamentous survive the winter. Alternatively, a by G. destructans infections could structures of fungi) (Blehert et al. 2009, second hypothesis suggests that bats sufficiently disrupt water balance to p. 227; Meteyer 2009, p. 412). Geomyces arrive at hibernacula unaffected and trigger frequent thirst-associated destructans grows optimally at enter hibernation with sufficient fat arousals with excessive winter flight, temperatures from 5 to 10 °C (41 to 50 stores, but then become affected and use and subsequent premature depletion of °F), the same temperatures at which bats fat stores too quickly as a result of fat stores. In related research, Cryan et typically hibernate (Blehert et al. 2009, disruption to hibernation physiology al. (2013, p. 398) found, after analyzing p. 227). Temperatures in WNS-affected (WNS Science Strategy Group 2008, p. blood from hibernating bats infected hibernacula seasonally range from 2 to 7). More recent observations, however, with WNS, that electrolytes, sodium and 14 °C (36 to 57 °F), permitting year- suggest that bats are arriving to chloride, tended to decrease as wing round growth, and may act as a hibernacula with sufficient or only damage increased in severity. Proper reservoir maintaining the fungus slightly lower fat stores (Turner 2011, concentrations of electrolytes are (Blehert et al. 2009, p. 227). Growth is pers. comm.), and that although body necessary for maintaining physiologic slow, and no growth occurs at weights of WNS-infected bats were homeostasis, and any imbalance could temperatures above 24 °C (75 °F) (Gargas consistently at the lower end of the be life-threatening (Cryan et al. 2013, p. et al. 2009, p. 152). Bats that are found normal range, in one study 12 of 14 bats 398). Although the exact mechanism by in more humid regions of hibernacula (10 little brown bats, 1 big-brown bat, which WNS affects bats is still in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61063

question, the effect it has on many Massachusetts. Langwig et al. (2012b, p. 2012, unpaginated). In addition, Francl hibernating bat species is well 15) also observed lower prevalence of et al. (2012, p. 34) compared bat mist- documented as well as the high levels Geomyces destructans on eastern small- net data collected from 31 counties in of mortality it causes in some footed bat wing and muzzle tissue West Virginia prior to the detection of susceptible bat species. during late hibernation, compared to WNS (1997 to 2008) to 8 West Virginia other bat species (e.g., little brown bats). and 1 extreme southwestern Effects of White-Nose Syndrome on the Lastly, biologists did not observe fungal Pennsylvania counties surveyed in Eastern Small-Footed Bat growth (although the fungus may not be 2010. Researchers reported a 16-percent Eastern small-footed bats are known visible after the first couple of years) on decline in the post-WNS capture rate for to be susceptible to WNS. As of 2011, eastern small-footed bats during 2013 eastern small-footed bats, although they of the 283 documented eastern small- hibernacula surveys in New York, acknowledge the small sample size may footed bat hibernacula, 86 (31 percent) Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, even have inherently higher variation and were WNS-positive (Service 2011, though it was observed on other bat bias compared to more common species unpublished data). Only three eastern species (e.g., little brown bats) within that showed consistently negative small-footed bats have been collected, the same sites (although a few, not all, trends (e.g., northern long-eared, little tested, and confirmed positive for WNS eastern small-footed bats viewed under brown, and tri-colored bats) (Francl et by histology: One bat collected and ultraviolet light did show signs of mild al. 2012, p. 40). Lastly, during acoustic euthanized from New York in 2009, one infections), nor did they observe surveys for bats, Nagel and Gates (2012, bat found dead in Pennsylvania in 2011, reduced numbers of eastern small- p. 5) reported a 63-percent increase in and one bat found dead from South footed bats compared to pre-WNS years the number of eastern small-footed bat Carolina in 2013 (Ballmann 2011, pers. (Graeter 2013, pers. comm.; Herzog passes during acoustic surveys from comm.; Last 2013a, pers. comm.). An 2013, pers. comm.; Turner 2013, 2010 to 2012 in western Maryland, additional eastern small-footed bat unpublished data). In fact, biologists in although large declines in bat passes collected in winter 2011–2012 from the New York observed the largest number were observed for other species (e.g., Mammoth Cave Visitor Center in of hibernating eastern small-footed bats northern long-eared, little brown/ Kentucky, was submitted to the ever reported (2,383) during surveys Indiana, and tri-colored bats). Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife conducted in 2013, up from 1,727 Several factors may influence why Disease Study; however, this bat tested reported in 1993 using roughly eastern small-footed bats are potentially negative for WNS. Biologists also comparable survey effort (Herzog 2013, less susceptible to WNS than other observed approximately five dead pers. comm.). In summary, WNS does Myotis bats. First, during mild winters, eastern small-footed bats with obvious not appear to have caused a significant eastern small-footed bats may not enter signs of fungal infection in Virginia population decline in hibernating caves and mines or, if they do, may (Reynolds 2011, pers. comm.). eastern small-footed bats. leave during mild periods. Although To determine whether WNS is Summer survey data are limited for there are few winter observations of this causing a population-level effect to the eastern small-footed bat. We know species outside of cave and mine eastern small-footed bats, the Service of only three studies that have habitat, it was first speculated in 1945 began by reviewing winter hibernacula attempted to quantify changes in the as a possibility. In trying to explain why survey data. By comparing the most number of non-hibernating eastern so many bats banded in the summer recent pre-WNS count to the most small-footed bats since the spread of were unaccounted for during winter recent post-WNS count, Turner et al. WNS (Francl et al. 2012; Nagel and hibernacula surveys, Griffin (1945, p. (2011, p. 22) reported a 12-percent Gates 2012; Moosman et al. in press). At 22) suggested that bats may be using decline in the number of hibernating one study location, Surry Mountain alternate hibernacula such as small, eastern small-footed bats at 25 Reservoir, New Hampshire, bats were deep crevices in rocks, which he hibernacula in New York, Pennsylvania, mist-netted over multiple years before suggested would provide a bat with Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. and after the emergence of WNS adequate protection from freezing. Data analyzed in this study were limited (Moosman et al. in press). Researchers Neubaum et al. (2006, p. 476) observed to sites with confirmed WNS mortality observed a significant decline in the many big brown bats choosing for at least 2 years and sites with relative abundance of eastern small- hibernation sites in rock crevices and comparable survey effort across pre- and footed bats between 2005 and 2011, speculated that this pattern of roost post-WNS years. Based on a review of based on reductions in capture rates. selection could be common for other pre-WNS hibernacula count data over However, they found that the species. Time spent outside of cave and multiple years at 12 of these sites, the probability of capturing greater than or mine habitat by eastern small-footed number of eastern small-footed bats equal to one eastern small-footed bat on bats means less time for the fungus to fluctuated between years. any given visit during the 7 years of grow because environmental conditions When we compared the most recent study was similar across years, although (e.g., temperature and humidity) are post-WNS eastern small-footed bat the probability of capturing other suboptimal for fungus growth. count to pre-WNS observations, we species (e.g., northern long-eared and A second factor that may influence found that post-WNS counts were little brown bats) declined over time. lower susceptibility of eastern small- within the normal observed range at Moosman et al. (unpublished data) also footed bats to WNS is that this bat nine sites (75 percent), higher at two noted that the observed decline in species tends to enter cave or mine sites (17 percent), and lower at only one relative abundance of eastern small- habitat later (mid-November) and leave site (8 percent). In addition, although footed bats at their site should not be earlier (mid-March) compared to other Langwig et al. (2012a, p. 1052) reported solely attributed to WNS because of the Myotis bats, again providing less time a significantly lower population growth potential for bats to become trap-shy for the fungus to grow, and less energy rate compared to pre-WNS population due to repeated sampling efforts. expenditure than other species that growth rates for eastern small-footed Eastern small-footed bats are noted for hibernate longer. Third, when eastern bat, they found that the species was not their ability to detect and avoid mist- small-footed bats are present at caves declining significantly at hibernacula in nets, perhaps more so than other bat and mines, they are most frequently New York, Vermont, Connecticut, and species within their range (Tyburec observed at the entrances, where

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61064 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

humidity is low and temperature suspect (Ballmann 2013, pers. comm.). sites where northern long-eared bats fluctuations are high, which In addition, 9 of 14 northern long-eared were also observed prior to WNS in consequently does not provide ideal bats in 2012–2013 were positive, and 1 Pennsylvania, researchers found a 99- environmental conditions for fungal was suspect (Last 2013b, pers. comm.); percent decline (from 637 to 5 bats) growth. Cryan et al. (2010, p. 4) suggest all the WNS-positive submissions were (Turner 2013, unpublished data). that eastern small-footed bats may be from Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio. Due to favoring small cracks or less susceptible to evaporative water The New York Department of crevices in cave ceilings, making them loss, since they often select drier areas Environmental Conservation has more challenging to locate during of hibernacula, and therefore may be confirmed 29 northern long-eared bats hibernacula surveys, data in some States less susceptible to succumbing to WNS. submitted with signs of WNS, at (particularly those with a greater Big brown bats also tend to select drier, minimum (there are still bat carcasses number of caves with more cracks or more ventilated areas for hibernation, that have not been analyzed yet), since crevices) may not give an entirely clear and consequently, Blehert et al. (2009, 2007 in New York (Okonieski 2012, picture of the level of decline the p. 227) and Courtin et al. (2010, p. 4) pers. comm.). species is experiencing (Turner et al. did not observe the fungus in big brown Due to WNS, the northern long-eared 2011, p. 21). When dramatic declines bat specimens. Lastly, unlike some other bat has experienced a sharp decline in due to WNS occur, the overall rate of gregarious bats (e.g., little brown bats), the northeastern part of its range, as decline appears to vary by site; some eastern small-footed bats frequently evidenced in hibernacula surveys. The sites experience the progression from roost solitarily or deep within cracks, northeastern United States is very close the detection of a few bats with visible possibly further reducing their exposure to saturation (WNS found in majority of fungus to widespread mortality after a to the fungus. hibernacula) for the disease, with the few weeks, while at other sites this may Fenton (1972, p. 5) never observed northern long-eared bat being one of the take a year or more (Turner et al. 2011, eastern small-footed bats close to or in species most severely affected by the pp. 20–21). For example, in contact with little brown or Indiana disease (Herzog and Reynolds 2012, p. Massachusetts, WNS was first bats, both highly gregarious species 10). Turner et al. (2011, p. 22) compared confirmed in February of 2008, and by experiencing severe population the most recent pre-WNS count to the 2009, ‘‘the population (northern long- declines. Solitary hibernating habits most recent post-WNS count for 6 cave eared bat) was knocked down, and the have also been suggested as one of the bat species; they reported a 98-percent second year the population was reasons why big brown bats appear to decline between pre- and post-WNS in finished’’ (French 2012, pers. comm.). have been only moderately affected by the number of hibernating northern Further, in Virginia, Reynolds (2012, WNS (Ford et al. 2011, p. 130). long-eared bats at 30 hibernacula in pers. comm.) reported that ‘‘not all sites Laboratory studies conducted by Blehert New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, are on the same ‘WNS time frame,’ but et al. (2011) further support this Virginia, and West Virginia. Data it appears the effects will be similar, hypothesis. In their study, only healthy analyzed in this study were limited to suggesting that all hibernacula in the bats that came into direct contact with sites with confirmed WNS mortality for mountains of Virginia will succumb to infected bats or were inoculated with at least 2 years and sites with WNS at one time or another.’’ We have pure cultures of Geomyces destructans comparable survey effort across pre and not yet seen the same level of decline in developed lesions consistent with WNS. post-WNS years. In addition to the the Midwestern and southern parts of Healthy bats housed with infected bats Turner et al. (2011) data, the Service the species’ range, although we expect in such a way as to prohibit animal-to- conducted an additional analysis that similar rates of decline once the disease animal contact but still allow for included data from Connecticut (n=3), arrives or becomes more established. potential aerosols to be transmitted from Massachusetts (n=4), and New Although the disease has not yet sick bats did not develop any detectable Hampshire (n=4), and added one spread throughout the species’ entire signs of WNS. additional site to the previous Vermont range (WNS is currently found in 22 of In conclusion, there are several factors data. We used a similar protocol for 39 States where the northern long-eared that may explain why eastern small- analyses as used in Turner et al. (2011); bat occurs), it continues to spread, and footed bats appear to be less susceptible our analysis was limited to sites where we have no reason not to expect that to WNS than other cave bat species. WNS has been present for at least 2 where it spreads, it will have the same These factors include hibernacula years. The combined overall rate of impact to the affected species (Coleman selection (cave versus non-cave), total decline seen in hibernacula count data 2013, pers. comm.). The current rate of time spent hibernating in hibernacula, for the 8 States is approximately 99 spread has been rapid, spreading from location within the hibernacula (areas percent. the first documented occurrence in New with lower humidity and higher In hibernacula surveys in New York, York in February 2006, to 22 states and temperature fluctuation), and solitary Vermont, Connecticut, and 5 Canadian provinces by July 2013. roosting behavior. Massachusetts, hibernacula with larger There is some uncertainty as to the populations of northern long-eared bats timeframe when the disease will spread Effects of White-Nose Syndrome on the experienced greater declines, suggesting throughout the species’ range and when Northern Long-Eared Bat a density-dependent decline due to resulting mortalities as witnessed in the The northern long-eared bat is known WNS (Langwig et al. 2012a, p. 1053). currently affected area will occur in the to be susceptible to WNS, and Also, although some species’ rest of the range. Researchers have mortalities due to the disease have been populations (e.g., tri-colored bat, suggested that there may be a ‘slow confirmed. The USGS National Wildlife Indiana bat) stabilized at drastically down’ in the spread of the disease in the Health Center in Madison, Wisconsin, reduced levels compared to pre-WNS, Great Plains (Frick and Kilpatrick 2013, received 79 northern long-eared bat each of the 14 populations of northern pers. comm.); however, this is on the submissions since 2007, of which 65 long-eared bats became locally extinct western edge of the northern long-eared were tested for WNS. Twenty-eight of within 2 years due to disease, and no bat’s range where the species is the 65 northern long-eared bats tested population was remaining 5 years post- naturally less common and, therefore, were confirmed as positive for WNS by WNS (Langwig et al. 2012, p. 1054). offers little respite to the species. A few histopathology and another 10 were During 2013 hibernacula surveys at 34 models have attempted to project the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61065

