Vol. 79 Friday, No. 206 October 24, 2014

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for Dakota and Endangered Species Status for Poweshiek Skipperling; Final Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63672 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Executive Summary Previous Federal Action Fish and Wildlife Service Why we need to publish a rule. Under Please refer to the proposed listing the Endangered Species Act, a species rule for the Dakota skipper and 50 CFR Part 17 may warrant protection through listing Poweshiek skipperling (78 FR 63574; if it is endangered or threatened October 24, 2013) for a detailed throughout all or a significant portion of [Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2013–0043; description of previous Federal actions 4500030113: 4500030113] its range. Listing a species as an concerning this species. endangered or threatened species can Background only be completed by issuing a rule. RIN 1018–AY01 This rule will finalize the listing of the Please refer to the proposed listing Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Dakota skipper ( dacotae) as a rule for the Dakota skipper and the and Plants; Threatened Species Status threatened species and the Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling (78 FR 63574; for Dakota Skipper and Endangered skipperling ( poweshiek) as an October 24, 2013) for a summary of Species Status for Poweshiek endangered species. species information. Skipperling The basis for our action. Under the Status Assessments for Dakota Skipper Endangered Species Act, we can AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, and Poweshiek Skipperling Dakota determine that a species is an Skipper Interior. endangered or threatened species based ACTION: Final rule. on any of five factors: (A) The present Species Description or threatened destruction, modification, The Dakota skipper (Hesperia SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Wildlife Service (Service), determine dacotae) is a member of the skipper Overutilization for commercial, family Hesperiidae and was first threatened species status under the recreational, scientific, or educational Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), described in 1911 from collections taken purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) at Volga, South Dakota, and Grinnell, as amended, for the Dakota skipper The inadequacy of existing regulatory (Hesperia dacotae), a butterfly currently Iowa (Skinner 1911 in Royer and mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or Marrone 1992a, p. 1). The family found in Minnesota, North Dakota, manmade factors affecting its continued South Dakota, Manitoba, and Hesperiidae comprises seven existence. We have determined the subfamilies worldwide, four of which Saskatchewan and endangered species threats to both species include: status for the Poweshiek skipperling occur in North America, north of • Habitat loss and degradation of (), a butterfly Mexico (Brower and Warren at http:// native and fens, currently found in Michigan, tolweb.org/Hesperiidae). There are 21 resulting from conversion to agriculture Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Manitoba. recognized species in the genus or other development; ecological The effect of this regulation will be to Hesperia (ibid). Dakota skipper is the succession and encroachment of add these species to the List of accepted common name for H. dacotae. invasive species and woody vegetation Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. The Dakota skipper is a small to primarily due to lack of management; medium-sized butterfly with a wingspan DATES: This rule becomes effective past and present fire, haying, or grazing of 2.4–3.2 centimeters (cm) (0.9–1.3 November 24, 2014. management that degrades or eliminates inches (in)) and hooked antennae (Royer native prairie grasses and flowering ADDRESSES: This final rule is available and Marrone 1992a, p. 3). Like other forbs; flooding; and groundwater on the internet at http:// Hesperiidae species, Dakota skippers depletion, alteration, and www.regulations.gov and http:// have a faster and more powerful flight contamination. www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/. than most because of a thick, Comments and materials we received, as • Other natural or manmade factors, well-muscled thorax (Scott 1986, p. well as supporting documentation we including loss of genetic diversity, small 415). used in preparing this rule, are available size and isolation of sites, Adult Dakota skippers have variable for public inspection at http:// indiscriminate use of herbicides such markings. The dorsal surface of adult www.regulations.gov. All of the that it reduces or eliminates nectar male wings ranges in color from tawny- comments, materials, and sources, climate conditions such as orange to brown and has a prominent documentation that we considered in drought, direct mortality from fire and mark on the forewing; the ventral this rulemaking are available by other management activities or natural surface is dusty yellow-orange (Royer appointment, during normal business occurrences, direct or indirect mortality and Marrone 1992a, p. 3). The dorsal hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, from indiscriminate use of pesticides, surface of adult females is darker brown Twin Cities Field Office, 4101 American and other unknown stressors. with diffused tawny orange spots and a Boulevard East, Bloomington, • Existing regulatory mechanisms are few diffused white spots restricted to Minnesota 55425; (612) 725–3548; (612) inadequate to mitigate these threats to 725–3609 (facsimile). the margin of the forewing; the ventral both species. surfaces are dusty gray-brown with a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peer review and public comment. We faint white spotband across the middle Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor, Twin sought comments from independent of the wing (Royer and Marrone 1992a, Cities Field Office, 4101 American specialists to ensure that our p. 3). Adult Dakota skippers may be Boulevard East, Bloomington, designation is based on scientifically confused with the Ottoe skipper (H. Minnesota 55425; (612) 725–3548; (612) sound data, assumptions, and analyses. ottoe), which is somewhat larger with 725–3609 (facsimile). Persons who use a We invited these peer reviewers to slightly longer wings (Royer and telecommunications device for the deaf comment on our listing proposal. We Marrone 1992a, p. 3). Dakota skipper (TDD) may call the Federal Information also considered all other comments and pupae are reddish-brown, and the larvae Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. information received during the are light brown with a black collar and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comment period. dark brown head (McCabe 1981, p. 181).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63673

General Life History (Dana 1991, p. 16). They construct 2–3 pp. 4, 57). In addition to nutrition, the Dakota skippers are univoltine successively larger shelters as they grow nectar of flowering forbs provides water (having a single flight per year), with an (Dana 1991, p. 16). The larvae emerge for Dakota skipper, which is necessary adult flight period that may occur from from their shelters at night to forage to avoid desiccation during flight the middle of June through the end of (McCabe 1979, p. 6; McCabe 1981, p. activity (Dana 1991, p. 47; Dana 2013, July (McCabe 1979, p. 6; McCabe 1981, 181; Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 25) pers. comm.). Some plant species listed p. 180; Dana 1991, p. 1; Royer and and appear to clip blades of grass and in some studies as nectar flowers are Marrone 1992a, p. 26; Skadsen 1997, p. bring them back to their shelters to likely used for perching and patrolling 3; Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 282). consume (Dana 2012a, pers. comm.). rather than as nectar sources. Dakota skippers have six or seven The actual flight period varies larval stages (instars) (Dana 1991, pp. The flight of the adult female somewhat across the range of each 14–15) and overwinter (diapause) in typically extends beyond that of males species and can also vary significantly ground-level or subsurface shelters (Dana 2014, pers. comm.; Dana 1991, from year to year (e.g., Rigney 2013a, p. during either the fourth or fifth instar pp. 1,15; Rigney 2013a, p. 138); 138), depending on temperature (McCabe 1979, p. 6; McCabe 1981, pp. therefore the two sexes can visit the patterns (Bink and Bik 2009, Koda and 180, 189; Dana 1991, p. 15; Royer and same nectar plant species at different Nakamura 2012). Females emerge Marrone 1992a, pp. 25–26). In the rates (e.g., if the flowering period is slightly later than males (Dana 1991, p. spring, larvae resume feeding and more coincident with either the male or 15, Rigney 2013a, p. 138), and the undergo two additional molts before the female flight period). For example, observed sex ratio of Dakota skippers they pupate. During the last two instars, Dana (1991, p. 21) observed a greater was roughly equal during peak flight larvae shift from buried shelters to number of males than females visiting periods (Dana 1991, p. 15; Swengel and horizontal shelters at the soil surface purple locoweed—this plant is already Swengel 1999, pp. 274, 283). (Dana 1991, p. 16). The Dakota skipper flight period in a past its flowering peak at the beginning locality lasts 2 to 4 weeks, and mating Food and Water of the male flight and nearly finished flowering by the peak female flight occurs throughout this period (Braker Nectar and water sources for adult (Dana 2014, pers. comm.). 1985, p. 46; McCabe and Post 1977, pp. Dakota skippers vary regionally and 36–38; McCabe 1979, p. 6; McCabe include purple coneflower (Echinacea Dakota skipper larvae feed on several 1981, p. 180; Dana 1991, p. 15; Swengel angustifolia), blanketflower (Gaillardia native grass species; little bluestem and Swengel 1999, p. 282; Rigney aristata), black-eyed Susan (Rudbeckia () is a frequent 2013a, p. 138). Adult male Dakota hirta), purple locoweed (Oxytropis food source of the larvae (Dana 1991, p. skippers exhibit perching behavior lambertii), bluebell bellflower 17; Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 25), (perch on tall plants to search for (Campanula rotundifolia), prairie although they have been found on females), but occasionally appear to milkvetch (Astragalus adsurgens) (syn. Dichanthelium spp., and other native patrol in search of mating opportunities A. laxmannii), and yellow sundrops grasses (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 25). (Calylophus serrulatus) (Dana 1991; 25). When presented with no other Dakota skippers lay eggs on broadleaf McCabe and Post 1977, pp. 36–38; choice, Dakota skipper larvae may feed plants (McCabe 1981, p. 180) and Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 21; Rigney on a variety of native and nonnative grasses (Dana 1991, p. 17), although 2013a, p. 142). Plant species likely vary grasses (e.g., Kentucky bluegrass ( larvae feed only on grasses. Potential in their value as nectar sources due to pratensis)) at least until diapause (Dana lifetime fecundity is between 180 and the amount of nectar available during 1991, p. 17). The timing of growth and 250 eggs per female Dakota skipper; the adult flight period (Dana 1991, p. development of grasses relative to the realized fecundity depends upon 48). Nectar source preferences are larval period of Dakota skippers are longevity (Dana 1991, p. 26). Female typically indicated as the relative likely important in determining the Dakota skippers lay eggs daily in proportion of plants selected for suitability of grass species as larval host diminishing numbers as they age (Dana nectaring among all the available plants. Large leaf blades, leaf hairs, and 1991, pp. 25–26). Dana (1991, p. 32) species in a particular area. Swengel the distance from larval ground shelters estimated the potential adult life span of and Swengel (1999, pp. 280–281) to palatable leaf parts preclude the value Dakota skipper to be 3 weeks and the observed nectaring at 25 plant species, of big bluestem and Indian grass as average life span (or residence on site however, most of the nectaring was at before death or emigration) to be 3 to 10 purple coneflower and blanketflower. larval food plants, particularly at days on one Minnesota prairie. Dana (1991, p. 21) reported the use of younger larval stages (Dana 1991, p. 46). Dakota skippers overwinter as larvae 25 nectar species in Minnesota with In captivity, Dakota skipper larvae ate and complete one generation per year. purple coneflower most frequented; big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), at Dakota skipper eggs hatch after McCabe (1979, p. 42; McCabe 1981, p. older larval stages, and prairie dropseed incubating for 7–20 days; therefore, 187) observed Dakota skippers using () (Runquist hatching is likely completed before the eight nectar plants. Dakota skippers in 2014, pers. comm.). Captive larvae also end of July. Recent research at the Manitoba were recently observed fed on smooth brome (Bromus inermis) Minnesota Zoo demonstrated that, nectaring on 12 species of plants, (Dana 1991, p 17), but this was not under controlled conditions in the primarily black-eyed Susan, but also tested in a natural setting and the laboratory, Dakota skippers eggs including 6 species that were previously structural features of this grass would hatched after 11 to 16 days, and the unrecorded as nectar flowers: White hinder or prevent larval survival (Dana majority of the caterpillars hatched on sweetclover (Melilotus alba), purple 2013, pers. comm.). The tight empirical the 13th and 14th days (Runquist 2014, prairie clover (Petalostemon purpureus), correlation between occurrence of pers. comm.). After hatching, Dakota yellow evening-primrose (Oenothera Dakota skippers and the dominance of skipper larvae crawl to the bases of grass biennis), palespike lobelia (Lobelia native grasses in the habitat, indicates plants where they form shelters at or spicata), fiddleleaf hawksbeard (Crepis that population persistence requires below the ground surface with silk, runcinata), and upland white aster native grasses for survival (Dana 2013, fastened together with plant tissue (Solidago ptarmicoides) (Rigney 2013a, pers. comm.).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63674 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dispersal emigrants or is artificially reintroduced gaillardia (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. Dakota skipper are not known to to a site; however, the capability to 22). Both Type A and Type B prairies disperse widely; the species was propagate the Dakota skipper is may contain slightly depressional (low evaluated among 291 butterfly species currently lacking. topographical areas that allow for the collection of surface water) wetlands in Canada as having relatively low Habitat mobility. Experts estimated Dakota with extensive flat areas and slightly Dakota skippers are obligate residents convex hummocks, which are dryer skipper to have a mean mobility of 3.5 of undisturbed (remnant, untilled) high- (standard deviation = 0.7) on a scale of than the wet areas (Lenz 1999, pp. 4, 8). quality prairie, ranging from wet-mesic In northeastern South Dakota, Dakota 0 (sedentary) to 10 (highly mobile) tallgrass prairie to dry-mesic mixed- skippers inhabit primarily Type B (Burke et al. 2011, p. 2279; Fitzsimmons grass prairie (Royer and Marrone 1992a, habitats with abundant purple 2012, pers. comm.). Dakota skippers pp. 8, 21). High-quality prairie contains coneflower, but they also occur in may be incapable of moving greater than a high diversity of native plant species, nearby Type A habitats in some areas 1 kilometer (km) (0.6 miles (mi)) including flowering herbaceous plants (Skadsen 1997, p. 4). All Type A between patches of prairie habitat (forbs). Royer and Marrone (1992a, p. habitats occupied by Dakota skipper in separated by structurally similar 21) categorized Dakota skipper habitat South Dakota are near hill-prairie (Type habitats (e.g., crop fields, grass- into two main types that were once B) habitats that are managed with fall dominated fields or pasture, but not intermixed on a landscape scale, but are haying (Skadsen 2006b, p. 2). necessarily native prairie) (Cochrane now mostly segregated. The first, Little bluestem and porcupine grass and Delphey 2002, p. 6). Royer and referred to as ‘‘Type A’’ by Royer et al. (Hesperostipa spartea) are the Marrone (1992a, p. 25) concluded that (2008, pp. 14–16), is low wet-mesic predominant grass species in Dakota Dakota skippers are not inclined to prairie that occurs on near-shore glacial skipper habitat in South Dakota disperse, although they did not describe lake deposits. Type A Dakota skipper (Skadsen 2006b, p. 2). Dry-mesic individual ranges or dispersal distances. habitat is dominated by bluestem prairies suitable for Dakota skippers in McCabe (1979, p. 9; 1981, p. 186) found grasses, with three other plant species South Dakota typically include little that concentrated activity areas for almost always present and blooming bluestem, side oats grama, porcupine Dakota skippers shift annually in during Dakota skipper’s flight period: grass, needle-and-thread grass response to local nectar sources and Wood lily (Lilium philadelphicum), (Hesperostipa comata), and prairie disturbance. bluebell bellflower, and mountain dropseed, and a high diversity and In a mark–recapture study, average deathcamas (smooth camas; Zigadenus abundance of forbs, including purple adult movements of Dakota skipper elegans) (McCabe 1981, p. 190). This coneflower, purple prairie clover, white were less than 300 meters (m) (984 feet habitat type has a high water table and prairie clover, yellow sundrops, prairie (ft)) over 3–7 days; marked adults is subject to intermittent flooding in the groundsel (Packera plattensis), prairie crossed less than 200 m (656 ft) of spring, but provides ‘‘sufficient relief to milkvetch, eastern pasqueflower unsuitable habitat between two prairie provide segments of non-inundated (Pulsatilla patens), old man’s whiskers patches and moved along ridges more habitat during the spring larval growth (prairie smoke, Geum triflorum), frequently than across valleys (Dana period within any single season’’ (Royer western silver aster (Symphyotrichum 1991, pp. 38–40). Dana (1997, p. 5) later et al. 2008, p. 15). Common forbs in sericeum), dotted blazing star (Liatris observed reduced movement rates bloom during the late season in Type A punctata), tall blazing star (L. asper), across a small valley dominated by habitat include Rocky Mountain blazing meadow zizia (Zizia aptera), blanket exotic grasses compared with star (Liatris ligulistylis), Canada flower, prairie sagewort (Artemisia movements in adjacent widespread goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), strict frigida), and leadplant (Amorpha prairie habitat. Roads and crop fields blue-eyed grass (Sisyrinchium canescens) (Skadsen 2006b, pp. 1–2). were suspected as impediments for montanum), common goldstar (Hypoxis Purple coneflower occurs at all sites movement among prairie patches along hirsuta), and black-eyed Susan (Lenz where the Dakota skipper has been two sites of the main valley (Dana 1997, 1999, p. 6). Type A habitats also contain recorded in South Dakota, although it is p. 5), although movements beyond the small patches of dry-mesic prairie absent at some sites where Dakota study area were beyond the scope of the inhabited by Dakota skippers. Common skipper is abundant in other States 1997 mark–recapture study (Dana 2013, forb species in these dry-mesic areas (Skadsen 2006b, p. 2). pers. comm.). Skadsen (1999, p. 2) include stiff sunflower (Helianthus In Minnesota, Dakota skippers often reported possible movement of Dakota pauciflorus Nutt. ssp. pauciflorus) and inhabit Type B habitats, however, the skippers in 1998 from a known candle anenome (Anemone cylindrica), species has been documented in Type A population at least 800 m (2625 ft) away although purple coneflower was rare in habitats, particularly in Kittson and to a site with an unusually heavy these habitats (Lenz 1999, pp. 6–11). Stearns counties. Dana (1997, p. 8) growth of purple coneflower; he had not Dakota skipper inhabits Type A habitat described typical habitat in Minnesota found Dakota skippers in three previous in north-central North Dakota, southeast as dry-mesic prairie dominated by mid- years when coneflower production was North Dakota, and Manitoba. height grasses with an abundance of sparse. The two sites were connected by The second Dakota skipper habitat nectar sources including purple native vegetation of varying quality, type, referred to as ‘‘Type B’’ by Royer coneflower and prairie milkvetch interspersed by a few asphalt and gravel et al. (2008, p. 14), occurs on rolling (Astragalus laxmannii Jacq. var. roads (Skadsen 2001, pers. comm.). terrain over gravelly glacial moraine robustior). Southern dry prairies in In summary, the best information we deposits and is dominated by bluestems Minnesota are described as having have suggests that dispersal of Dakota and needle grasses (Heterostipa spp.). sparse shrub cover (less than 5 percent) skipper is very limited due in part to its As with Type A habitat, bluebell composed primarily of leadplant, with short adult life span and single annual bellflower and wood lily are also prairie rose (Rosa arkansana), flight. Therefore, the species’ extirpation present in Type B habitats, but Type B wormwood sage, or smooth sumac from a site is likely permanent unless it habitats also support more extensive (Rhus glabra) present and few, if any, is within about 1 km (0.6 mi) of a site stands of purple coneflower, upright trees (Minnesota DNR 2012a). Dana that generates a sufficient number of prairie coneflower, and common (1991, p. 21) never encountered Dakota