spread of Geomyces destructans and population-level effects on the species (e.g., eastern small-footed bat (see WNS, and although they have differed at this time (Francl et al. 2012, p. 36). Effects of White-nose Syndrome on the in the timing of the disease spreading Ford et al. (2011, p. 127) conducted Eastern Small-footed Bat section, throughout the continental United summer acoustic surveys on Fort Drum, above)), which allows more time for the States, all were in agreement that WNS New York, from 2003–2010, including fungus to infect bats and grow; northern will indeed spread throughout the pre-WNS (2003–2008) and post-WNS long-eared bats enter the cave or mine United States (Hallam et al. 2011, p. 8; (2008–2010). Although activity still rose in October or November (although they Maher et al. 2012, pp. 4–5). One of these from early summer to late summer for may enter as early as August) and leave models suggests that there may be a northern long-eared bats, the overall the hibernaculum in March or April temperature-dependent boundary in activity levels for the species declined (Caire et al. 1979, p. 405; Whitaker and southern latitudes that may offer refuge from pre- to post-WNS (Ford et al. 2011, Hamilton 1998, p. 100; Amelon and to WNS-susceptible bats. However, this pp. 129–130). Similarly, Nagel and Burhans 2006, p. 72). Furthermore, the would likely provide little relief to the Gates (2012, p. 5) reported a 78-percent northern long-eared bat occasionally northern long-eared bat, since the decrease in northern long-eared bat roosts in clusters or in the same species’ range only slightly enters these passes (as compared to a 63-percent hibernacula as other bat species that are southern states (Hallam et al. 2011, pp. increase in the number of eastern small- also susceptible to WNS (see 9–11). In addition, human transmission footed bats mentioned above) during Hibernation section, above); therefore, could introduce the spread of the fungus acoustic surveys between 2010 and 2012 northern long-eared bats may have to new locations that are far removed in western Maryland. ‘‘Due to the increased susceptibility to bat-to-bat from the current known locations (e.g., greatest recorded decline in regional transmission of WNS. spread the fungus farther than an hibernacula counts (Turner et al. 2011), Given the observed dramatic infected bat could transmit it within the northern long-eared bat is of population declines attributed to WNS, their natural movement patterns) particular concern (to researchers in as described above, we are greatly (Coleman 2013, pers. comm.). Pennsylvania)’’ (Turner 2013, concerned about this species’ Long-term (including pre- and post- unpublished data). Therefore, persistence where WNS has already WNS) summer data for the northern researchers in Pennsylvania selected spread. The area currently affected by long-eared bat are somewhat limited; two sites to study in 2010 and 2011, WNS constitutes the core of the however, the available data parallel the where pre-WNS swarm trapping had northern long-eared bat’s range, where population decline exhibited in previously been conducted. The capture the species was most common prior to hibernacula surveys. Summer data can rates at the first site declined by 95 WNS; the species is less common in the corroborate and confirm the decline to percent and at the second site by 97 southern and western parts of its range the species seen in hibernacula data. percent, which corroborates and is considered to be rare in the Summer surveys from 2005–2011 near documented interior hibernacula northwestern part of its range (Caceres Surry Mountain Lake in New declines (Turner 2013 unpublished and Barclay 2000, p. 2; Harvey 1992, p. Hampshire showed a 99-percent decline data; Turner et al. 2011, p. 18). 35), the areas where WNS has not yet in capture success of northern long- Although northern long-eared bats are been detected. Furthermore, the rate at eared bats post-WNS, which is similar known to awaken from a state of torpor which WNS has spread has been rapid; to the hibernacula data for the State (a sporadically throughout the winter and it was first detected in New York in 95-percent decline) (Brunkhurst 2012, move between hibernacula (Griffin 2006, and has spread west at least as far unpublished data). 1940, p. 185; Whitaker and Rissler as Illinois and Missouri, south as far as The northern long-eared bat is 1992b, p. 131; Caceres and Barclay 2000 Georgia and South Carolina, and north becoming less common on the Vermont pp. 2–3), they have not been observed as far as southern Quebec and Ontario landscape as well. Pre-WNS, the species roosting regularly outside of caves and as of 2013. Although this spread rate was the second most common bat mines during the winter, as species that may slow or have reduced effects in the species in the State; however, it is now are less susceptible to WNS (e.g., big more southern and western parts of the one of the least likely to be encountered, brown bat) have. Northern long-eared species’ range (Frick and Kilpatrick with the change in effort to capture one bats may be more susceptible to 2013, pers. comm.), general agreement is bat increasing by nearly 13 times, and evaporative water loss (and therefore that WNS will indeed spread approximately a 94-percent overall more susceptible to WNS) due to their throughout the United States (Hallam et reduction in captures in mist-net propensity to roost in the most humid al. 2011, p. 8; Maher et al. 2012, pp. 4– surveys (Darling and Smith 2011, parts of the hibernacula (Cryan et al. 5). WNS has already had a substantial unpublished data). In eastern New York, 2010, p. 4). As described in the effect on northern long-eared bats in the captures of northern long-eared bats Hibernation section above, northern core of its range and is likely to spread have declined dramatically, long-eared bats roost in areas within throughout the species’ entire range approximately 93 percent, for the hibernacula that have higher humidity, within a short time; thus we consider it species from pre-WNS (Herzog 2012, possibly leading to higher rates of to be the predominant threat to the unpublished data). Prior to discovery of infection, as Langwig et al. (2012a, p. species rangewide. WNS in West Virginia, northern long- 1055) found with Indiana bats. Also, Other Diseases eared bat mist-net captures comprised northern long-eared bats prefer cooler 41 percent of all captures and 24 temperatures within hibernacula: 0 to 9 Infectious diseases observed in North percent post-WNS (2010) and at a rate °C (32 to 48 °F) (Raesly and Gates 1987, American bat populations include of 23 percent of historical rates (Francl p. 18; Caceres and Pybus 1997, p. 2; rabies, histoplasmosis, St. Louis et al. 2012, pp. 35–36). In addition, Brack 2007, p. 744), which are within encephalitis, and Venezuelan equine pregnancy peaked more than 2 weeks the optimal growth limits of Gyomyces encephalitis (Burek 2001, p. 519; earlier post-WNS than pre-WNS (May destructans (5 to 10 °C (41 to 50 °F)) Rupprecht et al. 2001, p. 14; Yuill and 20 versus June 7, respectively) and the (Blehert et al. 2009, p. 227). Seymour 2001, pp. 100, 108). Rabies is proportion of juveniles declined by The northern long-eared bat may also the most studied disease of bats, and more than half in mid-August; it is spend more time in hibernacula than can lead to mortality, although antibody unclear if this change will have other species that are less susceptible evidence suggests that some bats may

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61066 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

recover from the disease (Messenger et pertaining to eastern small-footed bat National Plan, http:// al. 2003, p. 645) and retain hibernacula and the threat of predation, static.whitenosesyndrome.org/sites/ immunological memory to respond to only 8 out of 80 responses (10 percent) default/files/white-nose_syndrome_ subsequent exposures (Turmelle et al. reported hibernacula as being prone to national_plan_may_2011.pdf)) that 2010, p. 2364). Bats are hosts of rabies predation. For northern long-eared bats, details the elements critical to in North America (Rupprecht et al. 1 hibernacula in Maine, 3 in Maryland investigating and managing WNS, along 2001, p. 14), accounting for 24 percent (2 of which were due to feral cats), 1 in with identifying actions and roles for of all wild animal cases reported during Minnesota, and 10 in Vermont were agencies and entities involved with the 2009 (Centers for Disease Control and reported as being prone to predation. In effort (Service 2011, p. 1). In addition to Prevention 2011). Although rabies is one instance, domestic cats were bat-to-bat transmission of the disease, detected in up to 25 percent of bats observed killing bats at a hibernaculum fungal spores can be transmitted by submitted to diagnostic labs for testing, used by northern long-eared bat and humans (USGS National Wildlife Health less than 1 percent of bats sampled eastern small-footed bat in Maryland, Center, Wildlife Health Bulletin 2011– randomly from wild populations test although the species of bat killed was 05). Therefore, the WNS positive for the virus (Messenger et al. not identified (Feller 2011, unpublished Decontamination Team (a sub-group 2002, p. 741). Eastern small-footed and data). Turner (1999, personal under the WNS National Plan), created northern long-eared bats are among the observation) observed a snake (species a decontamination protocol (Service species reported positive for rabies virus unknown) capture an emerging Virginia 2012, p. 2) that provides specific infection (Constantine 1979, p. 347; big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii procedures to ensure human Burnett 1989, p. 12; Main 1979, p. 458); virginianus) in West Virginia. The bat transmission risk to bats is minimized. however, rabies is not known to have was captured in flight while the snake The Service also issued an advisory appreciable effects to either species. was perched along the top of a bat gate calling for a voluntary moratorium on Histoplasmosis has not been at the cave’s entrance. Tuttle (1979, p. all caving activity in States known to associated with eastern small-footed 11) observed (eastern) screech owls have hibernacula affected by WNS, and bats or northern long-eared bats and (Otus asio) capturing emerging gray all adjoining States, unless conducted as may be limited in these species bats. part of an agency-sanctioned research or compared to other bats that form larger Northern long-eared bats are known to monitoring project (Service 2009). The aggregations with greater exposure to be affected to a small degree by Western Bat Working Group has also guano-rich substrate (Hoff and Bigler predators at summer roosts. Avian developed a White-nose Syndrome 1981, p. 192). St. Louis encephalitis predators, such as owls and magpies, Action Plan, a comprehensive strategy antibody and high concentrations of are known to successfully take to prevent the spread of WNS, that Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus individual bats as they roost in more covers States currently outside the range have been observed in big brown bats open sites, although this most likely of WNS (Western Bat Working Group and little brown bats (Yuill and does not have an effect on the overall 2010, p. 1–11). Although the majority of Seymour 2001, pp. 100, 108), although population size (Caceres and Pybus State and Federal agencies and tribes data are lacking on the prevalence of 1997, p. 4). In addition, Perry and Thill within the northern long-eared bat’s and these viruses in eastern small-footed (2007, p. 224) observed a black rat snake eastern small-footed bat’s ranges have bats. Eastern equine encephalitis has (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) descending adopted the recommendations and been detected in northern long-eared from a known maternity colony snag in protocols in the WNS National Plan, bats (Main 1979, p. 459), although no the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas. In these are not mandatory or required. For known population declines have been summary, since bats are not a primary example, in Virginia, the found due to presence of the virus. prey source for any known natural decontamination procedures are Northern long-eared bats are also known predators, it is unlikely that predation recommended for cavers; however, to carry a variety of pests including has substantial effects on either species although the Virginia Department of chiggers, mites, bat bugs, and internal at this time. Game and Inland Fisheries currently has helminthes (Caceres and Barclay 2000, closed the caves on the agencies’ Conservation Efforts To Reduce Disease p. 3). None of these diseases or pests, properties, they are reviewing this or Predation however, has caused the record level of policy in light of the extensive spread of bat mortality like that observed since As mentioned above, WNS is a WNS throughout the State. the emergence of WNS. disease that is responsible for The NPS is currently updating their unprecedented mortality in some cave management plans (for parks with Predation hibernating bats in the northeast, like caves) to include actions to minimize Typically, animals such as owls, the northern long-eared bat, and it the risk of WNS spreading to uninfected hawks, raccoons, skunks, and snakes continues to spread throughout the caves. These actions include WNS prey upon bats, although a limited range of the northern long-eared bat and education, screening visitors for number of animals consume bats as a eastern small-footed bat. Although disinfection, and closure of caves if regular part of their diet (Harvey et al. conservation efforts have been necessary (NPS 2013, http:// 1999, p. 13). Eastern small-footed and undertaken to help reduce the spread of www.nature.nps.gov/biology/WNS). In northern long-eared bats experience a the disease through human-aided April 2009, all caves and mines on U.S. very small amount of predation; transmission, these efforts have only Forest Service lands in the Eastern therefore, predation does not appear to been in place for a few years and it is Region were closed on an emergency be a major cause of mortality (Caceres too early to determine how effective basis in response to the spread of WNS. and Pybus 1997, p. 4; Whitaker and they are in decreasing the rate of spread. Eight National Forests in the Eastern Hamilton 1998, p. 101). In 2008, the Service, along with several Region contain caves or mines that are Predation has been observed at a other State and Federal agencies, used by bats; caves and mines on seven limited number of hibernacula within initiated a national plan (A National of these National Forests (Allegheny, the range of the northern long-eared and Plan for Assisting States, Federal Hoosier, Ottawa, Mark Twain, eastern small-footed bats. Of the State Agencies, and Tribes in Managing Mononqahela, Shawnee, and Wayne) and Federal agency responses received White-Nose Syndrome in Bats (WNS are currently closed, and no closure is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61067

needed for the one mine on the eighth experienced in the future throughout examples of such existing regulatory National Forest (Green Mountain) the majority of the species’ range. This mechanisms, but is not a comprehensive because it is already gated with a bat- is currently viewed as the predominant list. friendly structure. Forest supervisors threat to the species, and if WNS had Federal continue to evaluate the most recent not emerged or was not affecting information on WNS to inform northern long-eared bat populations to Several laws and regulations help decisions regarding extending cave and the level that it has, we presume the Federal agencies protect bats on their mine closures for the purpose of species would not be declining to the lands, such as the Federal Cave limiting the spread of WNS (U.S. Forest degree observed. Resources Protection Act (16 U.S.C. Service 2013, http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/ As bats are not a primary prey source 4301 et seq.) that protects caves on wildlife/wildlife/bats.php). Caves and for any known natural predators, it is Federal lands and National mines on U.S. Forest Service lands in unlikely that predation is significantly Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. the Rocky Mountain Region were closed affecting either species at this time. 4321 et seq.) review, which serves to on an emergency basis in 2010, in mitigate effects to bats due to Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing construction activities on federally response to WNS, but since then have Regulatory Mechanisms been reopened, with some exceptions owned lands. The NPS has additional (U.S. Forest Service 2013, http:// Under this factor, we examine laws, policies, and regulations that www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r2/home/ whether existing regulatory mechanisms protect bats on NPS units, including the ?cid=stelprdb5319926). In place of the are inadequate to address the threats to NPS Organic Act od 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 emergency closures, the Rocky the species discussed under the other et seq.), NPS management policies Mountain Region will implement an factors. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act (related to exotic species and protection adaptive management strategy that will requires the Service to take into account of native species), and NPS policies require registration to access an open ‘‘those efforts, if any, being made by any related to caves and karst systems cave, prohibit use of clothing or State or foreign nation, or any political (provides guidance on placement of equipment used in areas where WNS is subdivision of a State or foreign nation, gates on caves not only to address found, require decontamination to protect such species. . . .’’ In human safety concerns but also for the procedures prior to entering any and all relation to Factor D under the Act, we preservation of sensitive bat habitat) caves, and close all known cave interpret this language to require the (Plumb and Budde 2011, unpublished hibernacula during the winter Service to consider relevant Federal, data). Even if a bat species is not listed hibernation period. Although the above State, and tribal laws, regulations, and under the Endangered Species Act, the mentioned WNS-related conservation other such mechanisms that may NPS works to minimize effects to the measures may help reduce or slow the minimize any of the threats we describe species. In addition, the NPS Research spread of the disease, these efforts are in threat analyses under the other four Permitting and Reporting System tracks not currently enough to ameliorate the factors, or otherwise enhance research permit applications and population-level effect to the northern conservation of the species. We give investigator annual reports, and NPS long-eared bat. strongest weight to statutes and their Management Policies require non-NPS implementing regulations and to studies conducted in parks to conform Summary of Disease and Predation management direction that stems from to NPS policies and guidelines In summary, while populations of those laws and regulations. An example regarding the collection of bat data several species of hibernating bats (e.g., would be State governmental actions (Plumb and Budde 2011, unpublished little brown bat, Indiana bat, northern enforced under a State statute or data). long-eared bat, tri-colored bat) have constitution, or Federal action under The northern long-eared bat is experienced mass mortality due to statute. considered a ‘‘sensitive species’’ WNS, populations of the eastern small- Having evaluated the significance of throughout U.S. Forest Service’s Eastern footed bat appear to be stable, and if the threat as mitigated by any such Region (USDA Forest Service 2012). As they are in decline, the level of impact conservation efforts, we analyze under such, the northern long-eared bat must is not discernible at this time. Summer Factor D the extent to which existing receive, ‘‘special management emphasis monitoring data are scarce, and the little regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to ensure its viability and to preclude data we have are inconclusive. to address the specific threats to the trends toward endangerment that would However, based on the best available species. Regulatory mechanisms, if they result in the need for Federal listing. scientific information, we conclude that exist, may reduce or eliminate the There must be no effects to sensitive disease does not have an appreciable effects from one or more identified species without an analysis of the effect on the eastern small-footed bat. threats. In this section, we review significance of adverse effects on the Unlike the eastern small-footed bat, existing State, Federal, and local populations, its habitat, and on the the northern long-eared bat has regulatory mechanisms to determine viability of the species as a whole. It is experienced a sharp decline, estimated whether they effectively reduce or essential to establish population at approximately 99 percent (from remove threats to the eastern small- viability objectives when making hibernacula data), in the northeastern footed bat or northern long-eared bat. decisions that would significantly portion of its range, due to the No existing regulatory mechanisms reduce sensitive species numbers’’ emergence of WNS. Summer survey have been designed to protect the (Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2672.1). data have confirmed rates of decline species against WNS, the primary threat observed in northern long-eared bat to the northern long-eared bat; thus, State hibernacula data post-WNS. The species despite regulatory mechanisms that are The eastern small-footed bat is State- is highly susceptible to WNS where the currently in place, the species is still at listed as endangered in Maryland and disease currently occurs in the East, and risk. There are, however, some New Hampshire; State-listed as there is no reason to expect that western mechanisms in place to provide some threatened in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, populations will be resistant to the protection from other factors that may South Carolina, and Vermont; and disease. Thus, we expect that similar act cumulatively with WNS. As such, considered as a species of special declines as seen in the East will be the discussion below provides a few concern in Connecticut, Delaware,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61068 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, New roosting silver-haired bats (Lasionycteris Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Hampshire, North Carolina, noctivagans); and tri-colored bats Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. (Arnett et al. 2008, p. 64). Virginia, and West Virginia. The level of In the following States, there is either Three effects may explain proximate protection provided under these laws no State protection law or the northern causes of bat fatalities at wind turbines: varies by State, but most prohibit take, long-eared bat is not protected under the (1) Bats collide with turbine towers, (2) possession, or transport of listed existing law: Arkansas, Connecticut, bats collide with moving blades, or (3) species. For example, in Maryland, a Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, bats suffer internal injuries (barotrauma) person may not take, possess, transport, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, after being exposed to rapid pressure export, process, sell, offer for sale, or Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New changes near the trailing edges and tips ship nongame wildlife (MD Code, Jersey, New York, North Dakota, of moving blades (Cryan and Barclay Natural Resources, sec. 10–2A–01–09); Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. 2009, p. 1331). It appears that however, effects to summer roosting In Kentucky, although the northern barotrauma may be responsible for some habitat and direct mortality from wind long-eared bat does not have a State deaths observed at wind-energy energy development projects under 70 listing status, it is considered protected development sites. For example, nearly Megawatts (MW) are currently from take under Kentucky State law; half of the 1,033 bat carcasses exempted from protections offered to however, since greater than 95 percent discovered over a 2-year study by Klug the eastern small-footed bat (Feller of hibernacula in Kentucky are privately and Baerwald (2010, p. 15) had no fatal 2011, unpublished data). In owned, cave closures are not often external injuries, and over 90 percent of Pennsylvania, however, a House Bill possible to enforce (Hemberger 2011, those necropsied had internal injuries proposed in the General Assembly, if unpublished data). consistent with barotrauma (Baerwald et passed, would not allow any Wind energy development regulation al. 2008, pp. 695–696). However, ‘‘commonwealth agency to take action varies by State within the northern long- another study found that bone fractures to classify or consider wildlife, flora or eared bat’s and eastern small-footed from direct collision with turbine blades fauna as threatened or endangered bat’s ranges. For example, in Virginia, contributed to 74 percent of bat deaths, unless the wildlife, flora or fauna is although there are not currently any and therefore suggest that skeletal protected under the Endangered Species wind energy developments in the State, damage from direct collision with Act of 1973’’ (General Assembly of new legislation requires mitigation for turbine blades is a major cause of Pennsylvania 2013, p. 2). bats with the objective of reducing fatalities for bats killed by wind turbines The northern long-eared bat is listed fatalities. As part of the regulation, (Grodsky et al. 2011, p. 920). The in very few of the States within the operators are required to ‘‘measure the authors suggest that these injuries can species’ range. The northern long-eared efficacy’’ of mitigation (Reynolds 2011 lead to an underestimation of bat bat is listed as endangered under the unpublished data). In Vermont, all wind mortality at wind energy facilities due Massachusetts endangered species act, projects are required to conduct bat to delayed lethal effects (Grodsky et al. under which all listed species are, mortality surveys, and at least 2 of the 2011, p. 924). Lastly, the authors also ‘‘protected from killing, collecting, 3 currently permitted projects in the note that the surface and core pressure possessing, or sale and from activities State include application of operational drops behind the spinning turbine that would destroy habitat and thus adjustments (curtailment) to reduce bat blades are high enough (equivalent to directly or indirectly cause mortality or fatalities (Smith 2011, unpublished sound levels that are 10,000 times disrupt critical behaviors.’’ In addition, data). higher in energy density than the listed animals are specifically protected Summary of Inadequacy of Existing threshold of pain in humans (Cmiel et from activities that disrupt nesting, Regulatory Mechanisms al. 2004)) to cause significant ear breeding, feeding, or migration damage to bats flying near wind (Massachusetts Division of Fisheries No existing regulatory mechanisms turbines (Grodsky et al. 2011, p. 924). and Wildlife 2012, unpublished have been designed to protect the Bats crippled by ear damage would have document). In Wisconsin, all cave bats, species against WNS, the primary threat a difficult time navigating and foraging, including the northern long-eared bat, to the northern long-eared bat. since both of these functions depend on were listed as threatened in the State in Therefore, despite regulatory the bats’ ability to echolocate (Grodsky 2011, due to previously existing threats mechanisms that are currently in place et al. 2011, p. 924). and the impending threat of WNS for the northern long-eared bat, the Wind projects have been constructed (Redell 2011, pers. comm.). Certain species is still at risk, primarily due to in areas within a large portion of the development projects (e.g., wind WNS, as discussed under Factor C. ranges of eastern small-footed bats and energy), however, are excluded from Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade northern long-eared bats, suggesting regulations in place to protect the Factors Affecting Its Continued these species may be exposed to the risk species in Wisconsin (Wisconsin Existence of turbine-related mortality. However, as Department of Natural Resources, of 2011, only two eastern small-footed unpublished document, 2011, p. 4). The Wind Energy Development bat and 13 northern long-eared bat northern long-eared bat is considered as In general, bats are killed in fatalities were recorded from North some form of species of concern in 17 significant numbers by utility-scale American wind-energy facilities, States: ‘‘Species of Greatest Concern’’ in (greater than or equal to 0.66 megawatt representing less than 0.1 percent and Alabama and Rhode Island; ‘‘Species of (MW)) wind turbines along forested 0.2 percent of the total bat mortality, Greatest Conservation Need’’ in ridge tops in the eastern United States respectively (American Wind Energy Delaware, Iowa, and Vermont; ‘‘Species (Johnson 2005, p. 46; Arnett et al. 2008, Association 2011, p. 18). Because of Concern’’ in Ohio and Wyoming; p. 63). The majority of bats killed eastern small-footed bats fly slowly and ‘‘Rare Species of Concern’’ in South include migratory foliage-roosting close to the ground (Davis et al. 1965, Carolina; ‘‘Imperiled’’ in Oklahoma; species: the hoary bat (Lasiurus p. 683), they may be less susceptible to ‘‘Critically Imperiled’’ in Louisiana; and cinereus) and eastern red bat (Lasiurus mortality caused by the operation of ‘‘Species of Special Concern’’ in borealis); migratory tree and cavity- wind turbines.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61069