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63675

skippers in wet or wet-mesic prairies in needlegrasses, typically invaded by depths than occupied sites in North Minnesota, despite abundance of Kentucky bluegrass, typifies dry-mesic Dakota or South Dakota (Royer et al. suitable plants and the frequent use of Dakota skipper habitat in the rolling 2008, p. 11). Royer did not measure these habitats by similar skipper terrain of river valleys and the Missouri these parameters in unoccupied sites. species. In systematic surveys at 12 Coteau (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. Rigney (2013a, pp. 108–109) Minnesota sites, Swengel and Swengel 22). These prairies, located on the measured edaphic features at 8 sites in (1999, pp. 278–279) found that Dakota western edge of the species’ known Manitoba occupied by the species and skippers were significantly more range, typically contain wood lily, broadly characterized the soil abundant on dry prairie than on either bluebell bellflower, coneflowers, and compaction (at 10 cm) as 570 to 990 wet-mesic prairie. other asters as nectar sources; in some kPA, bulk density ranging from 0.75 to In Manitoba, Dakota skipper habitat areas, mountain deathcamas also occurs 1.30 kg/L, mean soil surface air has been described as Type A prairies, (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 22). The temperature at 18 °C during Julian where the species tends to occupy the location of larval food plants rarely weeks 28–39 (continuous count of slightly higher, drier areas of wet-mesic seems to affect Dakota skipper weeks since the beginning of the prairie where nectar sources are more distribution within habitats because calendar year), and mean relative abundant (Webster 2003, p. 7). Recent these warm-season grasses are usually humidity at 85 percent during the same studies classify Dakota Skipper sites in dominant and evenly dispersed time period. Soils were classified as clay Manitoba as tallgrass or medium to (Swengel 1994, p. 6), although invasion loams and sandy loams, with generally tallgrass prairies that have been subject by smooth brome grass and other low to moderate compaction (<1375 to minimal disturbance, generally invasive species may displace or kPA) and bulk densities, which is consisting of higher, dryer prairies extirpate native larval food plants indicative of little or no compacting adjacent to lower areas with sedges (Culliney 2005, p. 134; Bahm et al. forces from cattle grazing, tilling, or (Rigney 2013a, p. 155). Inhabited areas 2011, p. 240; LaBar and Schultz 2012, agricultural vehicles (Rigney 2013a, pp. are dominated by native grasses and p. 177). 104, 119). sites are generally characterized as Royer (2008, pp. 2, 16) hypothesized Two key factors, soils unsuitable for having the following plant species: Big that Dakota skipper larvae are agriculture and steep topography, have bluestem, little bluestem particularly vulnerable to desiccation allowed remnant native-prairie habitats (Schizachyrium scoparius), tufted hair (drying out) during dry summer months inhabited by Dakota skippers to persist grass (Deschampsia caespitosa), and require ‘‘vertical water distribution’’ switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 22). (movement of shallow groundwater to Cusick’s bluegrass (Poa cusickii), McCabe (1979, pp. 17–18; 1981, p. 192) the soil surface) in the soils or wet low porcupine grass, common spikerush and Royer et al. (2008, p. 16) have areas to provide relief from high (Eleocharis palustris), wood lily (Lilim linked the historical distribution of summer temperatures. Humidity may philadelphicum), wild onion (Allium Dakota skippers to surface geological also be essential for larval survival stellatum), mountain death camas features and soils that are glacial in during winter months since the larvae (Zygadenus elegans), death camas origin and, possibly, regional cannot take in water during that time (Zygadenus gramineus), common gold precipitation-evaporation ratios (ratio of and depend on humid air to minimize star (Hypoxis hirsute), wild prairie rose, evaporation occurring naturally in one water loss through respiration (Dana American licorice (Glycyrrhiza location over a given area compared to 2013, pers. comm.). Royer (2008, pp. lepidota), white prairie clover the amount of precipitation, such as rain 14–15) measured microclimalogical (Petalostemon candidum), purple and snow, falling over the same area). levels (climate in a small space, such as prairie clover, Seneca snake root Soil types typical of Dakota skipper sites at or near the soil surface) within (Polygala senega), meadow zizia, were described as sandy loams, loamy ‘‘primary larval nesting zones’’ (0 to 2 northern bedstraw (Galium boreale), sand, or loams (Lord 1988 in Royer et cm (0 to 0.8 inches) above the soil harebell, palespike lobelia, common al. 2008, pp. 3, 10). Additional edaphic surface) throughout the range of Dakota yarrow (Achillea millefolium), pale (soil) features, such as soil moisture, skippers, and found an acceptable agoseris (Agoseris glauca), heath aster compaction, surface temperature, pH, rangewide seasonal (summer) mean (Aster ericodes) or white prairie aster and humidity, may be contributing temperature range of 18 to 21 °C (64 to (A. falcatus), smooth aster (Aster laevis), factors in larval survival and, thus, 70 °F), rangewide seasonal mean dew Flodman’s thistle (Cirsium flodmanii), important limiting factors for Dakota point ranging from 14 to 17 °C (57 to 63 fiddle leaf hawksbeard, eastern daisy skipper populations (Royer et al. 2008, °F), and rangewide seasonal mean fleabane (Erigeron annuus), Maximilian p. 2). For example, edaphic parameters relative humidity between 73 and 85 sunflower (Helianthus maximilianii), measured in sites throughout the range percent. Royer (2008) only examined Nuttall’s sunflower (Helianthus of Dakota skipper and occupied by the occupied areas for these parameters; nuttallii), meadow blazing star, black- species included a bulk density (an therefore, the statistical and biological eyed Susan, upland white aster, and indicator of soil compaction) that significance of these edaphic variables stiff goldenrod (Solidago rigida) (Rigney ranged from 0.9g/cm3 to 1.3 g/cm3 and cannot be determined from his study. 2013a, pp. 155–156). mean soil pH that ranged from 6.3 to 6.7 Occupied habitats in Saskatchewan with high micro-scale variation Species Occupancy are similar to the drier upland dry-mesic (variation on a small scale) (Royer et al. We generally consider the Dakota mixed-grass prairie hillside habitats in 2008, p. 10). Soil texture ranged from 4 skipper or Poweshiek skipperling to be Manitoba, which is dominated by to 12 percent clay, 53 to 74 percent ‘‘present’’ at sites where the species was bluestems and needlegrass. The Dakota sand, and 14 to 39 percent silt (Royer et detected during the most recent survey, skipper was most common on ridgetops al. 2008, p. 12). Seasonal soil if the survey was conducted in 2002 or and hillsides near purple coneflower temperatures, measured at three depths more recently and there is no evidence (Webster 2003, p. 8). (20, 40, and 60 cm (8, 16, and 24 in)) to suggest the species is now extirpated In North Dakota, an association of were the same at all depths within a from the site (e.g., no destruction or bluestems (Schizachyrium scoparium, site; occupied Minnesota sites generally obvious and significant degradation of Andropogon gerardii) and had higher soil temperatures at all the species’ habitat), with the exception

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63676 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

of the following four sites. We consider ‘‘extirpated’’ at sites where habitat for expected to be at levels at which the the species to be present at one the species is no longer present. If the species can be detected. However, as Poweshiek skipperling site in Michigan species is considered to be extirpated with many rare species, detection where the species was observed at the from a site, the occupancy status would probabilities are imperfect and some site in 1996, and no further surveys not change unless the species is uncertainty remains between non- have been conducted. This site, detected at that location during future detection and true absence (Gross et al. however, still has suitable habitat for surveys. 2007, pp. 192, 197–198; Pellet 2008, pp. the species according to species experts When determining whether the 155–156). Three sequential years of in the State and at least one other species occupancy is unknown, possibly negative surveys is sufficient to capture species of prairie-fen-dependent extirpated, or extirpated at a particular variable detection probabilities, since butterfly is present (Hosler 2013, pers. site, we used the survey year 1993 as a each survey year typically encompasses comm.). Therefore, the Poweshiek cut-off date, because most known sites more than one visit (e.g., the average skipperling is most likely still present at (more than 81 percent of known number of visits per Dakota skipper site this site. We also consider the Dakota Poweshiek skipperling sites and more per year ranges from 1 to 11), and the skipper to be present at one site than 86 percent of known Dakota probability of false absence after 5–6 (Chanarambie Creek in Minnesota) skipper sites) have been surveyed at visits drops below 5 percent for studied where the most recent survey was from least once since 1993, and survey data butterfly species with varying average 1994. At this site, no evidence suggests more than 20 years old may not reflect detection probabilities (Pellet 2008, p. the species is not still present because, the current status of a species or its 159). Therefore, the site is considered based on a species-expert review of the habitat at a site (for example, due to ‘‘extirpated’’ if there are three sequential site, the habitat and management is still habitat loss from secondary succession years of negative surveys (preferably, conducive to the species (Dana 2013, of woody vegetation or a change in plant each year has more than one survey pers. comm.). Additional sites where we communities due to invasive species). date). consider Dakota skipper to be present Although it cannot be presumed that the It cannot be presumed that the species include two sites in Minnesota with species is absent at sites not surveyed is not persisting at a site only because 1996 records (Bluestem Prairie and since 1993, the likelihood of occupancy there have not been recent surveys. At Buffalo River State Park). Although no of these sites should be considered several sites, the species has persisted survey for the species has taken place at differently than sites with more recent for longer than 20 years; for example, Bluestem Prairie since 1996, a 2012 survey data (e.g., due to woody Dakota skipper was first recorded at vegetation succession over time). When assessment of the habitat at the site Scarlet Fawn Prairie in South Dakota in analyzing survey results, we disregarded indicates that this site is a high-quality 1985 and has had positive detections negative surveys conducted outside of prairie that contains the native prairie (the species was detected during a the species’ flight period (outside of flora conducive to the Dakota skipper survey) every survey since that date. June or July) or under unsuitable (Selby 2012, p. 9). The site at Buffalo The most recent detection was in 2013. conditions (e.g., high wind speeds over River State park, which adjoins The year 1993 was chosen based on approximately 16 miles-per-hour). We Bluestem Prairie, has not been surveyed habitat-related inferences, specifically, accepted survey data from those since 1996, but recent habitat the estimated time for prairie habitat to surveyors with whom we were assessments show that it still contains degrade to non-habitat due to woody confident in their ability to identify the prairie habitats with the native prairie species in the field. encroachment and invasive species. For flora conducive to the species (MN DNR After we applied these standards to example, native prairies with previous 2013, unpubl.). Furthermore, the species initially ascertain the status of the light-grazing management that were expert in Minnesota supports that the species, we asked species experts and subsequently left idle transitioned from species is most likely still present at Service personnel to help verify, mixed grass to a mix of woody these sites. modify, or correct species’ occupancy at vegetation and mixed grass in 13 years We assigned a status of ‘‘unknown’’ if each site (particularly for sites with and it was predicted that these idle the species was found in 1993 or more questionable habitat quality or those prairies would be completely lost due to recently, but not in the most recent one that have not been surveyed recently). woody succession in a 30-year to two sequential survey year(s) since In most cases, we used the status timeframe (Penfound 1964, pp. 260– 1993 and there is no evidence to suggest confirmed during expert review, unless 261). The time for succession of idle the species is now extirpated from the we received additional information (e.g., prairie depends on numerous factors, site (e.g., no destruction or obvious and additional survey or habitat data such as the size of the site, edge effects significant degradation of the species’ provided after the expert reviews) that (the changes that occur on the boundary habitat). We considered a species to be suggests a different status at a particular of two habitat types), and the plant ‘‘possibly extirpated’’ at sites where it site. composition of adjacent areas. was detected at least once prior to 1993, Timing of surveys is based on initial This approach is the most objective but not in the most recent one to two field checks of nectar plant blooms and way to evaluate the data range-wide. sequential survey years(s). A species is sightings of butterfly species with Most sites have been surveyed over also considered ‘‘possibly extirpated’’ at synchronous emergence (sightings of multiple years, although the frequency sites where it was found prior to 1993 butterfly species that emerge at the same and type of surveys varied among sites and no surveys have been conducted in time as Dakota skipper and Poweshiek and years. Surveys were conducted 1993 or more recently. At least three skipperling), and, more recently, using various protocols (e.g., Pollard sequential years of negative surveys, no emergence estimated by a degree-day walks (Pollard 1975), modified Pollard matter what years they were conducted, emergence model using high and low walks, wandering transects, timed were necessary for us to consider the daily temperature data from weather transects) depending on the objective of species ‘‘extirpated’’ from a site, because stations near the survey sites (Selby, the survey, funding or available of the difficulty of detecting these undated, unpublished dissertation). resources, and staff. In several cases, species, as explained further in this Surveys are conducted during flight species experts provided input on section. A species is also considered periods when the species’ abundance is occupancy based on their familiarity

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63677

with the habitat quality and stressors to Minnesota. Populations persist in a few that populations there were once populations at particular sites. locations in western Minnesota, connected. Dakota skipper dispersal is To summarize, there are few sites northeastern South Dakota, North very limited due in part to its short with relatively older data where we Dakota, southern Manitoba, and adult life span and single annual flight. consider the species to still be present. southeastern Saskatchewan. Royer and Therefore, the species’ extirpation from In general, most Poweshiek skipperling Marrone (1992a, p. 5) speculated that a site is likely permanent unless it is sites with a present status have had a Dakota skippers may also occur in far within about 1 km (0.62 mi) of a site positive detection in 2008, or more eastern Montana and southeastern that generates a sufficient number of recently with a few exceptions. At one Saskatchewan, in habitats similar to emigrants or is artificially reintroduced Poweshiek skipperling site, the species those occupied by the species in to a site. was observed at the site in 1996, and no northwestern North Dakota. The Dakota The Dakota skipper’s range once further surveys have been conducted. skipper was subsequently found in comprised native prairie in five States The remaining Poweshiek skipperling Saskatchewan in 2001 after 40 years of and Canada, extending from Illinois to sites where the species is considered searching (Hooper 2002, pers. comm.), Saskatchewan; it now occurs only in present have had detections in 2013, but no actual records have been found native prairie remnants in portions of except four sites where the species was in Montana and Royer (2002, pers. three States and two Canadian detected in 2008, 2010, 2011, or 2012, comm.) no longer thinks that the species provinces. Of the 264 historically and no further surveys have occurred. ever occured in Montana. documented sites, there are 83 sites Likewise, in general, most Dakota From its earliest identification, the where we consider the Dakota skipper skipper sites with a present status have Dakota skipper was considered rare to be present, 88 sites with unknown had a positive detection in 2002, or (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 1), status, 41 possibly extirpated sites, and more recently, with a few exceptions. At although considerable destruction of its 52 that are considered extirpated (Table four Dakota skipper sites we consider habitat likely occurred even before the 1). Approximately 47 percent (39 of 83) the species to be present with the most species was first described in 1911. of the sites where the species is recent record from 2001 or earlier Habitat destruction and degradation has considered to be present are located in including one site where the most greatly fragmented Dakota skipper’s Canada, mostly within three isolated recent survey was from 1994, and two range from its core through its northern complexes, and were observed in 2002, sites with 1996 records. No evidence and western fringes (McCabe 1981, p. or in 2007 with no subsequent surveys. suggests that the species is not still 179; Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 28; Four additional locations where we present at these sites because the best Schlicht and Saunders 1994, p. 1; Royer consider the species to be present in information indicates that the site’s 1997, p. 2; Schlicht 1997a, p. 2; Schlicht Manitoba had positive detections of the habitat is still conducive to the 1997b, p. 2; Skadsen 1997, pp. 25–26; species as recently as 2012 (Rigney butterfly, and, therefore, the species Skadsen 1999c, p. 15; Swengel and 2013a, p. 117). The remaining 42 sites may still be present there. We also Swengel 1999, p. 267). The historical where the species is considered to be consider Dakota skipper to be present at distribution of Dakota skippers may present are about equally distributed the following sites: 17 sites in Canada never be precisely known because among Minnesota (11 sites), North that were surveyed most recently in ‘‘much of tallgrass prairie was Dakota (16 sites), and South Dakota (14 2002; 1 additional site with a 2002 extirpated prior to extensive ecological sites). Researchers made positive detection of the species and a favorable study’’ (Steinauer and Collins 1994, p. detections of the species in 10 of these habitat assessment in 2012; 1 site with 42), such as butterfly surveys. sites in 2013. The species was observed a 2003 detection; 1 site with a 2005 Destruction of tallgrass and mixed-grass at 19 of these sites in 2012. Other U.S. detection; 1 site with a 2006 detection; prairie began in 1830 (Samson and sites with a present status with 19 sites in Canada that were surveyed Knopf 1994, p. 418), but significant relatively older positive detections and most recently in 2007; 2 additional sites documentation of the ecosystem’s no subsequent surveys for the species with a 2007 detection; 1 site with a butterfly fauna did not begin until about include one site with a positive positive detection in 2008; 3 sites with 1960. Therefore, most of the species’ detection in 1994, two sites with a positive detection in 2009; 23 sites decline probably went unrecorded. positive detections in 1996, one site with positive detections in 2012; and 10 Based on records of vouchered with a positive detection in 2002, one sites with positive detections in 2013. specimens, however, we know that site with a positive detection in 2005, Dakota skipper range has contracted one site with a positive detection in Population Distribution and Occupancy northward out of Illinois and Iowa. The 2006, two sites with a positive detection Status species was last recorded in Illinois in in 2007, one site with a positive Once found in native prairies in five 1888 (McCabe 1981, p. 191) and in Iowa detection in 2008, and three sites with States and two Canadian provinces, the in 1992 (Orwig and Schlicht 1999, p. 6). a positive detection in 2009. At several Dakota skipper and its habitat have Britten and Glasford’s (2002, pp. 363, of these sites, the habitat has been undergone dramatic declines; the 372) genetic analyses support the assessed more recently than they were species is now limited to native prairie presumption that this species formerly surveyed for the species. The remnants in three States and two had a relatively continuous distribution; distribution and status of Dakota Canadian provinces. The Dakota skipper the small genetic divergence (genetic skipper in each State of known is presumed extirpated from Illinois and distance) among seven sites in historical or extant occurrence are Iowa and no longer found in eastern Minnesota and South Dakota indicate described in detail below.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63678 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—NUMBER OF HISTORICALLY DOCUMENTED DAKOTA SKIPPER SITES WITHIN EACH STATE AND THE NUMBER OF SITES WHERE THE SPECIES IS THOUGHT TO BE PRESENT, UNKNOWN, POSSIBLY EXTIRPATED, OR EXTIRPATED

State’s percentage of the total Possibly State number of Present Unknown extirpated Extirpated Total historical sites

Illinois ...... 0.4 ...... 1 1 Iowa ...... 1.1 3 3 Minnesota ...... 26.1 11 28 18 12 69 North Dakota ...... 20.5 16 14 11 13 54 South Dakota ...... 32.6 14 45 10 17 86 Manitoba ...... 14.0 28 1 2 6 37 Saskatchewan ...... 5.3 14 0 0 0 14

Total Number of Historically Documented Sites ...... 83 88 41 52 264 Percent of the Total Number of Historical Sites by Occupancy ...... 32 33 15 20 ......