The threat level posed by wind ‘‘climate change’’ thus refers to a change rate of change will be influenced development to northern long-eared and in the mean or variability of one or more substantially by the extent of GHG eastern small-footed bats throughout measures of climate (e.g., temperature or emissions (IPCC 2007a, pp. 44–45; their ranges varies. For example, in precipitation) that persists for an Meehl et al. 2007, pp. 760–764 and 797– Illinois, wind energy development is extended period, typically decades or 811; Ganguly et al. 2009, pp. 15555– viewed as a large threat to northern longer, whether the change is due to 15558; Prinn et al. 2011, pp. 527, 529). long-eared bats, especially during natural variability, human activity, or (See IPCC 2007b, p. 8, for a summary of migration. Although the species is not both (IPCC 2007a, p. 78). other global projections of climate- considered a long-distance migrant, Scientific measurements spanning related changes, such as frequency of even limited migration distances several decades demonstrate that heat waves and changes in between summer and winter habitats changes in climate are occurring, and precipitation. Also see IPCC 2011 pose a risk to the northern long-eared that the rate of change has been faster (entire) for a summary of observations bat in Illinois, due to the increasingly since the 1950s. Examples include and projections of extreme climate large line of wind farms across most of warming of the global climate system, events.) the central portion of the State (Kath and substantial increases in Various changes in climate may have 2012, pers. comm.). In 2012, 7 to 10 precipitation in some regions of the direct or indirect effects on species. wind farms were in operation, and at world and decreases in other regions. These effects may be positive, neutral, least as many are planned. Further, (For these and other examples, see IPCC or negative, and they may change over northern long-eared bats have been 2007a, p. 30; Solomon et al. 2007, pp. time, depending on the species and found in pre-construction surveys for 35–54, 82–85). Results of scientific other relevant considerations, such as many of the wind farms (both planned analyses presented by the IPCC show interactions of climate with other and operational) (Kath 2012, pers. that most of the observed increase in variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) comm.). In Minnesota, wind energy global average temperature since the (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). development is moving at a rapid pace, mid–20th century cannot be explained Identifying likely effects often involves and is one of the reasons State wildlife by natural variability in climate, and is aspects of climate change vulnerability agency officials are concerned about the ‘‘very likely’’ (defined by the IPCC as 90 analysis. Vulnerability refers to the species’ status in the State (Baker 2011, percent or higher probability) due to the degree to which a species (or system) is pers. comm.). In many States, such as observed increase in greenhouse gas susceptible to, and unable to cope with, Maryland, New Hampshire, South (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere adverse effects of climate change, Carolina, and Vermont, wind energy as a result of human activities, including climate variability and projects have just recently been particularly carbon dioxide emissions extremes. Vulnerability is a function of completed or are in the process of being from use of fossil fuels (IPCC 2007a, pp. the type, magnitude, and rate of climate installed; therefore, the level of 5–6 and figures SPM.3 and SPM.4; change and variation to which a species mortality to northern long-eared bats Solomon et al. 2007, pp. 21–35). Further is exposed, its sensitivity, and its and eastern small-footed bats has yet to confirmation of the role of GHGs comes adaptive capacity (IPCC 2007a, p. 89; be seen (Brunkhurst 2012, pers. comm.; from analyses by Huber and Knutti see also Glick et al. 2011, pp. 19–22). Bunch 2011,unpublished data; Feller (2011, p. 4), who concluded it is There is no single method for 2011, unpublished data; Smith 2011, extremely likely that approximately 75 conducting such analyses that applies to unpublished data). Vermont currently percent of global warming since 1950 all situations (Glick et al. 2011, p. 3). We has three permitted wind energy has been caused by human activities. use our expert judgment and facilities in the State (the first of which Scientists use a variety of climate appropriate analytical approaches to is currently under construction), from models, which include consideration of weigh relevant information, including which State officials see limited natural processes and variability, as uncertainty, in our consideration of potential that northern long-eared bat well as various scenarios of potential various aspects of climate change. fatalities will occur (Smith 2011, levels and timing of GHG emissions, to As is the case with all stressors that unpublished data), likely due to the evaluate the causes of changes already we assess, even if we conclude that a current low population of the species in observed and to project future changes species is currently affected or is likely the State. We conclude that there may in temperature and other climate to be affected in a negative way by one be adverse effects posed by wind energy conditions (e.g., Meehl et al. 2007, or more climate-related effects, it does development to northern long-eared bats entire; Ganguly et al. 2009, pp. 11555, not necessarily follow that the species and eastern small-footed bats; however, 15558; Prinn et al. 2011, pp. 527, 529). meets the definition of an ‘‘endangered there is no evidence suggesting effects All combinations of models and species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ from wind energy development in itself emissions scenarios yield very similar under the Act. If a species is listed as have led to population declines in either projections of increases in the most endangered or threatened, knowledge species. common measure of climate change, regarding the vulnerability of the average global surface temperature species to, and known or anticipated Climate Change (commonly known as global warming), impacts from, climate-associated Our analyses under the Act include until about 2030. Although projections changes in environmental conditions consideration of ongoing and projected of the magnitude and rate of warming can be used to help devise appropriate changes in climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ differ after about 2030, the overall strategies for its recovery. and ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the trajectory of all the projections is one of The unique natural history traits of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate increased global warming through the bats and their susceptibility to local Change (IPCC). The term ‘‘climate’’ end of this century, even for the temperature, humidity, and refers to the mean and variability of projections based on scenarios that precipitation patterns make them an different types of weather conditions assume that GHG emissions will early warning system for effects of over time, with 30 years being a typical stabilize or decline. Thus, there is strong climate change in regional ecosystems period for such measurements, although scientific support for projections that (Adams and Hayes 2008, p. 1120). shorter or longer periods also may be warming will continue through the 21st Climate change is expected to alter used (IPCC 2007a, p. 78). The term century, and that the magnitude and seasonal ambient temperatures and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61070 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

precipitation patterns across regions exposure and slower spread of WNS or largely been replaced by (Adams and Hayes 2008, p. 1115). The persistence of the fungus, which would organophosphate insecticides, which ability of successful reproductive effort likely benefit both species. However, the are generally short-lived in the in female insectivorous bats is related rapid rate at which WNS is affecting the environment and do not accumulate in directly to roost temperatures and water species is on a much quicker time scale food chains; however, risk of exposure availability (Adams and Hayes 2008, p. than are the changes associated with is still possible from direct exposure 1116). Adams and Hayes (2008, p. 1120) climate change. Thus, longer-term from spraying or ingesting insects that predict an overall decline in bat effects of climate change are unlikely to have recently been sprayed but have not populations in the western United have an impact on the short-term effects died, or both (Clark 1988, p. 411). States from reduced regional water of WNS. Although we do have Organophospahate and carbamate storage caused by climate warming. In information that suggests that climate insecticides are acutely toxic to comparison, the northeast United States change may impact both the northern mammals. Also, some organophosphates is projected to see a steady increase in long-eared bat and eastern small-footed may be stored in fat tissue and annual winter precipitation, although a bat and bats in general, we do not have contribute to ‘‘organophosphate- much greater proportion is expected to any evidence suggesting that climate induced delayed neuropathy’’ in fall as rain rather than as snow. Overall, change in itself has led to population humans (USEPA 2013, p. 44). little change in summer rainfall is declines in either species. Bats are less sensitive to expected, although projections are organophosphate insecticides than birds Contaminants highly variable (Frumhoff et al. 2007, p. in regards to acute toxicity, but many 8). Based on this model, water Effects to bats from contaminant bats lose their motor coordination from availability should not be a limiting exposure have likely occurred and gone, direct application and are unlikely to factor to bats in the northeast United for the most part, unnoticed among bat survive in the wild in an incapacitated States. populations (Clark and Shore 2001, p. state lasting over 24 hours (Plumb and Climate change may result in warmer 204). Contaminants of concern to Budde 2011, unpublished data). Bats winters, which could lead to a reduced insectivorous bats like the eastern small- may be exposed to organophosphate and period of hibernation, increased winter footed and northern long-eared bats carbamate insecticides in regions where activity, and reduced reliance on the include organochlorine pesticides, methyl parathion is applied in cotton relatively stable temperatures of organophosphate, carbamate and fields and where malathion is used for underground hibernation sites (Jones et neonicotinoid insecticides, mosquito control (Plumb and Budde al. 2009, p. 99). Hibernation sites polychlorinated biphenyls and 2011, unpublished data). The chosen by eastern small-footed bats polybrominated diphenyl ethers organophosphate, chlorpyrifos, has high (e.g., under rocks) may be even more (PBDEs), pyrethroid insecticides, and fat solubility and is commonly used on susceptible to temperature fluctuations, inorganic contaminants such as mercury crops such as corn, soybeans (van which may lead to energy depletion that (Clark and Shore 2001, pp. 159–214). Beelen 2000, p. 34 of Appendix 2; reduces winter survival (Rodenhouse et Organochlorine pesticides (e.g., DDT, http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/ al. 2009, p. 251). An earlier spring chlordane) persist in the environment usage/maps/show_ would presumably result in a shorter due to lipophilic (fat-loving) properties, map.php?year=2009&map=CHLOR hibernation period and the earlier and therefore readily accumulate within PYRIFOS&hilo=L). appearance of foraging bats (Jones et al. the fat tissue of bats. Because The neonicotinoids have been found 2009, p. 99). An earlier emergence from insectivorous bats have high metabolic to cause oxidative stress, neurological hibernation may have no detrimental rates, associated with flight and small damage and possible liver damage in effect on population size if sufficient size, their food intake increases the rats and immune suppression in mice food is available (Jones et al. 2009, p. amount of organochlorines available for (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ 99); however, predicting future insect concentration in the fat (Clark and article/pii/S0048357512001617 population dynamics and distributions Shore 2001, p. 166). Because bats are Badgujar et al. 2013, p. 408; Duzguner is complex (Bale et al. 2002, p. 6). long-lived, the potential for 2012, p. 58; Kimura-Kuroda et al. 2011, Alterations in precipitation, stream bioaccumulation is great, and effects on p. 381), Due to information indicating flow, and soil moisture could influence reproduction and populations have been that there is a link between insect populations in such a way as to documented (Clark and Shore 2001, pp. neonicotinoids used in agriculture and potentially alter food availability for 181–190). In maternity colonies, young a decline in bee numbers, the European bats (Rodenhouse et al. 2009, p. 250). bats appear to be at the greatest risk of Union proposed a two year ban on the Warmer winter temperatures may also mortality. This is because use of the neonocotinoids, disrupt bat reproductive physiology. organochlorines become concentrated in thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and Both eastern small-footed bats and the fat of the mother’s milk and these clothianidin on crops attractive to northern long-eared bats breed in the chemicals continually and rapidly honeybees, beginning in December of fall, and spermatozoa are stored in the accumulate in the young as they nurse 2013 (http://www.lawbc.com/regulatory- uterus of hibernating females until (Clark 1988, pp. 410–411). developments/entry/proposal-for- spring ovulation. If bats experience In addition to indirect effects of restriction-of-neonicotinoid-products-in- warm conditions they may arouse from contaminants on bats via prey the-eu/). hibernation prematurely, ovulate, and consumption, documented cases of The more recently developed ‘‘third become pregnant (Jones et al. 2009, p. population-level effects involve direct generation’’ of pyrethroids have acute 99). Given this dependence on external application of pesticides to bats or their oral toxicities rivaling the toxicity of temperatures, climate change is likely to roosts. For example, when a mixture of organophosphate, carbamate and affect the timing of reproductive cycles DDT and chlordane was applied to little organochlorine pesticides. These (Jones et al. 2009, p. 99), but whether brown bats and their roost site, pyrethroids include esfenvalerate, these effects would be to the detriment mortality from exposure was observed deltamethrin, bifenthrin, tefluthrin, of the species is largely unknown. A (Kunz et al. 1977, p. 478). Most flucythrinate, cyhalothrin and shorter hibernation period and warmer organochlorine pesticides have been fenpropathrin (Mueller-Beilschmidt winter temperatures may lead to less banned in the United States and have 1990, p. 32). Pyrethroids are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61071