Illinois Minnesota; the species is extirpated or from 1985 to 2005, with an average Dakota skippers are considered to be possibly extirpated from 30 of those detection rate of 67 percent for all extirpated from Illinois. The species was sites, and the status is unknown at 28 survey years with more than one site last recorded near Chicago in 1888 others (Service 2014, unpubl. surveyed (excluding sites newly (McCabe 1981, p. 191). geodatabase). The Dakota skipper is discovered in the first year it was considered to be present at 11 sites in discovered), an average of 70 percent Iowa Minnesota in 3 counties: Clay, Lincoln, detection rate for survey years with 5 or There are three historical records of and Murray, although 2 of those sites more sites surveyed and an average of Dakota skippers in three counties in have not been surveyed since 1996, and 66 percent detection rate for survey Iowa (Dickinson, Poweshiek, and 1 site has not been surveyed since 1994. years with 10 or more sites surveyed. Woodbury), but the species is presumed McCabe (1981, p. 187) observed very One exception to the high detection extirpated from the State (Schlicht and stable population numbers in Minnesota rates was 1994; only 26 percent (5 of 19 Orwig 1998, pp. 84–85; Selby 2004a, pp. prairies that he visited repeatedly 1968– sites) of sites surveyed in 1994 resulted 1, 5; Selby 2012, pers. comm.; Nekola 1979. On dry-mesic prairie in Lincoln in positive detections. Recent surveys of and Schlicht 2007, p. 9). The species County, Minnesota, Dana (Dana 1997, the species resulted in significantly was last seen at Cayler Prairie pp. 3–5) also observed stable numbers lower than average positive detections. (Dickinson County) in 1992, but surveys into the thousands during his intensive The percent of sites surveyed each year of this site in 2000, 2004, 2005, and studies from 1978 to 1983. Schlicht with positive detections has recently 2007 were negative, so we presume it to (1997a, p. 13) and Reiser (1997, p. 16) decreased from 70 percent (7 of 10 sites) be extirpated from that site (Schlicht reported more variable numbers on the in 2005, to 47 percent (8 of 17 sites) in and Orwig 1998, p. 85; Selby 2004a, p. same sites in 1995–1996, and based on 2007, 56 percent (10 of 18 sites) in 2008, 5; Selby 2006a, p. 5; Selby 2008, p. 6). these more recent observations, Dana 6 percent (1 of 16 sites) in 2012, and to The species was not observed at eight (1997, pp. 3–5) suggested that 7 percent (1 of 15 sites) in 2013 (for sites surveyed in the period 1988–1997 populations could experience years with greater than 10 sites (Swengel and Swengel 1999, pp. 288– significant size fluctuations between surveyed, see Figure 1). Only one 289), at eight sites surveyed in 2004 years. At Hole-in-the-Mountain individual was detected in Minnesota (Selby 2004a, p. 5), nor during extensive preserve, Minnesota, Dana (1991, pp. during 2012 surveys, which included 18 surveys at 32 sites in 2007 (Selby 2008, 36–37) found peak abundance of sites with previous records and 23 p. 6). approximately 1,000 Dakota skippers prairie remnants without previous over about 40 ha (98 ac); he estimated records for the species (Dana 2012c, Minnesota that 2,000–3,000 individuals may have pers. comm.; Runquist 2012a, pers. Minnesota historically contained been alive at various times during the comm.; Olsen 2012, pers. comm.). about 26 percent of the sites where the flight period and that only one-third to Dakota skippers were detected at 1 site Dakota skipper has been recorded (Table one-half of adults were alive in Minnesota during 2013 surveys, 1) (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). simultaneously. Where they occur, these which included 15 sites with previous Since the earliest known record (1965) high adult densities persist for only records and 12 prairie remnants without of the species in Minnesota, 66 sites about a week to 10 days during the previous records for the species have been recorded in the State, but single annual flight period (Selby and (Runquist 2014, pp. 3–6; Selby 2014, pp. recent surveys indicate that the species Glenn-Lewin 1989, pp. 24–28). 2–5; Rigney 2013b, p. Appendix B; is declining in the State (Service 2014, The percentage of sites surveyed each Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase.). unpubl. geodatabase). Of the 69 known year in Minnesota with positive The cause for this sharp decline is locations of Dakota skipper in detections remained relatively stable unknown.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63679

The Dakota skipper is presumed where the species is possibly extirpated these species in west-central Minnesota extirpated at 12 sites in Minnesota; at 7 have not been observed since 1991 beginning in 2003 (Selby 2006b, p. 30). of these sites the species has not been (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Researchers surveyed 17 and 19 sites observed since 1984 or earlier. Four One site, with a positive detection in with previous Dakota skipper records in sites at which the species is now 1998, was ranked as ‘‘possibly 2007 and 2008, respectively; Dakota presumed to be extirpated have had extirpated’’ based on expert opinion. skipper was found at 8 sites each year fairly recent positive observations. The The remaining 11 sites had positive and at 1 site where it had not previously species was last observed at Prairie observations prior to 1993, were been recorded (Selby 2009a, p. 6). The Waterfowl Production Area (WPA) in surveyed once more recently, and had a surveys confirmed Dakota skipper’s Big Stone County in 2000 (Skadsen negative observation (Service 2014, extirpation from one site in Cottonwood 2000, p. 1), for example, but was not unpubl. geodatabase). County, where it was last recorded in found in 2008 (Selby 2009a, p. i), 2010, The status of the Dakota skipper is 1970. and 2012 (Service 2014, unpubl. unknown at 28 sites; Dakota skipper A parallel study in 2007 (Dana 2008) geodatabase). Dakota skippers were have not been observed at 14 of these consisted of more intensive work at a observed at the Glacial Lakes WPA in sites since the mid- to late 1990s, few sites thought to contain some of the 2001 (Schlicht 2001b, p. 18), but the despite one or two years of survey effort State’s most viable populations of species was not observed in 2003, 2004, at several sites. The remaining 14 sites Dakota skipper. Among these sites was and 2005 (Selby 2006b, p. Appendix A with unknown status have had positive The Nature Conservancy’s Hole-in-the- xii); the species is now considered to be observations in 2007 or more recently, Mountain preserve in Lincoln County, extirpated at that site (Service 2014, but are given this designation due to one which was the only Minnesota unpubl. geodatabase). The last or two subsequent negative surveys. For population rated as secure in 2002 observation of Dakota skipper at the Big example, Dakota skipper was (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, p. 16). Stone National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) documented at the Gens Prairie in The 2007 surveys indicated that the site in Lac Qui Parle County was in 2000, Murray County and Woodstock Prairie still supported a substantial population, and it was not observed during surveys in Pipestone County in 2007, but the but that it may have decreased in size in 2009, 2011, or 2012 (Skadsen 2012a, species was not observed during surveys since earlier studies were conducted p. 5). Dakota skippers were observed at in 2008 or 2013 (Selby 2009a, p. (Dana 1991, p. 36; Dana 2008, p. 18). Chippewa Prairie in 1995, but not in Appendix 5 li, xxxiii and Appendix 4 Dakota skippers were not detected 1996, 2005, and 2012 (Service 2014, xlix; Selby 2014, p. 5). during the 2012 or 2013 flight periods unpubl. geodatabase). Of the 18 sites In 2007 and 2008, the Minnesota DNR (Runquist 2012, pp. 13–14, 18–20; where the species is possibly extirpated, carried out a broad survey effort to Runquist 2012a, pers. comm., Selby 4 have not been surveyed since the assess the status of Dakota skipper and 2014, p. 5); therefore, we consider the species was last seen in 1989 or earlier. other prairie butterflies in the State after status of the species at the Hole-in-the- Dakota skippers at two of the sites experts noted significant declines in Mountain preserve to be unknown.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES ER24OC14.009 63680 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Relatively important populations of which included 15 sites with previous = 9.4 encounters per hour) than during Dakota skipper in Minnesota may still records; 2013 surveys for undiscovered the 1996–1997 statewide surveys (State occur at the Prairie Coteau, Felton populations were also carried out on 12 average = 17.4 encounters per hour) Prairie, and Glacial Lakes complexes, prairie remnants without previous (Royer and Royer 2012b, p. 5; Royer and but the 2012 and 2013 survey results records for the species (Service 2014, Royer 2012a. pp. 7–8). Three sites with raised concern for the species’ status at unpubl. geodatabase). Similar surveys of previous Dakota skipper records in Prairie Coteau. The number of Dakota prairie remnants with no previous North Dakota were surveyed during the skippers encountered per 100 m (328 ft) documentation of Dakota skipper were 2013 flight period; the species was not of transect at Prairie Coteau State completed in Minnesota in 2007 and detected in any of those surveys (Fauske Natural Area (SNA) were 1.7 in 1990 2008. Based on these surveys, the 2013 data (in ND National Guard 2013, and 1.1 in 2007 (Dana 2008, p. 19). No likelihood that significant undiscovered in litt.; HDR Engineering 2013, pp. 10– Dakota skippers were observed at Prairie Dakota skipper populations occur in 11). Coteau SNA during the 2012 or 2013 Minnesota is low. Of the Dakota skipper populations in North Dakota, none may be secure, flight periods (Runquist 2012, pp. 9–10); North Dakota therefore, we consider the status of the although the Towner-Karlsruhe complex species to be unknown at that site. Selby North Dakota historically contained was considered to be the stronghold for (2009b, Appendix 4, p. iv) recorded 14 approximately 21 percent of all known the species in the State in 2002 Dakota skippers during a 5-hour survey historical locations of Dakota skippers (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, p. 17), in 2007 at the Felton Prairie SNA. rangewide (Table 1); the State contained and most of the sites where the species During a 1-hour survey in 2008, nine 54 historical sites distributed among 18 is currently present are still occupied by Dakota skippers were recorded and with counties (Service 2014, unpubl. ‘‘viable populations’’ (Royer 2012a, little indication of any substantial geodatabase). The Dakota skipper is pers. comm.). All of the habitat where change since the previous year (Selby currently present at 16 sites in 5 North the species is present in the Towner- 2009b, Appendix 5, p. iv); Felton Prairie Dakota counties, of these, 11 occur Karlsruhe complex is Type A (wet- was resurveyed in 2013, and no Dakota within the Towner-Karlsruhe complex mesic) habitat (Royer and Marrone skippers were observed (Service 2014, in McHenry County, 1 is within the 1992a, pp. 21–22; Royer et al. 2008, pp. unpubl. geodatabase). The number of Sheyenne National Grasslands complex 14–16). Three sites within the Towner- Dakota skippers recorded during recent in Ransom County, 2 are in northern Karlsruhe complex are owned by the McKenzie County, and 1 site is in Wells surveys at Glacial Lakes State Park has North Dakota State Land Department, County. Of the 16 sites where we been low despite good habitat and the remaining nine sites with extant consider the Dakota skipper to be conditions. An apparently widespread populations are privately owned. Some present, 15 sites had positive population was present as recently as Towner-Karlsruhe sites are linked by observations of the species in 2012. The 2001 when Skadsen (2001, p. 24) found highway rights-of-way that contain remaining site had positive observations Dakota skippers along almost all of 40 native prairie vegetation and by other in 2002. The status of the species is km (25 mi) of transect in and around the prairie remnants (Royer and Royer unknown at 14 sites; 10 of these sites park—he recorded as many as 31 Dakota 2012a, p. 18). In 2002, none of these have not had positive records since the skippers along one transect (Skadsen sites were described as secure (Cochrane mid- to late 1990s, and the other 4 sites 2001, p. 24). Selby (2009a, p. 1 and 1iv) and Delphey 2002, pp. 66–67) since had positive records between 2001 and each is subject to private or State surveyed the same areas in 2007 and 2003. The Dakota skipper is presumed management options that could 2008, describing habitat at survey sites extirpated from 13 sites and 4 counties, extirpate Dakota skipper from the site. as good to excellent, but recorded only primarily due to heavy grazing, weed In 1999, it was estimated that about 30 eight Dakota skippers during about 7 control, and other disturbances (e.g., percent of the Towner-Karlsruhe area hours of surveys in and around the park bulldozing at Killdeer Mountain to still contained native prairie (Lenz 1999, (Selby 2009a, p. 1 and 1iv). Glacial reduce aspen growth, Royer 1997). The p. 2); more recent observations indicate Lakes State Park surveys conducted in species is possibly extirpated from 11 that several native prairie sites have 2012 were outside of the Dakota skipper additional sites and 3 additional been invaded to varying extents by flight period (Runquist 2012a, pers. counties. nonnative species, such as leafy spurge, comm.), and the species was not Researchers surveyed 25 sites, Kentucky bluegrass, and alfalfa detected in 2013 (Selby 2014, p. 5). believed to possibly have Dakota (Medicago sativa), and several are In summary, the Dakota skipper is skipper populations, in 2012; of these subject to intense grazing or early now considered to be extirpated or sites, 23 had previous records of the haying (Royer and Royer 2012b, pp. 5– possibly extirpated from at least 30 of species (Royer and Royer 2012a, entire). 6, 7–10, 13–16, 18–19, 22–23; Royer the 69 sites in Minnesota, which Thirteen of the 25 surveyed sites had 2012, in litt.). historically contained approximately 26 Dakota skipper present (Royer and Dakota skipper populations in the percent of all known historical Dakota Royer 2012a, pp. 3–4; Royer and Royer Sheyenne National Grasslands complex skipper locations rangewide (Table 1). 2012b, pp. 2–3). One new site was have experienced intensive grazing, The species is considered to be present found in 2012 (Royer and Royer 2012a, leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) invasion, and unknown at 12 and 27 sites, p. 33), adjacent to a site with previous and the effects of herbicides used to respectively. However, only one records but with different land- control leafy spurge and grasshoppers individual male was detected in the ownership, so the researcher considered (Royer 1997, pp. 15 and 27). For State during 2012 surveys, which it a new site. Another new site was example, McCabe (1979, p. 36) cited the included 18 sites with previous records; found in North Dakota in 2012, in Wells McLeod Prairie in the Sheyenne 2012 surveys for undiscovered County, where two observations were Grasslands in southeastern North populations were also carried out on 23 made—possibly the same individual Dakota as the best site for Dakota prairie remnants without previous (HDR, Inc. 2012, pp. 21–23). At sites skippers in North Dakota. Since then, records for the species. Only 6 with Dakota skipper, lower average however, leafy spurge invasion has individual Dakota skipper were encounter frequencies were observed significantly modified the habitat, and observed in 2013 surveys in Minnesota, across the State in 2012 (State average the Dakota skipper is now extirpated

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63681

from the site (Royer 1997, p. 14). and Royer 2012b, pp. 16–17). Only three populations in un-surveyed areas can Swengel and Swengel (1999, p. 286) did sites with previous records were reasonably be inferred by analyzing data not find Dakota skippers at eight survey surveyed in North Dakota during the collected from the sites that have been sites in the Sheyenne grasslands during 2013 flight period, and the Dakota surveyed. 1988–1997, although Royer did observe skipper was not observed (Fauske 2013 South Dakota a few isolated Dakota skippers in the in ND National Guard 2013, in litt.; HDR Sheyenne National Grasslands during Engineering 2013, pp. 10–11). South Dakota historically contained this period (e.g., Royer 1997, pp. 14–15). In summary, North Dakota contains approximately 33 percent of all known Dakota skippers were recorded at one approximately 21 percent (N = 54) of all locations of Dakota skippers rangewide new site (Gregor) in the Sheyenne known historical locations of the (Table 1). Since the earliest known National Grasslands in 2001 (Spomer species rangewide; however, the current record of Dakota skipper (1905) in South 2004, pp. 14–15). The status of Dakota occupancy status of the Dakota skipper Dakota, 86 sites have been documented skipper at the Gregor site is currently is unknown at 14 sites, and it is across 11 counties in the State, but unknown, since the species was not considered to be extirpated or possibly recent surveys indicate that the species observed during the 2002 survey (Royer extirpated from at least 24 of the 54 is declining in the State (Service 2014, and Royer 2012a, pp. 3–4). known sites in the State (Table 1). The unpubl. geodatabase). Of the 86 Orwig (1996, p. 3) suggested that species is considered to be present at 16 historical sites, Dakota skipper is Brown’s Ranch in Ransom County, sites in the State. North-central North presumed extirpated from 17 sites and owned by The Nature Conservancy, had Dakota may hold hope for the species’ 2 counties (Brown and Moody), and is potential to support a metapopulation long-term conservation. Dakota skipper possibly extirpated from 10 additional (groups of local populations was detected at 13 of the 25 sites sites. Dakota skipper is considered interconnected by dispersal habitat) in surveyed during 2012 (23 of the sites present at 14 sites, and the status of the the Sheyenne River watershed. More had previous Dakota skipper records); species is unknown at 45 sites. Twenty- recently, however, Spomer (2004, p. 36) average encounter frequencies observed seven sites in South Dakota with found that the population there was not across the State in 2012 (9.4 encounters previous Dakota skipper records were doing well, and Royer failed to find the per hour), however, were lower than surveyed in 2012; the species was species in 2012 (Royer and Royer 2012a, during the 1996–1997 State-wide detected at 9 of those sites (Service p. 3). Therefore, the status of the species surveys (ND State average = 17.4 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Eight at the Brown Ranch site is unknown. encounters per hour) using the same additional sites within the species’ Royer (1997, pp. 15 and 27) claimed methodology. The species was not historical range were surveyed during that, throughout the Sheyenne detected at the three sites surveyed in the 2012 flight period, which resulted in Grasslands, both public and private 2013. the discovery of two new nearby Dakota lands have been so heavily grazed and Although only a small fraction of all skipper sites (Service 2014, unpubl. altered by grasshopper and leafy spurge grassland in North Dakota has been geodatabase; Skadsen 2012a, pers. control that extirpation of Dakota surveyed for Dakota skippers, a comm.). Twenty-eight sites in South skippers from the area is almost certain significant proportion of the un- Dakota with previous Dakota skipper to occur. The population at Venlo surveyed area is likely not suitable for records were surveyed in 2013; the Prairie, for example, deteriorated from Dakota skipper. The species was never species was detected at 9 of those sites good/fair in 2001 to poor in 2003 due detected at approximately 108 (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). to intense grazing and disappearance of additional locations in North Dakota Ten additional sites within the species’ flowers (Spomer 2004, pp. 9, 12); the that were surveyed for the species in the historical range were surveyed during species is now considered to be period 1991–2013 (USFWS 2014, the 2013 flight period, which resulted in extirpated at that site. The population at unpubl. geodatabase). Many of these no new Dakota skipper sites discovered Garrison Training Area in McLean sites have been surveyed multiple times (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). County is now considered unknown due over multiple years (USFWS 2014, The proportion of positive surveys at to negative surveys in 2004 and 2013 unpubl. geodatabase). Surveys for the known sites has fluctuated over time; (Fauske 2004, p. 1; Fauske 2013 in ND Dakota skipper are typically conducted however, the 2012 and 2013 surveys National Guard 2013, in litt.). only in areas where floristic had the lowest positive detection rate In 2002, experts ranked all sites characteristics are indicative of their (35 percent and 32 percent, outside of the two complexes discussed presence. New potential sites surveyed respectively) for the last 16 years (since above as threatened or vulnerable; most are generally focused on prairie habitat 1996), much less than comparable were small and isolated populations that appears suitable for the species and survey years (years with 10 or more sites threatened by conversion and invasive has a good potential of hosting the surveyed) in South Dakota. species (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, species, in other words, sites are not While there are some sites with earlier pp. 66–67). Most of these sites are now randomly selected across the landscape. records, most South Dakota sites were considered extirpated or possibly Therefore, researchers have a higher initially documented during extensive extirpated. Today, only 3 sites outside likelihood of detecting the species at surveys conducted during 1996 to 1998. of the Towner-Karsruhe Complex and these sites than at sites randomly Forty-eight locations without previous Sheyenne National Grasslands selected across the landscape. Based on records were surveyed during 2002– complexes are thought to have extant these surveys, the likelihood that 2004, which resulted in the discovery of (present) Dakota skipper populations. In significant numbers of undiscovered 20 new Dakota skipper sites in addition to the Towner-Karsruhe Dakota skipper populations occur in northeastern South Dakota (Skadsen Habitat Complex sites in McHenry North Dakota is low. Moreover, data 2003, p. 8; Skadsen 2004, pp. 3–6), but County, only 2 of the 25 sites surveyed available from the numerous sites that due to more recent negative surveys, the by Royer in 2012, both in northern have been surveyed are likely to be occupancy of the species is currently McKenzie County, may have ‘‘viable representative of areas that have not unknown or extirpated at many of these populations’’ (Royer 2012b, pers. been surveyed—that is, population sites (Skadsen 2011, p. 5; Skadsen comm.), although only one individual trends and the nature and extent of 2012b, pp. 4–5; Skadsen, 2012, pers. was observed at each site in 2012 (Royer stressors that may impact the comm.; Skadsen 2003, p. 10; Skadsen

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63682 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