increasingly used in the United States, small-footed bats exhibited the highest (Dickinson et al. 2009, p. 56). Low- and some of these compounds have very mercury levels of all species. Bats intensity burns may not kill taller trees high fat solubility (e.g., bifenthrin, recaptured during the study 1 or 2 years directly but may create snags of smaller cypermethrin) (van Beelen 2000, p. 34 after their original capture maintained trees and larger trees may be injured, of Appendix 2). similar levels of mercury in fur year-to- resulting in vulnerability (of the tree) to Like the organochlorine pesticides, year. Biologists suggest that individual pathogens that cause hollowing of the PCBs and PBDEs are highly lipophilic bats accumulate body burdens of trunk, which provides roosting habitat and therefore readily accumulate in mercury that cannot be reduced once (Perry 2012, p. 177). Prescribed burning insectivorous bats. Outside of laboratory elevated to a certain threshold. also opens the tree canopy, providing experiments, there is no conclusive Exposure to holding ponds containing more canopy light penetration (Boyles evidence that bats have been killed by flow-back and produced water and Aubrey 2006, p. 112; Johnson et al. PCBs, although effects on reproduction associated with hydraulic fracturing 2009, p. 240), which may facilitate faster have been observed (Clark and Shore operations may also expose bats to development of juvenile bats (Sedgeley 2001, pp. 192–194). toxins, radioactive material, and other 2001, p. 434). Although Johnson et al. In New Hampshire, to limit the contaminants (Hein 2012, p. 8). (2009, p. 240) found the amount of roost amount of plant material growing on the Cadmium, mercury, and lead are switching did not differ between burned rock slope of the Surry Mountain contaminants reported in hydraulic and unburned areas, the rate of Reservoir, the U.S. Army Corps of fracturing operations. Whether bats switching in burned areas of every 1.35 Engineers spray the rock slope with drink directly from holding ponds or days was greater than that found in herbicide; this site is an eastern small- contaminants are introduced from these other studies of every 2–3 days (Foster footed bat summer roosting site operations into aquatic ecosystems, bats and Kurta 1999, p. 665; Owen et al. (Veilleux and Reynolds 2006, p. 331). It will presumably accumulate these 2002, p. 2; Carter and Feldhamer 2005, is unknown whether the direct substances and potentially suffer p. 261; Timpone et al. 2010, p. 119). application of herbicide on the roost adverse effects (Hein 2012, p. 9). In Direct effects of fire on bats likely area reduces the roost quality or causes summary, the best available data differ among species and seasons (Perry mortality of adult bats, young bats, or indicate that contaminant exposure can 2012, p. 172). Northern long-eared bats both. pose an adverse effect to individual have been seen flushing from tree roosts Eastern small-footed bats and northern long-eared and eastern small- shortly after ignition of prescribed fire northern long-eared bats forage on footed bats, although it is not an emergent insects and can be immediate and significant risk in itself during the growing season (Dickinson et characterized as occasionally foraging at a population level. al. 2009, p. 60). Fires of reduced over water (Yates and Evers 2006, p. 5), intensity that proceed slowly allow and therefore are at risk of exposure to Prescribed Burning sufficient time for roosting bats to bioaccumulation of inorganic Eastern forest-dwelling bat species, arouse from sleep or torpor and escape contaminants (e.g., cadmium, lead, such as the eastern small-footed and the fire (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2200), mercury) from contaminated water northern long-eared bats, likely evolved although extra arousals from fire smoke bodies. Bats tend to accumulate with fire management of mixed-oak could cause increased energy loss inorganic contaminants due to their diet ecosystems (Perry 2012, p. 182). A (Dickinson et al. 2009, p. 52). During and slow means of elimination of these recent review of prescribed fire and its prescribed burns, bats are potentially compounds (Plumb and Budde 2011, effects on bats (U.S. Forest Service 2012, exposed to heat and gases; the roosting unpublished data). In Virginia, for p. 182) generally found that fire had behavior of these two species, however, example, the North Fork Holston River beneficial effects on bat habitat. Fire may reduce their vulnerability to toxic is a water body that was highly may create snags for roosting and gases. When trees are dormant, the bats contaminated by a waterborne point creates more open forests conducive to are roosting in caves or mines source of mercury through foraging on flying insects (Perry 2012, (hibernacula can be protected from toxic contamination by a chlor-alkali plant. pp. 177–179), although gleaners such as gases through appropriate burn plans), Based on findings from a pilot study for northern long-eared bats may readily and during the growing season, northern bats in 2005 (Yates and Evers 2006), use cluttered understories for foraging long-eared bats roost in tree cavities or there is sufficient information to (Owen et al. 2003, p. 355). Cavity and under bark above the understory, above conclude that bats from near- bark roosting bats, such as the eastern the area with the highest concentration downstream areas of the North Fork small-footed and northern long-eared, of gases in a low-intensity prescribed Holston River have potentially harmful use previously burned areas for both burn (Dickinson et al. 2010, pp. 2196, body burdens of mercury, although the foraging and roosting (Johnson et al. 2200). Carbon monoxide levels did not effect on bats is unknown. Fur samples 2009, p. 239; Johnson et al. 2010, p. reach critical thresholds that could taken from eastern small-footed bats 118). In Kentucky, the abundance of harm bats in low-intensity burns at the have also yielded detectable amounts of prey items for northern long-eared bats typical roosting height for the eastern mercury and zinc (Hickey et al. 2001, p. increased after burning (Lacki et al. small-footed and northern long-eared 703). Hickey et al. (2001, p. 705) suggest 2009, p. 1170), and more roosts were bats (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2196); that the concentrations of mercury found in post-burn areas (Lacki et al. thus heat effects from prescribed fire are reported may be sufficient to cause 2009, p. 1169). Burning may create more of greater concern than gas effects on sublethal biological effects to bats. suitable snags for roosting through bats. Direct heat could cause injury to Divoll et al. (in prep) found that eastern exfoliation of bark (Johnson et al. 2009, the thin tissue of bat ears and is more small-footed bats and northern long- p. 240), mimicking trees in the likely to occur than exposure to toxic eared bats showed consistently higher appropriate decay stage for roosting gas levels during prescribed burns mercury levels than little brown bats or bats. In contrast, a prescribed burn in (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2196). In eastern red bats sampled in Maine, Kentucky caused a roost tree used by a addition, fires of reduced intensity with which may be correlated with gleaning radio-tagged female northern long-eared shorter flame height could lessen the behavior and the consumption of bat to prematurely fall after its base was effect of heat to bats roosting higher in spiders by these two bat species. Eastern weakened by smoldering combustion trees (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2196).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61072 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Winter, early spring, and late fall FR 52754; August 30, 2012). Currently, eastern small-footed bat is endangered generally contain less intense fire both the northern long-eared bat and or threatened throughout all of its range. conditions than during other seasons eastern small-footed bat are being We examined the best scientific and and coincide with time periods when considered for inclusion as covered commercial information available bats are less affected by prescribed fire species under the MSHCP. The MSHCP regarding the past, present, and future due to low activity in forested areas. will address protection of covered threats faced by the eastern small-footed Furthermore, no young are present species through avoidance, bat. We reviewed the petition, during these times, which reduces the minimization of take, and mitigation to information available in our files, and likelihood of heat injury and exposure offset effect of ‘‘take’’ (e.g., habitat other available published and of vulnerable young to fire (Dickinson et preservation, habitat restoration, habitat unpublished information, and we al. 2010, p. 2200). Prescribed fire enhancement) to help ameliorate the consulted with recognized bat experts objectives, such as fires with high effect of wind development (77 FR and other Federal and State agencies. intensity and rapid ignition in order to 52754; August 30, 2012). In some cases, Threats previously identified for the meet vegetation goals, must be balanced the U.S. Forest Service has agreed to eastern small-footed bat include with the exposure of bats to the effects limit or restrict burning in the central modification or destruction of winter of fire (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2201). hardwoods from mid- to late April and summer habitat, disturbance of Currently, the Service and U.S. Forest through summer to avoid periods when hibernating bats from commercial and/ Service strongly recommend not bats are active in forests (Dickinson et or recreational activities in caves and burning in the central hardwoods from al. 2010, p. 2200). mines, disease, wind energy mid- to late April through summer to development, climate change, and avoid periods when bats are active in Summary of Factor E contaminants. The primary threat forests (Dickinson et al. 2010, p. 2200). We have identified a number of previously identified was WNS. While Bats that occur in forests are likely factors (e.g., wind energy development, other species of hibernating bats have equipped with evolutionary climate change, contaminants, experienced mass mortality due to characteristics that allow them to exist prescribed burning) that may have WNS, there is no indication of a in environments with prescribed fire. direct or indirect effects on eastern population-level decline in eastern Periodic burning can benefit habitat small-footed bats and northern long- small-footed bat based on winter survey through snag creation and forest canopy eared bats. Although such activities data. A review of pre-WNS and post- gap creation, but frequency and timing occur, there is no evidence that these WNS hibernacula count data over need to be considered to avoid direct activities alone have significant effects multiple years finds that post-WNS and indirect adverse effects to bats on either species, because their effects counts were within the normal observed when using prescribed burns as a are often localized and not widespread range at the majority of sites analyzed. management tool. We conclude that throughout the species’ ranges. Several life-history traits may reduce the there may be adverse effects posed by However, these factors may have a susceptibility of this bat to WNS, which prescribed burning to individual cumulative effect on the northern long- include their comparatively late arrival northern long-eared bats and eastern eared bat when added to white-nose and early departure from hibernacula, small-footed bats; however, there is no syndrome, because the disease had led departure from hibernacula during mild evidence suggesting effects from to dramatic population declines in that winter periods, solitary roosting habits, prescribed burning itself have led to species (discussed under Factor C). and selection of drier microhabitats population declines in either species. (e.g., cave and mine entrances). We will Cumulative Effects From Factors A continue to closely monitor the spread Conservation Efforts To Reduce Other Through E Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting of WNS and its effects on eastern small- Its Continued Existence None of the factors discussed above footed bats. As for the other above- under Factors A, B, C, or E, alone or in mentioned threats, although there is risk In the Midwest, rapid wind combination, is affecting the eastern of exposure and individual mortality in development is a concern with regards small-footed bat at a population level. isolated incidences, no declines in to the effect to bats (Baker 2011, pers. Conversely, WNS (Factor C) alone has eastern small-footed bat populations comm.; Kath 2012, pers. comm.). Due to led to dramatic and rapid population- have been documented. the known impact from wind energy level effects on the northern long-eared Our review of the best available development, in particular to listed (and bat. White-nose syndrome is the most scientific and commercial information species currently being evaluated to significant threat to the northern long- indicates that the eastern small-footed determine if listing is warranted) bird bat is not in danger of extinction and bat species in the Midwest, the eared bat, and the species would likely not be imperiled were it not for this (endangered) nor likely to become Service, State natural resource agencies, endangered within the foreseeable and wind energy industry disease. However, although the effects on the northern long-eared bat from future (threatened), throughout all of its representatives are developing the range. Midwest Wind Energy Multi-Species Factors A, B, and E individually or in Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). combination do not have significant Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment effects on the species, when combined The planning area includes the Midwest After assessing whether the species is with the significant population Region of the Service, which includes endangered or threatened throughout its reductions due to white-nose syndrome all or portions of the following States: range, we next consider whether a (Factor C), the resulting cumulative Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, distinct vertebrate population segment effect may further adversely impact the Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and (DPS) of the eastern small-footed bat species. Wisconsin. The MSHCP would allow meets the definition of an endangered or permit holders to proceed with wind Finding threatened species. energy development, which may result Under the Service’s Policy Regarding in ‘‘incidental’’ taking of a listed species Eastern Small-Footed Bat the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate under section 10 of the Act, through As required by the Act, we considered Population Segments Under the issuance of an incidental take permit (77 the five factors in assessing whether the Endangered Species Act (61 FR 4722;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61073

February 7, 1996 (DPS Policy)), three portions of the eastern small-footed bat’s delisting of the Northern Rocky elements are considered in the decision range. Therefore, the best available Mountain gray wolf (74 FR 15123; April concerning the establishment and information indicates that there is no 2, 2009); and WildEarth Guardians v. classification of a possible DPS. These evidence that the eastern small-footed Salazar, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105253 are applied similarly for additions to or bat is delimited by international (D. Ariz. September 30, 2010), removal from the Federal List of governmental boundaries within which concerning the Service’s 2008 finding Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. differences in control of exploitation, on a petition to list the Gunnison’s These elements include: management of habitat, conservation prairie dog (73 FR 6660; February 5, (1) The discreteness of a population in status, or regulatory mechanisms exist 2008). The Service had asserted in both relation to the remainder of the species that are significant in light of section of these determinations that it had to which it belongs; 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. authority, in effect, to protect only some (2) The significance of the population We determine, based on a review of members of a ‘‘species,’’ as defined by segment to the species to which it the best available information, that no the Act (i.e., species, subspecies, or belongs; and population of the eastern small-footed DPS), under the Act. Both courts ruled (3) The population segment’s bat meets the discreteness conditions of that the determinations were arbitrary conservation status in relation to the the 1996 DPS policy. Therefore, no and capricious on the grounds that this Act’s standards for listing, delisting, or eastern small-footed bat population approach violated the plain and reclassification (i.e., is the population qualifies as a DPS under our policy, and unambiguous language of the Act. The segment endangered or threatened). no population is a listable entity under courts concluded that reading the SPR the Act. Discreteness language to allow protecting only a The DPS policy is clear that portion of a species’ range is Under the DPS policy, a population significance is analyzed only when a inconsistent with the Act’s definition of segment of a vertebrate taxon may be population segment has been identified ‘‘species.’’ The courts concluded that considered discrete if it satisfies either as discrete. Since we found that no once a determination is made that a one of the following conditions: population segment meets the species (i.e., species, subspecies, or (1) It is markedly separated from other discreteness element and, therefore, DPS) meets the definition of populations of the same taxon as a does not qualify as a DPS under the ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened consequence of physical, physiological, Service’s DPS policy, we will not species,’’ it must be placed on the list ecological, or behavioral factors. conduct an evaluation of significance. in its entirety and the Act’s protections Quantitative measures of genetic or Significant Portion of the Range applied consistently to all members of morphological discontinuity may that species (subject to modification of provide evidence of this separation; or Under the Act and our implementing protections through special rules under (2) It is delimited by international regulations, a species may warrant sections 4(d) and 10(j) of the Act). governmental boundaries within which listing if it is endangered or threatened Consistent with that interpretation, differences in control of exploitation, throughout all or a significant portion of and for the purposes of this finding, we management of habitat, conservation its range. The Act defines ‘‘endangered interpret the phrase ‘‘significant portion status, or regulatory mechanisms exist species’’ as any species which is ‘‘in of its range’’ in the Act’s definitions of that are significant in light of section danger of extinction throughout all or a ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. significant portion of its range,’’ and species’’ to provide an independent There are no characteristics of the ‘‘threatened species’’ as any species basis for listing; thus there are two eastern small-footed bat’s taxonomy, which is ‘‘likely to become an situations (or factual bases) under which distribution or abundance, habitat, or endangered species within the a species would qualify for listing: A biology (see the Species Information foreseeable future throughout all or a species may be endangered or section, above) that suggest the species significant portion of its range.’’ The threatened throughout all of its range; or may be segmented into discrete definition of ‘‘species’’ is also relevant a species may be endangered or populations. Throughout its range, the to this discussion. The Act defines threatened in only a significant portion eastern small-footed bat has similar ‘‘species’’ as follows: ‘‘The term of its range. If a species is in danger of morphology and, as far as we know, ‘species’ includes any subspecies of fish extinction throughout a significant genetics; uses similar roosting and or wildlife or plants, and any distinct portion of its range, the species is an foraging habitat; and exhibits similar population segment [DPS] of any ‘‘endangered species.’’ The same roosting, foraging, and reproductive species of vertebrate fish or wildlife analysis applies to ‘‘threatened species.’’ behavior. Therefore, the best available which interbreeds when mature.’’ The Based on this interpretation and information indicates there is no phrase ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ supported by existing case law, the evidence of markedly separated eastern (SPR) is not defined by the statute, and consequence of finding that a species is small-footed bat populations. we have never addressed in our endangered or threatened in only a There are no characteristics of the regulations: (1) The consequences of a significant portion of its range is that the eastern small-footed bat’s management determination that a species is either entire species shall be listed as that suggest the species may be endangered or likely to become so endangered or threatened, respectively, segmented into discrete populations. throughout a significant portion of its and the Act’s protections shall be The eastern small-footed bat occurs in range, but not throughout all of its applied across the species’ entire range. the Canadian provinces of Ontario and range; or (2) what qualifies a portion of We conclude, for the purposes of this Quebec, as well as in the United States. a range as ‘‘significant.’’ finding, that interpreting the significant However, the species is not listed under Two recent district court decisions portion of its range phrase as providing Canada’s Species At Risk Act. In have addressed whether the SPR an independent basis for listing is the addition, we have no information to language allows the Service to list or best interpretation of the Act because it suggest that the species, its habitat, or protect less than all members of a is consistent with the purposes and the the potential threats evaluated above in defined ‘‘species’’: Defenders of Wildlife plain meaning of the key definitions of the five factor analysis are managed v. Salazar, 729 F. Supp. 2d 1207 (D. the Act; it does not conflict with differently in the Canadian versus U.S. Mont. 2010), concerning the Service’s established past agency practice (i.e.,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61074 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

prior to the 2007 Solicitor’s Opinion), as species’ range may be determined to be Wildlife v. Norton, 258 F.3d 1136 (9th no consistent, long-term agency practice ‘‘significant’’ due to its contributions Cir. 2001). has been established; and it is consistent under any one or more of these The definition of ‘‘significant’’ used in with the judicial opinions that have concepts. this finding carefully balances these most closely examined this issue. For the purposes of this finding, we concerns. By setting a relatively high Having concluded that the phrase determine if a portion’s biological threshold, we minimize the degree to ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ contribution is so important that the which restrictions will be imposed or provides an independent basis for portion qualifies as ‘‘significant’’ by resources expended that do not listing and protecting the entire species, asking whether without that portion, the contribute substantially to species we next turn to the meaning of representation, redundancy, or conservation. But we have not set the ‘‘significant’’ to determine the threshold resiliency of the species would be so threshold so high that the phrase ‘‘in a for when such an independent basis for impaired that the species would have an significant portion of its range’’ loses listing exists. increased vulnerability to threats to the independent meaning. Specifically, we Although there are potentially many point that the overall species would be have not set the threshold as high as it ways to determine whether a portion of in danger of extinction (i.e., would be was under the interpretation presented a species’ range is ‘‘significant,’’ we ‘‘endangered’’). Conversely, we would by the Service in the Defenders conclude, for the purposes of this not consider the portion of the range at litigation. Under that interpretation, the finding, that the significance of the issue to be ‘‘significant’’ if there is portion of the range would have to be portion of the range should be sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and so important that current imperilment determined based on its biological representation elsewhere in the species’ there would mean that the species contribution to the conservation of the range that the species would not be in would be currently imperiled species. For this reason, we describe the danger of extinction throughout its everywhere. Under the definition of threshold for ‘‘significant’’ in terms of range if the population in that portion ‘‘significant’’ used in this finding, the an increase in the risk of extinction for of the range in question became portion of the range need not rise to the species. We conclude that a extirpated (extinct locally). such an exceptionally high level of biologically based definition of biological significance. (We recognize We recognize that this definition of ‘‘significant’’ best conforms to the that if the species is imperiled in a ‘‘significant’’ (a portion of the range of purposes of the Act, is consistent with portion that rises to that level of a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its judicial interpretations, and best biological significance, then we should ensures species’ conservation. Thus, for contribution to the viability of the conclude that the species is in fact the purposes of this finding, and as species is so important that without that imperiled throughout all of its range, explained further below, a portion of the portion, the species would be in danger and that we would not need to rely on range of a species is ‘‘significant’’ if its of extinction) establishes a threshold the significant portion of its range contribution to the viability of the that is relatively high. On the one hand, language for such a listing.) Rather, species is so important that without that given that the consequences of finding under this interpretation we ask portion, the species would be in danger a species to be endangered or threatened whether the species would be of extinction. in a significant portion of its range endangered everywhere without that We evaluate biological significance would be listing the species throughout portion, i.e., if that portion were based on the principles of conservation its entire range, it is important to use a completely extirpated. In other words, biology using the concepts of threshold for ‘‘significant’’ that is the portion of the range need not be so redundancy, resiliency, and robust. It would not be meaningful or important that even the species being in representation. Resiliency describes the appropriate to establish a very low danger of extinction in that portion characteristics of a species and its threshold whereby a portion of the would be sufficient to cause the species habitat that allow it to recover from range can be considered ‘‘significant’’ in the remainder of the range to be periodic disturbance. Redundancy even if only a negligible increase in endangered; rather, the complete (having multiple populations extinction risk would result from its extirpation (in a hypothetical future) of distributed across the landscape) may be loss. Because nearly any portion of a the species in that portion would be needed to provide a margin of safety for species’ range can be said to contribute required to cause the species in the the species to withstand catastrophic some increment to a species’ viability, remainder of the range to be events. Representation (the range of use of such a low threshold would endangered. variation found in a species) ensures require us to impose restrictions and The range of a species can that the species’ adaptive capabilities expend conservation resources theoretically be divided into portions in are conserved. Redundancy, resiliency, disproportionately to conservation an infinite number of ways. However, and representation are not independent benefit: Listing would be rangewide, there is no purpose to analyzing of each other, and some characteristic of even if only a portion of the range of portions of the range that have no a species or area may contribute to all minor conservation importance to the reasonable potential to be significant or three. For example, distribution across a species is imperiled. On the other hand, to analyzing portions of the range in wide variety of habitat types is an it would be inappropriate to establish a which there is no reasonable potential indicator of representation, but it may threshold for ‘‘significant’’ that is too for the species to be endangered or also indicate a broad geographic high. This would be the case if the threatened. To identify only those distribution contributing to redundancy standard were, for example, that a portions that warrant further (decreasing the chance that any one portion of the range can be considered consideration, we determine whether event affects the entire species), and the ‘‘significant’’ only if threats in that there is substantial information likelihood that some habitat types are portion result in the entire species’ indicating that: (1) The portions may be less susceptible to certain threats, being currently endangered or ‘‘significant,’’ and (2) the species may be contributing to resiliency (the ability of threatened. Such a high bar would not in danger of extinction there or likely to the species to recover from disturbance). give the significant portion of its range become so within the foreseeable future. None of these concepts is intended to be phrase independent meaning, as the Depending on the biology of the species, mutually exclusive, and a portion of a Ninth Circuit held in Defenders of its range, and the threats it faces, it