2004, p. 2; Skadsen 2006a, p. 2, 10; additional areas of possible habitat these sites than at sites randomly Skadsen 2006b, p. 5; Skadsen 2007, p. where the species was not detected . For selected across the landscape. Based on 3; Skadsen 2008, p. 3, 12; Skadsen 2009, example, there is an estimated 1,620,549 these surveys, the likelihood that p. 3). Additional survey effort resulted acres (ac) (655,813 hectares (ha)) of significant undiscovered Dakota skipper in the discovery of nine new sites unbroken (untilled) grasslands that may populations occur in South Dakota is between 2005 and 2012, with a provide habitat for the Dakota skipper in low. Moreover, data available from the maximum of three new sites discovered the nine counties where the Dakota numerous sites that have been surveyed in 2006 (Skadsen 2010a, p. 6; Skadsen skipper is considered be present or to are likely to be representative of areas 2012b, pp. 4–5; Skadsen 2012, pers. have unknown occupancy in South that have not been surveyed—that is, comm.; Skadsen 2005, pp. 5–6, Skadsen Dakota (HAPET 2012, unpubl. data). population trends and the nature and 2006a, p. 12; Skadsen 2006b, p. 5; Additional areas of unbroken prairie extent of stressors that may impact the Skadsen 2007, p. 3; Skadsen 2008, p. 9; were estimated in three other counties populations in un-surveyed areas can Skadsen 2009, p. 2). Eight additional where the species may have occurred reasonably be inferred by analyzing data sites without previous documentation of historically (HAPET 2012, unpubl. collected from the sites that have been the species were surveyed in 2012, data). While these lands represent surveyed. which resulted in the discovery of two unbroken grassland in South Dakota, the nearby sites (Service 2014, unpubl. models used to identify unbroken Since there is little long-term geodatabase). To summarize, new sites grassland are not able to identify plant quantitative data for sites in South have been discovered in South Dakota species, plant species composition, Dakota, we examined presence–absence during most survey years since 2002, floristic quality, or presence of invasive (non-detection) data over time. The however, the number of new sites species (Loesch 2013, pers. comm.). percent of sites surveyed each year with discovered each year has been low Therefore, it is not known if these positive detections of the species recently; two or three new sites have unbroken grasslands contain the remained relatively stable from 1985 to been discovered each survey year since specific native prairie plants that the 2010, with an average positive detection 2005 (three sites in 2005, two sites in Dakota skipper requires (as discussed in rate of 63 percent for all survey years 2006, two sites in 2007, zero sites in detail in the Background section of this with more than one site surveyed 2010, two sites in 2012, and zero sites proposed rule) and, therefore, may not (excluding new sites for the first year of in 2013). The rate that known sites are equate to suitable habitat for the species. discovery), an average positive detection becoming extirpated is higher than the The species was never detected at rate of 60 percent for survey years with rate of new discovery—the occupancy of approximately 79 additional locations at least 5 sites surveyed, and an average the species at many sites is now in South Dakota that were surveyed positive detection rate of 71 percent for unknown or extirpated due to more from 1991 through 2013 (USFWS 2014, survey years with at least 10 sites recent negative surveys. unpubl. geodatabase). Several of these surveyed. One exception to the high The species has never been sites have been surveyed multiple times detection rates was during the 1991 documented in Clark County, but in one year or during multiple years survey year when none (0 of 7 sites) of because few surveys have been (USFWS 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). the sites surveyed in 1991 resulted in conducted there, the county may Surveys for Dakota skipper are typically positive detections of the species, contain undiscovered populations conducted only in areas where floristic excluding 3 new sites that were (Skadsen 2006b, p. 1). Skadsen (2012b, characteristics are indicative of their discovered that year. Another exception pers. comm.) doubts the existence of presence. For example, in South Dakota, was in 1996, when 2 of the 8 sites with public lands with suitable Dakota Skadsen (1997, p. 2) selected for surveys previous records surveyed had a skipper habitat in Clark County and has dry-mesic prairie that supported purple positive detection; however, 6 new sites not received permission to survey a few coneflower and wet-mesic prairie that were discovered that year. The detection possible suitable locations that are supported wood lily and mountain rate remained relatively stable until privately owned. deathcamas based on searches for these 2010, when the percent of sites with Although only a small fraction of all sites by car and reports from resource positive detections fell from 89 percent grassland in eastern South Dakota has managers. Only sites with landowner (8 of 9 sites) in 2010, to 46 percent (5 been surveyed for Dakota skippers (e.g., permission are accessed for surveys, of 11 sites) in 2011, 35 percent (9 of 26 Dakota skipper surveys have been however, new potential sites surveyed sites) in 2012, and 32 percent (9 of 28 conducted on less than approximately are generally focused on prairie habitat sites) in 2013 (Figure 2). These types of 30,000 acres (12,140 ha) in South that appears suitable for the species and fluctuations had been observed in prior Dakota within the species range (Service has a good potential of hosting the years; therefore, it is difficult to 2014, unpubl. geodatabase)), a species, in other words, sites are not determine a clear trend in the data using significant proportion of the un- randomly selected across the landscape. positive detections—the last two survey surveyed area may not be suitable for Therefore, researchers have a higher years may fall within the normal range the Dakota skipper, based on surveys in likelihood of detecting the species at of variation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63683

The Outer Coteau des Prairies areas of grasslands remain in South had the lowest positive detection rate subsection of the North Central Dakota we don’t expect significant (35 percent and 32 percent, Glaciated Plains section of Bailey’s Eco- additional populations to be found if respectively) for the last 16 years (since regions is thought to be a stronghold for more surveys were conducted. 1996)—much less than comparable Dakota skipper, since nearly 34 percent Furthermore, downward trends and survey years in South Dakota. of the total documented Dakota skipper threats impacting populations at known Manitoba sites are within that subsection (89 of sites are also likely occurring at the 264 documented sites—Service potentially undiscovered sites. The Manitoba historically contained 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Most of species is considered to be present at 14 approximately 14 percent (N = 37) of the these Outer Coteau des Prairie sites are of the 86 documented sites in the State. known locations of the Dakota skipper in South Dakota; 73 of the 86 Dakota Twenty-six sites in South Dakota with rangewide. The Dakota skipper is skipper sites in South Dakota are within previous Dakota skipper records were considered present at 1 isolated site and the Outer Coteau des Prairies subsection surveyed in 2012; the species was 28 sites split between 2 distinct (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). detected at nine of those sites; eight complexes, 12 sites near Griswold and Dakota skipper is considered to be sites with no previous records for the 16 sites along Lake Manitoba. The 12 present at only 9 of those 73 sites—the species were surveyed during the 2012 sites near Griswold are located species status is unknown at 40 of those flight period, which resulted in the approximately 200 km (124 mi) sites, possibly extirpated at 8 sites, and discovery of two nearby sites. Twenty- southwest of the populations along Lake extirpated at the remaining 16 sites eight sites in South Dakota with Manitoba (at 16 sites) and about 125 km within that ecoregion subsection in previous Dakota skipper records were (78 mi) northeast of the nearest South Dakota (Service 2014, unpubl. surveyed in 2013; the species was population in Saskatchewan (Webster geodatabase). detected at 9 of those sites (Service 2003, pp. 5–6; Webster 2007, p. 4). The In summary, South Dakota 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Ten species is considered to be unknown at historically contained approximately 33 additional sites within the species’ one site near Griswold where the percent of all known locations of the historical range were surveyed during species was detected in 2007 and 2011, species rangewide. The current the 2013 flight period, which resulted in but not during the most recent survey occupancy status of the Dakota skipper no new Dakota skipper sites discovered year (2012) (Rigney 2013a, p.117). The is unknown at 45 sites, and it is (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). species is presumed extirpated or considered to be extirpated or possibly The proportion of positive surveys at possibly extirpated from eight sites in extirpated from at least 27 of the 86 known sites has fluctuated over time; Manitoba, including from the Tallgrass known sites in the State, although large however, the 2012 and 2013 surveys Prairie Preserve, where it has not been

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES ER24OC14.010 63684 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

found in the seven most recent survey unknown at another site where the Glasford (2002, pp. 367, 372) suggested years (Webster 2003, p. 5; Westwood et estimated numbers fell from 2/hour to that Manitoba populations are al. 2012, p. 1; Westwood 2007, pers. zero detected in 2012 (Rigney 2013a, p. genetically distinct from a group of comm.; Hamel et al. 2013, pp. 8–16)— 117). populations in Minnesota and South (the later surveys were focused on The Dakota skipper was first recorded Dakota, although populations in Poweshiek skipperlings, but other near Winnipeg in 1933 and near Miniota additional intervening locations should species were recorded), and one site that in 1944 and then at two additional sites be sampled to confirm this hypothesis was converted to a flaxseed field in the early 1990s. The species is (Runquist 2012b, pers. comm.). (Webster 2003, p. 7). considered to be extirpated or possibly In 2007, researchers surveyed 16 sites extirpated at all of these sites (Service Saskatchewan for the Dakota skipper near Griswold, 2014 unpubl. geodatabase). Saskatchewan historically contained Manitoba (Webster 2007, p. 4), and In 2002, the species was observed at approximately 5 percent (N=14) of all found Dakota skippers at 14 of the 16 19 sites near Lundar, within about 25 known records of Dakota skippers sites; 12 of these represent new sites for km (16 mi) east of Lake Manitoba rangewide. In Saskatchewan, the Dakota the species in Manitoba (Webster 2007, (Interlake region) (Webster 2003, p. 4); skipper is restricted to undisturbed or p. 4). Four of these sites were however, most of these sites have not lightly grazed, steep, south-facing hills resurveyed in subsequent years (2010, been surveyed since. Similar to the near the Souris River (Webster 2007, p. 2011, and 2012)—the species is Griswold sites, the survey methodology ii). The Dakota skipper was first considered to be present at two sites, is changes in years since 2007 (two to five recorded south of Oxbow, unknown at one site due to a recent surveys per site per flight period during Saskatchewan, in 2001 where three negative survey, and extirpated at the 2009–2013 compared to single site visits males were collected (Hooper 2003, p. fourth site due to 3 consecutive negative per year prior to 2008) have provided 124) on an ungrazed knoll within a survey years (Rigney 2013a, p. 117; more rigorous population estimates at patch of mixed-grass prairie that was Service 2014 unpublished database). four Manitoba sites near Lake Manitoba approximately 1 ha (2 ac) in extent. The species is considered to be present (Interlake region) and have shown a Dakota skippers were found at three at the remaining 10 sites that have not marked reduction in densities since additional sites during 2002 surveys been surveyed since 2007. 2002 or 2007 at two of the four sites (Webster 2003, pp. 6–7). In 2007, Until recently, population estimates (Rigney 2013a, p. 117). The species is researchers surveyed 16 sites in and trends at the sites near Griswold in considered present at two of four sites southeastern Saskatchewan and found south west Manitoba have not been that have been surveyed since 2002 in Dakota skippers at 10 of these sites examined quantitatively; however, the this area; the species is considered (including Oxbow); 8 of these represent population appears to be relatively extirpated from the other two sites due new sites for the species in stable at one site, may be declining at a to three consecutive negative survey Saskatchewan (Webster 2007, p. i). second site, and is considered years (2010, 2011, and 2012) (Rigney During 2007 surveys, which were extirpated from two sites with repeated 2013a, p. 117). The mean number of conducted late in the flight period, only survey years. Numbers observed during individuals observed per hour at one a few individuals were observed at each searches at a site near Griswold in 2007 site has declined from 2/hour in 2011 to site where the species was present did not appear to change appreciably 1/hour in 2012 (Rigney 2013a, p. 117). (Webster 2007, p. ii). Nine of these sites since 2002 surveys, when the The mean number per hour increased where the species was found in 2007 population was estimated (non- from approximately 1/hour to 6/hour at were surveyed along an approximate 50- quantitatively) to be approximately 750 another site (Rigney 2013a, p. 117). The km (31-mi) stretch of steep hillsides individuals (Webster 2003, p. 5; Webster species is considered to be present at along the ridgeline north of Souris 2007, p. 4). A total of 273 adults were the remaining 14 Interlake sites that River; distances between sites range observed during a 3.3-hour survey at the have not been resurveyed since 2002 from 1 to 28 km (0.8 mi to 17 mi). We second site, where the population was (Service 2014, unpublished database). consider Dakota skipper to be present at Several additional areas were estimated non-quantitatively to be about all 14 sites in Saskatchewan, although 3 examined for potential Dakota skipper 2,000 individuals (Webster 2007, p. 4). of those sites have not been surveyed Survey methodology changes in the habitat in 2007, including areas east of since 2002. The nearest known extant years since 2007 (two to five surveys per Hwy 21, within the Lauder Sandhills population of Dakota skippers in site per flight period in the timeframe Wildlife Management Area, north of Saskatchewan is approximately 111 km 2009–2013 compared to single site visits Oak Lake and near Tilston, Sinclair, (69 mi) from the closest extant (present) per year prior to 2008) have provided Cromer, and Brandon, as well as other population in North Dakota and 200 km more rigorous population estimates at locations. Most of the areas examined (125 mi) from the closest Manitoba four Manitoba sites near Griswold and were under row crop agriculture, were population. have shown a marked reduction in heavily grazed, were dry scrub prairies, densities since 2002 or 2007 at three of or were otherwise habitats unsuitable Poweshiek Skipperling the four sites (Rigney 2013a, p. 117). for Dakota skipper (Webster 2007, p. 6). The Dakota skipper is present at two of In 2007, the areas near Brandon and the Species Description the four sites near Griswold with high ground within the wetland The Poweshiek skipperling (Oarisma repeated survey years. The estimated complexes near Oak Lake still contained poweshiek) is a member of the skipper densities (mean number of individuals potentially suitable habitat (Webster family, Hesperiidae, and was first observed per hour) at one site remained 2007, p. 6). described by Parker (1870, pp. 271– at 1/hour in 2011 and 2012 and was The nearest known extant (present) 272). Parker (1870, pp. 271–272) approximately 30/hour in 2011 and 33/ population of Dakota skippers in provided the original description of this hour in 2012 at a second site. The Manitoba is approximately 120 km (75 species from his type series collected species is considered extirpated at one mi) from the closest extant (present) near Grinnell, Iowa. It was named for of these sites, because it was not population in North Dakota and about the county in which it was found detected during 2010, 2011, and 2012 111 km (69 mi) from the closest (Poweshiek County), but it was surveys. The status of the species is Saskatchewan population. Britten and misspelled, Powesheik, in the original

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63685

description. This spelling was retained Natural Resources (DNR) 2012, Rare observed larvae moving to the tips of by most early authorities (Lindsey 1922, features database. Accessed 5/14/12). grass blades to feed on the outer and p. 61; Holland 1931, p. 360). Miller and McAlpine (1972, pp. 85–92) described thinner edges of the blades, with later Brown (1981, p. 31) used the corrected Poweshiek skipperling eggs as pale movement down and among blades. spelling, Poweshiek, but then Miller and yellowish green, mushroom shaped Mature Poweshiek skipperling Ferris (1989, p. 31) changed it back in with a flattened bottom, a slightly caterpillars reared in captivity ranged in their supplement. Current usage is depressed micropyle (pore in the egg’s size from approximately 22 to 25 mm mixed, with many authorities retaining membrane through which the sperm (0.9 to 1 inch) in length just prior to the original spelling (e.g., Miller 1992, enter) and smooth surfaced. They were pupation (Runquist 2013, pers. comm.). 0.8 millimeters (mm) (0.01 in) long, 0.7 p. 20), while others have opted for the Food and Water corrected spelling (Layberry et al. 1998, mm (0.03 in) wide and 0.5 mm (0.02 in) p. 48; Opler et al. 1998, p. 363; high. The overall color of the head and For the Poweshiek skipperling, nectar Glassberg 1999, p. 167; Brock and body of the larvae is pale grass-green, plants vary across its geographic range. Kaufman 2003, p. 306). Layberry et al. with a distinctive darker green mid- Smooth ox-eye (Heliopsis helianthoides) (1998, p. 48) state ‘‘. . . since it is a dorsal stripe and seven cream-colored and purple coneflower were noted as clear case of an original incorrect stripes on each side. First instars were the frequently visited nectar plants in spelling it can be corrected [rule 32(c)ii 1.8 mm (0.07 in) at hatching, and the Iowa, Minnesota, and North Dakota of the International Code of Zoological lone 7th instar survivor was 23.6 mm (Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 280). Nomenclature].’’ (1.0 in) near the end of that stage. Other nectar species used were stiff tickseed (Coreopsis palmata), black- Poweshiek skipperlings are small and McAlpine did not have any observations eyed Susan, and palespike lobelia slender-bodied, with a wingspan past the 7th instar (the stage between (Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 280). On generally ranging from 2.3 to 3.0 cm (0.9 successive molts, the first instar being drier prairie habitats in Iowa and to 1.2 in). The size of Poweshiek between hatching and the first molt) Minnesota, purple coneflower is used skipperlings appears to vary somewhat (McAlpine 1972, pp. 85–93). almost exclusively, and the emergence across their range (Royer and Marrone General Life History of the adults corresponds closely to the 1992b, p. 3). North Dakota and South Poweshiek skipperlings lay their eggs early maturity of this species’ disk Dakota specimens tend to be slightly near the tips of leaf blades and florets (Selby 2005, p. 5). On the wetter smaller than the 2.9 to 3.2 cm (1.1 to 1.3 overwinter as larvae on the host plants prairie habitats of Canada and the fen in) range given by Parker (1870) for the (Bureau of Endangered Resources in habitats of Michigan, favored nectar type specimens from Grinnell, Iowa Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 285, plants are black-eyed Susan, palespike (Royer and Marrone 1992b, p. 3). A Borkin 2000, p. 7). Poweshiek lobelia, sticky tofieldia (Triantha sample of Richland County, North skipperlings have also been documented glutinosa), and shrubby cinquefoil Dakota, specimens from Royer’s laying eggs on the entire length of grass (Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda) collection had an average wingspan of leaf blades and on low-growing (Nielsen 1970, p. 46; Holzman 1972, p. 2.8 cm (1.1 in) for males and 3.0 cm (1.2 deciduous foliage (Dupont 2013, p. 133). 111; Catling and Lafontaine 1986, p. 65; in) for females. South Dakota specimens McAlpine (1972, pp. 85–92) described Bess 1988, p. 13; Summerville and in Marrone’s collection had an average the various life-history stages of Clampitt 1999, p. 231). Recent studies in wingspan of 2.6 cm (1.0 in) for males Poweshiek skipperling, and recent Manitoba indicate that the most and 2.7 cm (1.1 in) for females. The studies of captive Poweshiek frequently used nectar plants are black- upper wing surface is dark brown with skipperlings at the Minnesota Zoo eyed Susan, upland white aster, and a band of orange along the leading edge provide additional information self-heal (Prunella vulgaris) (Dupont of the forewing. Ground color of the (Runquist 2013, pers. comm.). McAlpine 2013, pp. 70–71). In addition to lower surface is also dark brown, but the (1972, pp. 85–93) observed hatching of nutrition, the nectar of flowering forbs veins of all but the anal third of the larval Poweshiek skipperling after about provides water for Poweshiek hindwing are outlined in hoary white, 9 days. McAlpine’s records were skipperling, which is necessary to avoid giving an overall white appearance to incomplete, and he did not have any desiccation during flight activity (Dana the undersurface. observations past the 7th instar, but he 2013, pers. comm.). The Poweshiek skipperling is most believed that there should have been Until recently, the larval food plant easily confused with the Garita one or two additional instars, followed was presumed to be elliptic spikerush skipperling (), which can by the chrysalis (pupa) and then the (Eleocharis elliptica) or sedges, but this be distinguished from Poweshiek imago (adult) stages (McAlpine 1972, was based on limited observations, skipperling by their smaller size, pp. 85–93). Captive Poweshiek primarily from the Michigan quicker flight, and overall golden- skipperling eggs hatched 8 to 9 days populations (e.g., Holzman 1972, p. bronze color (Royer and Marrone 1992b, after oviposition (Runquist 2013, pers. 113). More recent observations show p. 3). Another distinguishing feature is comm.). After hatching, Poweshiek that the preferred larval food plant for the color of the anal area of the ventral skipperling larvae crawl out near the tip some populations of Poweshiek hindwing (orange in Garita; dark brown of grasses and may remain stationary, skipperling is prairie dropseed (Borkin in Poweshiek). The Garita skipperling with their head usually pointing 1995, p. 6); larvae have also been generally occurs west of Poweshiek downward (McAlpine 1972, pp. 88–92). observed feeding on little bluestem skipperling range, although there are Unlike Dakota skippers, Poweshiek (Schizachyrium scoparium) (Borkin records of both species from two skipperling do not form shelters 1995, pp. 5–6) and sideoats grama counties in southeastern North Dakota underground (McAlpine 1972, pp. 88– ( curtipendula) (Dana 2005a, and two counties in northwestern 92; Borkin 1995, p. 9; Borkin 2008, pers. pers. comm.). Poweshiek skipperling Minnesota (Montana State University— comm.), instead the larvae overwinter larvae have been observed feeding on Big Sky Institute 2012, Butterflies of up on the blades of grasses and on the Carex sp. (Borkin 1994, p. 6; Borkin North America http:// stem near the base of the plant (Borkin 1996, p. 2), although not through the www.butterfliesandmoths.org, Accessed 2008, pers. comm.; Dana 2008, pers. entire larval development (Borkin 2014, 5/14/12; Minnesota Department of comm.). Borkin (2008, pers. comm.) pers. comm.). Poweshiek skipperling

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63686 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

have been observed laying eggs Manitoba in 2008 and 2009; however, been observed avoiding dispersal over (ovipositing) on mat muhly only 2 of the 56 marked individuals in short distances, even to suitable habitat, (Muhlenbergia richardsonis) (Cuthrell 2008 were recaptured and none of the if a barrier such as a road exists between 2012a, pers. comm.), a grass in 16 marked individuals in 2009 were suitable prairie habitat and nectar Michigan’s prairie fens (Penskar and recaptured, so available data are sources (Westwood et al. 2012, p. 18). Higman 1999, p. 1). Captive-reared insufficient to examine within and Since experts estimated Dakota caterpillars fed most successfully on between site dispersal (Dupont 2013, skippers to have a mean mobility of 3.5 prairie dropseed, and older caterpillars pp. 68–70). After 2 days, the two (standard deviation = 0.7) on a scale of (late 2-day instar and older) successfully recaptured individuals were within 50 0 (sedentary) to 10 (highly mobile), fed on little bluestem, big bluestem, and m (165 ft) of their initial capture which is higher than the estimate for the side-oats gramma (Runquist 2013, pers. location (Dupont 2013, p. 69). Poweshiek skipperling (mean mobility comm.). One post-diapause Poweshiek Besides this study in Manitoba, which of 2) (Burke et al. 2011, p. 2279; skipperling was successfully reared to had too few recaptures to make any Fitzsimmons 2012, pers. comm.), we adulthood on Pennsylvania sedge statistically significant conclusions, we used the estimated dispersal distance of (Carex pensylvanica) (Runquist 2013, are unaware of any other studies that the Dakota skipper, approximately 1 km pers. comm.). documented the dispersal distance of (0.6 mi) (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, p. In southwestern Minnesota dry hill the species. Therefore, we used the 6), which is more conservative than the prairies, Poweshiek skipperling Dakota skipper as a surrogate species to 1.6 km (1.0 mi) estimated for the oviposition was observed on prairie estimate the maximum dispersal Poweshiek skipperling by expert dropseed, little bluestem, big bluestem, distance of Poweshiek skipperlings and opinion (Westwood 2012b, pers. comm., porcupine grass, and a couple verified our assumptions with expert Dana 2012b, pers. comm.). One unidentified species; a larva was review. In a mark–recapture study, kilometer is a reasonable maximum observed feeding on sideoats grama average adult movements of Dakota dispersal distance, since no data (Dana 2005a, pers. comm.). Poweshiek skippers were less than 300 meters (m) documents the species that document a skipperlings were observed to oviposit (984 feet (ft)) during a period of 3–7 greater distance travelled. on big bluestem in Wisconsin (Borkin days; marked adults crossed less than In summary, using the best 2012a, pers. comm.), although 200 m (656 ft) of unsuitable habitat information available, dispersal of indiscriminate oviposition on between two prairie patches and moved Poweshiek skipperling is very limited unsuitable larval plants has been along ridges more frequently than across due in part to its short adult life span observed during high summer valleys (Dana 1991, pp. 38–40). Dana and single annual flight. Therefore, the temperatures (Borkin 1995, p. 6). Borkin (1997, p. 5) later observed reduced species’ extirpation from a site is likely (1995, p. 4) also observed oviposition on movement rates across a small valley permanent unless it is within about 1 an unidentified sedge (Eleocharis sp.), dominated by exotic grasses with roads km (0.6 mi) of a site that generates a but only 2 eggs were found on the sedge and crop fields compared with sufficient number of emigrants or is in comparison to more than 100 eggs movements in adjacent widespread artificially reintroduced to a site; found on prairie dropseed. In Manitoba, prairie habitat. Roads and crop fields however, the capability to propagate the Poweshiek skipperlings were observed were suspected as impediments for Poweshiek skipperling is currently ovipositing on big bluestem, white movement among prairie patches along lacking. sweet clover, an unidentified goldenrod two sites of the main valley (Dana 1997, Habitat (Solidago spp.), and juvenile bur oak p. 5), although movements beyond the (Quercus macrocarpa) leaves (Dupont study area were beyond the scope of the Poweshiek skipperling habitats 2013, p. 73). Poweshiek skipperlings 1997 mark–recapture study (Dana 2013, include prairie fens, grassy lake and have also been documented laying eggs pers. comm.). Skadsen (1999, p. 2) stream margins, moist meadows, sedge on the entire length of grass leaf blades, reported possible movement of Dakota meadow, and wet-to-dry prairie. including the tips, and on low-growing skippers in 1998 from a known McCabe and Post (McCabe and Post deciduous foliage (Dupont 2013, p. 133). population at least 800 m (2,625 ft) 1977, pp. 36–38) describe the species’ Dana (2013, pers. comm.) noted that away to a site with an unusually heavy habitat in North Dakota as ‘‘. . . high larvae seem to begin feeding at a very growth of purple coneflower; he had not dry prairie and low, moist prairie fine, threadlike blade tip and females found Dakota skippers in three previous stretches as well as old fields and placed eggs on fine blade tips of grasses years when coneflower production was meadows.’’ Royer and Marrone (1992b, during some observed ovipositions. sparse. p. 12) describe Poweshiek skipperling Consistent with field observations of Based on expert opinion, a maximum habitat in North Dakota and South female oviposition on fine blades of dispersal distance of 1.6 km (1.0 mi) Dakota as moist ground in undisturbed grass, captive-reared caterpillars (early was estimated to be a reasonable and native tallgrass prairies. Poweshiek instars) preferred feeding on finer leaf likely distance for male Poweshiek skipperling habitat throughout Iowa and blades (Runquist 2013, pers. comm.). skipperling to travel between patches of Minnesota is described as both ‘‘high prairie habitat separated by structurally dry’’ and ‘‘low wet’’ prairie (McCabe Dispersal similar habitats (e.g., perennial and Post 1977, pp. 36–38). The only Poweshiek skipperlings are also not grasslands but not necessarily native documented Illinois record was known to disperse widely; the species prairie) (Westwood 2012a and 2012b, associated with high rolling prairie was evaluated among 291 butterfly pers. comm.; Dana 2012b, pers. comm.). (Dodge 1872, p. 218); the only species in Canada as having relatively The species, however, will not likely documented Indiana record was from low mobility; experts estimated disperse across habitat that is not marshy lakeshores and wetlands Poweshiek skipperling to have a mean structurally similar to native prairies, (Blatchley 1891, p. 398; Shull 1987, p. mobility of 2 (standard deviation = 1.4) such as certain types of row crops or 29). on a scale of 0 (sedentary) to 10 (highly anywhere not dominated by grasses Southern dry prairies in Minnesota mobile) (Burke et al. 2011, p. 2279; (Westwood 2012a and 2012b, pers. are described as having sparse shrub Fitzsimmons 2012, pers. comm.). A comm.; Dana 2012b, pers. comm.). In cover (less than 5 percent) composed mark–recapture study was conducted in Manitoba, Poweshiek skipperling have primarily of leadplant, with prairie rose,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63687