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61075

might be more efficient for us to address endangered within the foreseeable find that the petitioned action to list the the significance question first or the future (threatened), throughout all of its northern long-eared bat as an status question first. Thus, if we range or in a significant portion of its endangered or threatened species is determine that a portion of the range is range. Therefore, we find that listing the warranted. A determination on the not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to eastern small-footed bat as an status of the species as an endangered determine whether the species is endangered or threatened species under or threatened species is presented below endangered or threatened there; if we the Act is not warranted at this time. in the proposed listing determination. determine that the species is not We request that you submit any new information concerning the status of, or Proposed Determination for Northern endangered or threatened in a portion of Long-Eared Bat its range, we do not need to determine threats to, the eastern small-footed bat to if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ In our Pennsylvania Field Office, 315 Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), practice, a key part of the determination South Allen Street, Suite 322, State and its implementing regulations at 50 that a species is in danger of extinction College, PA 16801, whenever it becomes CFR part 424, set forth the procedures in a significant portion of its range is available. New information will help us for adding species to the Federal Lists whether the threats are geographically monitor the eastern small-footed bat and of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife concentrated in some way. If the threats encourage its conservation. If an and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the to the species are essentially uniform emergency situation develops for the Act, we may list a species based on (A) throughout its range, no portion is likely eastern small-footed bat, we will act to The present or threatened destruction, to warrant further consideration. provide immediate protection. modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for Moreover, if any concentration of Northern Long-Eared Bat threats to the species occurs only in commercial, recreational, scientific, or As required by the Act, we considered portions of the species’ range that educational purposes; (C) disease or the five factors in assessing whether the clearly would not meet the biologically predation; (D) the inadequacy of northern long-eared bat is an based definition of ‘‘significant,’’ such existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) endangered or threatened species, as portions will not warrant further other natural or manmade factors cited in the petition, throughout all of consideration. affecting its continued existence. Listing its range. We examined the best actions may be warranted based on any We evaluated the current range of the scientific and commercial information of the above threat factors, singly or in eastern small-footed bat to determine if available regarding the past, present, combination. there is any apparent geographic and future threats faced by the northern We have carefully assessed the best concentration of potential threats for the long-eared bat. We reviewed the scientific and commercial information species. We examined potential habitat petition, information available in our available regarding the past, present, threats from modification of cave and files, and other available published and and future threats to the northern long- mine openings, mine reclamation, unpublished information, and we eared bat. There are several factors that vandalism, wind energy development, consulted with recognized bat and affect the northern long-eared bat; and timber harvesting (Factor A); disease experts and other Federal and however, we have found that no other disturbance from cave recreation and State agencies. threat is as severe and immediate to the research-related activities (Factor B); This status review identifies that the species persistence as WNS (Factor C). WNS and predation (Factor C); the primary threat to the northern long- Predominantly due to the emergence of inadequacy of existing regulatory eared bat is attributable to WNS (Factor WNS, the northern long-eared bat has mechanisms (Factor D); and collisions C), a disease caused by the fungus experienced a severe and rapid decline from wind energy development projects, Geomyces destructans that is known to in the Northeast, estimated at climate change, contaminants, and kill bats. The disease has led to dramatic approximately 99 percent (from prescribed burning (Factor E). We found and rapid population declines in hibernacula data) since the disease was no concentration of threats that suggests northern long-eared bats of up to 99 first discovered there in 2007. Summer that the eastern small-footed bat may be percent from pre-WNS levels in some survey data in the Northeast have in danger of extinction in a portion of areas. White-nose syndrome has spread confirmed rates of decline observed in its range. We found no portions of its rapidly throughout the East and is northern long-eared bat hibernacula range where potential threats are currently spreading through the data post-WNS, with rates of decline significantly concentrated or Midwest. We have no information to ranging from 93 to 98 percent. This substantially greater than in other indicate that there are areas within the disease is considered the prevailing portions of its range. Therefore, we find species’ range that will not be impacted threat to the species, as there is that factors affecting the eastern small- by the disease or that similar rates of currently no known cure. As mentioned footed bat are essentially uniform decline (to what has been observed in under Factor C, although at the current throughout its range, indicating no the East, where the disease has been time the disease has not spread portion of the range warrants further present for at most 8 years) will not throughout the species’ entire range consideration of possible endangered or occur throughout the species’ range. (WNS is currently found in 22 of 39 threatened status under the Act. There Other sources of mortality to the species States where the northern long-eared bat is no available information indicating include wind-energy development, occurs), it continues to spread, and we that there has been a range contraction habitat modification, destruction and have no reason not to expect that where for the species, and therefore we find disturbance (e.g., vandalism to it spreads, it will have the same impact that lost historical range does not hibernacula, roost tree removal), effects to the affected species (Coleman 2013, constitute a significant portion of the of climate change, and contaminants. pers. comm.). Although there is some range for the eastern small-footed bat. Although no significant decline due to uncertainty as far as when the disease Our review of the best available these factors has been observed, they will spread throughout the northern scientific and commercial information may have cumulative effects to the long-eared bat’s range, all models that indicates that the eastern small-footed species in addition to WNS. have attempted to project the spread of bat is not in danger of extinction On the basis of the best scientific and WNS (presented in Factor C) were in (endangered) nor likely to become commercial information available, we agreement that WNS will indeed spread

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61076 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

across the United States. In addition, significant effects where it has occurred whether a species remains endangered human transmission could introduce and is expected to spread rangewide in or may be downlisted or delisted, and the spread of the fungus to new a short timeframe. methods for monitoring recovery locations that are far removed from the Under the Act and our implementing progress. Recovery plans also establish current known locations (Coleman 2013, regulations, a species may warrant a framework for agencies to coordinate pers. comm.). This threat is ongoing, is listing if it is endangered or threatened their recovery efforts and provide expected to increase in the future, and throughout all or a significant portion of estimates of the cost of implementing is significant because it continues to its range. The threats to the survival of recovery tasks. Recovery teams extirpate northern long-eared bat the species occur throughout the (composed of species experts, Federal populations as it spreads and is species’ range and are not restricted to and State agencies, nongovernmental expected to continue to spread any particular significant portion of that organizations, and stakeholders) are throughout the species’ range. Other range. Accordingly, our assessment and often established to develop recovery threats to the northern long-eared bat proposed determination applies to the plans. When completed, the recovery include wind-energy development, species throughout its entire range. outline, draft recovery plan, and the winter and summer habitat Available Conservation Measures final recovery plan will be available on modification, destruction and our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ disturbance (e.g., vandalism to Conservation measures provided to endangered), or from our Green Bay, hibernacula, roost tree removal), climate species listed as endangered or Wisconsin, Field Office (see FOR change, and contaminants. Although threatened under the Act include FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). these threats (prior to WNS) have not in recognition, recovery actions, Implementation of recovery actions and of themselves had significant requirements for Federal protection, and generally requires the participation of a prohibitions against certain practices. impacts at the species level, they may broad range of partners, including other Recognition through listing results in increase the overall impacts to the Federal agencies, States, Tribal, public awareness, and conservation by species when considered cumulatively nongovernmental organizations, Federal, State, Tribal, and local with WNS. businesses, and private landowners. agencies; private organizations; and Examples of recovery actions include The Act defines an endangered individuals. The Act encourages habitat protection, habitat restoration species as any species that is ‘‘in danger cooperation with the States and requires (e.g., restoration of native vegetation) of extinction throughout all or a that recovery actions be carried out for and management, research, captive significant portion of its range’’ and a all listed species. The protection propagation and reintroduction, and threatened species as any species ‘‘that required by Federal agencies and the outreach and education. The recovery of is likely to become endangered prohibitions against certain activities many listed species cannot be throughout all or a significant portion of are discussed, in part, below. accomplished solely on Federal lands its range within the foreseeable future.’’ The primary purpose of the Act is the because their range may occur primarily We find that the northern long-eared bat conservation of endangered and or solely on non-Federal lands. To is presently in danger of extinction threatened species and the ecosystems achieve recovery of these species throughout its entire range based on the upon which they depend. The ultimate requires cooperative conservation efforts severity and immediacy of threats goal of such conservation efforts is the on private, State, and Tribal lands. currently affecting the species. The recovery of these listed species, so that If this species is listed, funding for overall range has been significantly they no longer need the protective recovery actions will be available from impacted because a large portion of measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of a variety of sources, including Federal populations in the eastern part of the the Act requires the Service to develop budgets, State programs, and cost-share range have been extirpated due to WNS. and implement recovery plans for the grants for non-Federal landowners, the White-nose syndrome is currently or is conservation of endangered and academic community, and expected in the near future to impact threatened species. The recovery nongovernmental organizations. In the remaining populations. In addition planning process involves the addition, under section 6 of the Act, the other factors are acting in combination identification of actions that are State(s) of Alabama, Arkansas, with WNS to reduce the overall viability necessary to halt or reverse the species’ Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, of the species. The risk of extinction is decline by addressing the threats to its Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, high because the species is considered survival and recovery. The goal of this Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, less common to rare in the areas not yet, process is to restore listed species to a Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, but anticipated to soon be, affected by point where they are secure, self- Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, WNS, and significant rates of decline sustaining, and functioning components Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, have been observed over the last 6 years of their ecosystems. New York, North Carolina, North in the core of the species’ range, which Recovery planning includes the Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, is currently affected by WNS; these rates development of a recovery outline Rhode Island, South Carolina, South of decline are especially high in the shortly after a species is listed and Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, eastern part of the species’ range, where preparation of a draft and final recovery West Virginia, Wisconsin, and rates of decline have been as high as 99 plan. The recovery outline guides the Wyoming, and the District of Columbia, percent in hibernating populations of immediate implementation of urgent would be eligible for Federal funds to the species. Therefore, on the basis of recovery actions and describes the implement management actions that the best available scientific and process to be used to develop a recovery promote the protection or recovery of commercial information, we propose plan. Revisions of the plan may be done the northern long-eared bat. Information listing the northern long-eared bat as to address continuing or new threats to on our grant programs that are available endangered in accordance with sections the species, as new substantive to aid species recovery can be found at: 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We find that information becomes available. The http://www.fws.gov/grants. a threatened species status is not recovery plan identifies site-specific Although the northern long-eared bat appropriate for the northern long-eared management actions that set a trigger for is only proposed for listing under the bat because the threat of WNS has review of the five factors that control Act at this time, please let us know if

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61077

you are interested in participating in carry, transport, or ship any such (7) Unauthorized removal or recovery efforts for this species. wildlife that has been taken illegally. exclusion from buildings or artificial Additionally, we invite you to submit Certain exceptions apply to agents of the structures being used as roost sites by any new information on this species Service and State conservation agencies. the species, resulting in take of the whenever it becomes available and any We may issue permits to carry out species. information you may have for recovery otherwise prohibited activities (8) Unauthorized building and planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER involving endangered and threatened operation of wind energy facilities INFORMATION CONTACT). wildlife species under certain within areas used by the species, which Section 7(a) of the Act requires circumstances. Regulations governing results in take of the species. Federal agencies to evaluate their permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for (9) Unauthorized discharge of actions with respect to any species that endangered species, and at § 17.32 for chemicals, fill, or other materials into is proposed or listed as an endangered threatened species. With regard to sinkholes which may lead to or threatened species and with respect endangered wildlife, a permit must be contamination of known northern long- to its critical habitat, if any is issued for the following purposes: For eared bat hibernacula. designated. Regulations implementing scientific purposes, to enhance the Questions regarding whether specific this interagency cooperation provision propagation or survival of the species, activities would constitute a violation of of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part and for incidental take in connection section 9 of the Act should be directed 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires with otherwise lawful activities. to the Green Bay, Wisconsin Ecological Federal agencies to confer with the It is our policy, as published in the Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER Service on any action that is likely to Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR INFORMATION CONTACT). jeopardize the continued existence of a 34272), to identify to the maximum species proposed for listing or result in Critical Habitat for Northern Long- extent practicable at the time a species Eared Bat destruction or adverse modification of is listed, those activities that would or proposed critical habitat. If a species is would not constitute a violation of Background listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this the Act requires Federal agencies to Critical habitat is defined in section 3 policy is to increase public awareness of of the Act as: ensure that activities they authorize, the effect of a proposed listing on fund, or carry out are not likely to (1) The specific areas within the proposed and ongoing activities within geographical area occupied by the jeopardize the continued existence of the range of species proposed for listing. the species or destroy or adversely species, at the time it is listed in The following activities could accordance with the Act, on which are modify its critical habitat. If a Federal potentially result in a violation of action may affect a listed species or its found those physical or biological section 9 of the Act; this list is not features critical habitat, the responsible Federal comprehensive: agency must enter into consultation (a) Essential to the conservation of the (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, with the Service. species, and Federal agency actions within the possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, (b) Which may require special species’ habitat that may require or transporting of the species, including management considerations or conference or consultation or both as import or export across State lines and protection; and described in the preceding paragraph international boundaries, except for (2) Specific areas outside the include management and any other properly documented antique geographical area occupied by the landscape-altering activities on Federal specimens of these taxa at least 100 species at the time it is listed, upon a lands administered by the U.S. Fish and years old, as defined by section 10(h)(1) determination that such areas are Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, of the Act. essential for the conservation of the NPS, and other Federal agencies; (2) Incidental take of the species species. issuance of section 404 Clean Water Act without authorization pursuant to Conservation, as defined under (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) permits by the section 7 or section 10(a)(1)(B) of the section 3 of the Act, means to use and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and Act. the use of all methods and procedures construction and maintenance of roads (3) Disturbance or destruction of that are necessary to bring an or highways by the Federal Highway known hibernacula due to commercial endangered or threatened species to the Administration. or recreational activities during known point at which the measures provided The Act and its implementing periods of hibernation. pursuant to the Act are no longer regulations set forth a series of general (4) Unauthorized destruction or necessary. Such methods and prohibitions and exceptions that apply modification of summer habitat procedures include, but are not limited to all endangered and threatened (including unauthorized grading, to, all activities associated with wildlife. The prohibitions of section leveling, burning, herbicide spraying, or scientific resources management such as 9(a)(2) of the Act, codified at 50 CFR other destruction or modification of research, census, law enforcement, 17.21 for endangered wildlife, in part, habitat) in ways that kills or injures habitat acquisition and maintenance, make it illegal for any person subject to individuals by significantly impairing propagation, live trapping, and the jurisdiction of the United States to the species’ essential breeding, foraging, transplantation, and, in the take (includes harass, harm, pursue, sheltering, or other essential life extraordinary case where population hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, functions. pressures within a given ecosystem or collect; or to attempt any of these), (5) Unauthorized removal or cannot be otherwise relieved, may import, export, ship in interstate destruction of trees and other natural include regulated taking. commerce in the course of commercial and manmade structures being utilized Critical habitat receives protection activity, or sell or offer for sale in as roosts by the northern long-eared bat under section 7 of the Act through the interstate or foreign commerce any that results in take of the species. requirement that Federal agencies listed species. Under the Lacey Act (18 (6) Unauthorized release of biological ensure, in consultation with the Service, U.S.C. 42–43; 16 U.S.C. 3371–3378), it control agents that attack any life stage that any action they authorize, fund, or is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, of this taxon. carry out is not likely to result in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61078 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

destruction or adverse modification of designate critical habitat in areas actions that affect habitat. Federally critical habitat. The designation of outside the geographical area occupied funded or permitted projects affecting critical habitat does not affect land by a species only when a designation listed species outside their designated ownership or establish a refuge, limited to its range would be inadequate critical habitat areas may still result in wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other to ensure the conservation of the jeopardy findings in some cases. These conservation area. Such designation species. protections and conservation tools will does not allow the government or public Section 4 of the Act requires that we continue to contribute to recovery of to access private lands. Such designate critical habitat on the basis of this species. Similarly, critical habitat designation does not require the best scientific data available. designations made on the basis of the implementation of restoration, recovery, Further, our Policy on Information best available information at the time of or enhancement measures by non- Standards Under the Endangered designation will not control the Federal landowners. Where a landowner Species Act (published in the Federal direction and substance of future requests Federal agency funding or Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), recovery plans, habitat conservation authorization for an action that may the Information Quality Act (section 515 plans (HCPs), or other species affect a listed species or critical habitat, of the Treasury and General conservation planning efforts if new the consultation requirements of section Government Appropriations Act for information available at the time of 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. these planning efforts calls for a in the event of a destruction or adverse 5658)), and our associated Information different outcome. modification finding, the obligation of Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, Prudency Determination the Federal action agency and the establish procedures, and provide landowner is not to restore or recover guidance to ensure that our decisions Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as the species, but to implement are based on the best scientific data amended, and implementing regulations reasonable and prudent alternatives to available. They require our biologists, to (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the avoid destruction or adverse the extent consistent with the Act and maximum extent prudent and modification of critical habitat. with the use of the best scientific data determinable, the Secretary designate Under the first prong of the Act’s available, to use primary and original critical habitat at the time the species is definition of critical habitat, areas sources of information as the basis for determined to be endangered or within the geographical area occupied recommendations to designate critical threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR by the species at the time it was listed habitat. 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation are included in a critical habitat When we are determining which areas of critical habitat is not prudent when designation if they contain physical or should be designated as critical habitat, one or both of the following situations biological features (1) which are our primary source of information is exist: (1) The species is threatened by essential to the conservation of the generally the information developed taking or other human activity, and species and (2) which may require during the listing process for the identification of critical habitat can be special management considerations or species. Additional information sources expected to increase the degree of threat protection. For these areas, critical may include the recovery plan for the to the species, or (2) such designation of habitat designations identify, to the species, articles in peer-reviewed critical habitat would not be beneficial extent known using the best scientific journals, conservation plans developed to the species. and commercial data available, those by States and counties, scientific status There is currently no imminent threat physical or biological features that are surveys and studies, biological of take attributed to collection or essential to the conservation of the assessments, other unpublished vandalism under Factor B for the species (such as space, food, cover, and materials, or experts’ opinions or northern long-eared bat, and protected habitat). In identifying those personal knowledge. identification and mapping of critical physical and biological features within Habitat is dynamic, and species may habitat is not expected to initiate any an area, we focus on the principal move from one area to another over such threat. In the absence of finding biological or physical constituent time. We recognize that critical habitat that the designation of critical habitat elements (primary constituent elements designated at a particular point in time would increase threats to a species, if such as roost sites, nesting grounds, may not include all of the habitat areas there are any benefits to a critical seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide, that we may later determine are habitat designation, then a prudent soil type) that are essential to the necessary for the recovery of the finding is warranted. The potential conservation of the species. Primary species. For these reasons, a critical benefits of designation include: (1) constituent elements are those specific habitat designation does not signal that Triggering consultation under section 7 elements of the physical or biological habitat outside the designated area is of the Act, in new areas for actions in features that provide for a species’ life- unimportant or may not be needed for which there may be a Federal nexus history processes and are essential to recovery of the species. Areas that are where it would not otherwise occur the conservation of the species. important to the conservation of listed because, for example, it is or has Under the second prong of the Act’s species, both inside and outside the become unoccupied or the occupancy is definition of critical habitat, we can critical habitat designation, continue to in question; (2) focusing conservation designate critical habitat in areas be subject to: (1) Conservation actions activities on the most essential features outside the geographical area occupied implemented under section 7(a)(1) of and areas; (3) providing educational by the species at the time it is listed, the Act, (2) regulatory protections benefits to State or county governments upon a determination that such areas afforded by the requirement in section or private entities; and (4) preventing are essential for the conservation of the 7(a)(2) of the Act for Federal agencies to people from causing inadvertent harm species. For example, an area currently ensure their actions are not likely to to the species. Therefore, because we occupied by the species but that was not jeopardize the continued existence of have determined that the designation of occupied at the time of listing may be any endangered or threatened species, critical habitat will not likely increase essential to the conservation of the and (3) section 9 of the Act’s the degree of threat to the species and species and may be included in the prohibitions on taking any individual of may provide some measure of benefit, critical habitat designation. We the species, including taking caused by we find that designation of critical

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 61079

habitat is prudent for the northern long- There are also uncertainties with announce the dates, times, and places of eared bat. potential designation of summer habitat, those hearings, as well as how to obtain specifically maternity colony habitat. reasonable accommodations, in the Critical Habitat Determinability Although research has given us Federal Register and local newspapers Having determined that designation is indication of some key summer roost at least 15 days before the hearing. prudent, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act requirements, the northern long-eared Persons needing reasonable we must find whether critical habitat for bat appears to be somewhat accommodations to attend and the species is determinable. Our opportunistic in roost selection, participate in a public hearing should regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state selecting varying roost tree species and contact the Green Bay, Wisconsin, Field that critical habitat is not determinable types of roosts throughout the range. Office at 920–866–1717, as soon as when one or both of the following Thus, it is not clear whether certain possible. To allow sufficient time to situations exist: (i) Information summer habitats are essential for the process requests, please call no later sufficient to perform required analyses recovery of the species, or whether than 1week before the hearing date. of the impacts of the designation is summer habitat is not a limiting factor Information regarding this proposed lacking, or (ii) The biological needs of for the species. Although research has rule is available in alternative formats the species are not sufficiently well shown some consistency in female upon request. known to permit identification of an summer roost habitat (e.g., selection of Required Determinations area as critical habitat. mix of live trees and snags as roosts, We reviewed the available roosting in cavities, roosting beneath Clarity of the Rule information pertaining to the biological bark, and roosting in trees associated We are required by Executive Orders needs of the species and habitat with closed canopy), the species and 12866 and 12988 and by the characteristics where this species is diameter of the tree (when tree roost is Presidential Memorandum of June 1, located. Since information regarding the used) selected by northern long-eared 1998, to write all rules in plain biological needs of the species is not bats for roosts vary widely depending language. This means that each rule we sufficiently well known to permit on availability. Therefore, we are identification of areas as critical habitat, publish must: currently unable to determine whether (1) Be logically organized; we conclude that the designation of specific summer habitat features are (2) Use the active voice to address critical habitat is not determinable for essential to the conservation of the readers directly; the northern long-eared bat at this time. species, and find that critical habitat is (3) Use clear language rather than There are many uncertainties in not determinable for the northern long- jargon; designating hibernacula as critical eared bat at this time. We will seek more (4) Be divided into short sections and habitat for the northern long-eared bat. information regarding the specific sentences; and First, we are not able to establish which winter and summer habitat features and (5) Use lists and tables wherever of the large number of known requirements for the northern long- possible. hibernacula the species is known to eared bat and make a determination on If you feel that we have not met these inhabit are essential to the conservation critical habitat no later than 1 year requirements, send us comments by one of the species. This is due to the species following any final listing. of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES typically being found in small numbers section. To better help us revise the (often fewer than 10 individuals per Peer Review rule, your comments should be as hibernaculum). Also, those hibernacula In accordance with our joint policy specific as possible. For example, you with historically greater numbers published in the Federal Register on should tell us the numbers of the (greater than 100) are often now infected July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek sections or paragraphs that are unclearly with WNS, where the northern long- the expert opinions of at least three written, which sections or sentences are eared bat has been extirpated or close to appropriate and independent specialists too long, the sections where you feel extirpated. In addition, we lack regarding this proposed rule. The lists or tables would be useful, etc. sufficient information to define the purpose of peer review is to ensure that physical and biological features or our listing determination for this species National Environmental Policy Act primary constituent elements with is based on scientifically sound data, (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) enough specificity; we are not able to assumptions, and analyses. We will We have determined that determine how habitats affected by invite these peer reviewers to comment environmental assessments and WNS (where populations previously during the public comment period. environmental impact statements, as thrived and are now extirpated) may We will consider all comments and defined under the authority of the contribute to the recovery of the species information we receive during the National Environmental Policy Act or whether those areas may still contain comment period on this proposed rule (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not essential physical and biological during preparation of a final be prepared in connection with listing features. Finally, for several States (e.g., rulemaking. Accordingly, the final a species as an endangered or Alabama, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, decision may differ from this proposal. threatened species under the Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma) Endangered Species Act. We published Public Hearings within the species’ range it is unknown a notice outlining our reasons for this if hibernacula occur within parts of the The Act provides for one or more determination in the Federal Register State, due to either the lack of survey public hearings on this proposal, if on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). effort or (especially the case in the requested. Requests must be received western part of the range) the species within 45 days after the date of References Cited being sparsely populated over a large publication of this proposal in the A complete list of references cited in landscape, making locating potential Federal Register. Such requests must be this rulemaking is available on the hibernacula challenging. Therefore, we sent to the address shown in the FOR Internet at http://www.regulations.gov currently lack the information necessary FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. and upon request from the Green Bay, to propose critical habitat for the We will schedule public hearing on this Wisconsin, Field Office (see FOR species. proposal, if any are requested, and FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 61080 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Authors Proposed Regulation Promulgation ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an The primary authors of this proposed Accordingly, we propose to amend entry for ‘‘Bat, northern long-eared’’ in rule are the staff members of the Green part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title alphabetical order under MAMMALS to Bay, Wisconsin, Field Office and the 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the List of Endangered and Threatened State College, Pennsylvania, Ecological as set forth below: Wildlife to read as follows: Services Field Office. PART 17—[AMENDED] § 17.11 Endangered and threatened List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 wildlife. Endangered and threatened species, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 * * * * * continues to read as follows: Exports, Imports, Reporting and (h) * * * recordkeeping requirements, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– Transportation. 1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted.

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

MAMMALS

******* Bat, northern Myotis U.S.A. (AL, AR, CT, DE, Entire ...... E ...... NA ...... NA long-eared. septentrionalis. DC, FL, GA, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, VT, VA, WV, WI, WY); Can- ada (AB, BC, LB, MB, NB, NF, NS, NT, ON, PE, QC, SK, YT).

*******

Dated: September 10, 2013. Stephen Guertin, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2013–23753 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:57 Oct 01, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\02OCP2.SGM 02OCP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2