wormwood sage, or smooth sumac larval habitat (Swengel 2013, pers. prairies with Poweshiek skipperlings, present and few, if any, trees (Minnesota comm.). the following species are listed as often DNR 2012a, p. 1). Southern mesic Like the Dakota skipper, it has been seen: Willow (Salix spp.), sedges (Carex prairies also have sparse shrubs (5–25 hypothesized that Poweshiek spp.), rushes (Juncus spp.), groundsels percent cover) consisting of leadplant skipperling larvae may be vulnerable to (Pakera spp.), tufted hairgrass, creeping and prairie rose with occasional desiccation during dry summer months bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera), mat wolfberry (Symphoricarpos (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.) and require muhly, elliptic spike-rush, four- occidentalis) and few, if any, trees movement of shallow groundwater to flowered yellow loosestrife (Lysimachia (Minnesota DNR 2012b, p. 1). the soil surface or wet low areas to quadriflora), and common self-heal The disjunct populations of provide relief from high summer (Environment Canada 2012, p. 6). Most Poweshiek skipperlings in Michigan temperatures or dry conditions (Royer et of these plants were also commonly have more narrowly defined habitat al. 2008, pp. 2, 16; Borkin 2012a, pers. observed in study plots surveyed in preferences, variously described as wet comm.). Humidity may also be an 2008–2009 (Dupont 2013, p. 86). The marshy meadows (Holzman 1972, p. essential factor to larval survival during soils where the Poweshiek skipperling 114), bog fen meadows or carrs (Shuey winter months since the larvae cannot occurs in Manitoba are described as 1985, p. 181), sedge fens (Bess 1988, p. take in water during that time and shallow, rocky, and highly calcareous 13), and prairie fens (Michigan Natural depend on humid air to minimize water (Westwood and Borkowsky 2004 in Features Inventory 2011, unpubl. data; loss through respiration (Dana 2013, Dupont 2013, p. 19). Michigan Natural Features Inventory pers. comm.). Prairie fen habitat soils in Michigan 2012, unpubl. data); prairie fen is the Royer (2008, pp. 14–15) measured are described as saturated organic soils currently accepted name for this habitat microclimatological (climate in a small (sedge peat and wood peat) and marl, a space, such as at or near the soil surface) type. Bess (1988, p. 13) found the calcium carbonate (CaCO3) precipitate levels within ‘‘larval nesting zones’’ (0 species primarily in the drier portions of (MINFI Web site accessed August 3, to 2 cm above the soil surface) at six Liberty Fen, Jackson County, dominated 2012). In other States, soil textures in known Poweshiek skipperling sites, and by ‘‘low sedges’’ and an abundance of Poweshiek skipperling habitats are found an acceptable rangewide seasonal nectar sources. Summerville and classified as loam, sandy loam, or loamy (summer) mean temperature range of 18 Clampitt (1999, p. 231) noted that the sand (Royer et al. 2008, pp. 3, 10); soils to 21 °C (64 to 70 °F), rangewide population was concentrated in areas in moraine deposits are described as seasonal mean dew point ranging from dominated by spikerush and that only gravelly, except the deposits associated 14 to 17 °C (57 to 63 °F), and rangewide with glacial lakes. 10–15 percent of the fen area was seasonal mean relative humidity occupied despite the abundance of between 73 and 85 percent. Royer Population Distribution and Occupancy nectar sources throughout. Poweshiek (2008) examined only occupied areas for The Poweshiek skipperling is skipperling have been described as these parameters; therefore, the historically known from eight States, occupying peat domes within larger statistical and biological significance of ranging widely over the native wet- prairie fen complexes in areas either these edaphic variables cannot be mesic to dry tallgrass prairies from dominated by mat muhly or prairie determined from his study. eastern North and South Dakota (Royer dropseed (Cuthrell 2013a, pers. comm.). Canadian populations of Poweshiek and Marrone 1992b, pp. 4–5) through A few prairie fens in Michigan also skipperlings are restricted to a single Iowa (Nekola and Schlicht 2007, p. 7) contain other rare butterflies, such as 2,300-ha (5,683-ac) area in southeastern and Minnesota (Minnesota DNR, Mitchell’s satyr and swamp metalmark Manitoba (COSEWIC 2003, p. 5). The Division of Ecological Resources, (Cuthrell 2013a, pers. comm.). wet to mesic tallgrass prairie in this area unpubl. data), with occurrences also Poweshiek skipperling populations in is characterized by low relief (1–2 m (3– documented in northern Illinois (Dodge Wisconsin are also disjunct from the 7 ft)), with alternating lower, wetter 1872, p. 218), Indiana (Blatchley 1891, population to the west and are areas and higher, drier prairie; p. 898), Michigan (Holzman 1972, p. associated with areas that contain Poweshiek skipperlings tend to be 111; McAlpine 1972, p. 83), and intermixed wet prairie, wet-mesic, and concentrated on or near the edge of the Wisconsin (Borkin 2011, in litt.; Selby dry-mesic prairie habitats (Borkin 1995, higher, drier prairie (COSEWIC 2003, p. 2010, p. 22). The relatively recent p. 6; Swengel 2013, pers. comm.). The 8). Spikerush is frequent in the wetter discovery of Poweshiek skipperling dry-mesic habitats in the Scuppernong areas, and prairie dropseed, black-eyed populations in the Canadian province of Prairie contain ‘‘extensive patches of Susan, and palespike lobelia are Manitoba further extends its known prairie dropseed and little bluestem frequent in the drier areas (COSEWIC historical northern distribution grasses’’ (Borkin 1995, p. 7). Survival in 2003, pp. 7–8). The wet-mesic tallgrass (Westwood 2010, pp. 7–22; Dupont wetter areas, which tend to burn cooler prairies in Manitoba vary in size and 2010, pers. comm.). Additional and less completely, coupled with low occur along bluffs of Bur oak and historical accounts of Poweshiek recolonization rates, or the trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides skipperling from the States of Montana, disproportionate loss of wet versus dry Michx.) (Catling and Lafontaine 1986; Colorado, and Nebraska are likely prairie could give the false impression Dupont 2013, p. 17). Little bluestem, big misidentifications of its western that the wet areas were their preferred bluestem, and Indian grass were the congener, the Garita skipperling. habitat (Borkin 1995, p. 7). Puchyan three most common grasses in managed Once common and abundant Prairie consists of wet-mesic prairie that study plots in Manitoba (Dupont 2013, throughout native prairies in eight grades lower into sedge meadow (WI p. 85). Plant species generally associated States and at least one Canadian DNR Web site http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ with upland, drier portions of the mesic province, the Poweshiek skipperling Lands/naturalareas/ tallgrass prairies in Manitoba include: and its habitat have experienced index.asp?SNA=172; Swengel 2013, Big bluestem, pale-spike lobelia, prairie significant declines. The species is pers. comm.) and adult Poweshiek dropseed, mountain death camas, stiff considered to be present at a few native Skipperlings have been observed in wet goldenrod, black-eyed Susan, and prairie remnants in two States and one prairie there, although it is not known meadow blazing-star (Environment location in Manitoba, Canada. The if these areas function as successful Canada 2012, p. 6). In lower, wetter species is presumed extirpated from

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63688 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Illinois and Indiana, and the status of seen in Minnesota from 2007 through Seven Michigan sites were recently the species is uncertain in four of the six 2012. Two individuals were observed at ranked as having good or better States with relatively recent records one site in 2013 (Weber 2014, in litt.; ‘‘viability,’’ a habitat-based element (within the last 20 years). The historical Dana 2014, pers. comm.). In Iowa, the occurrence rank assigned by the distribution of Poweshiek skipperling Poweshiek skipperling was found at 2 of Michigan Natural Features Inventory may never be precisely known because 33 sites with previous records surveyed (2011); however, the number of ‘‘much of tallgrass prairie was in 2007; the species was last observed individuals observed at a few of those extirpated prior to extensive ecological at one site in 2008. Iowa contains about sites has declined in recent years, and study’’ (Steinauer and Collins 1994, p. 14 percent of documented sites the species is presumed extirpated from 42), such as butterfly surveys. rangewide. Unidentified threats to the one of those sites. Currently, four of the Destruction of tallgrass and mixed-grass species have acted to extirpate or ten extant occurrences of Poweshiek prairie began in 1830 (Sampson and sharply diminish populations at all or skipperling in Michigan are considered Knopf 1994, p. 418), but significant the vast majority of sites in Iowa and to have good or better viability documentation of the ecosystem’s Minnesota (Dana 2008, p. 16; Selby (Michigan Natural Features Inventory butterfly fauna did not begin until about 2010, p. 7). (2011, unpubl. data). Each of those faces 1960. Therefore, most of the decline of South Dakota historically contained threats of at least low to moderate the Poweshiek skipperling probably about 23 percent of the rangewide sites magnitude, and the State contains only went unrecorded. Poweshiek with documented presence of about 6 percent of all known historical skipperling dispersal is very limited due Poweshiek skipperling, although recent Poweshiek skipperling records. One in part to its short adult life span and surveys in that State also suggest an population of Poweshiek skipperlings in single annual flight. Therefore, the emergent and mysterious decline. The Wisconsin had fairly consistent species’ extirpation from a site is likely species was last observed in South numbers observed over the last 5 years permanent unless it is within about 1 Dakota in 2008, at three sites. Surveys (17 to 63 individuals counted using km (0.6 mi) of a site that generates a conducted in 2009–2013 flight seasons modified Pollard transect covering 15 ac sufficient number of emigrants or is in South Dakota resulted in zero (6 ha) in approximately 40 minutes), but artificially reintroduced to a site. detections of the species. North Dakota the species was not observed in 2013 Recent survey data indicate that historically contained about six percent surveys. One population in Manitoba Poweshiek skipperling has declined to of the rangewide sites with documented has fairly consistent numbers (typically zero or to undetectable levels at 96 presence of Poweshiek skipperling; the hundreds of individuals observed each percent of sites where it has ever been species was last observed in North year). To summarize, of the 298 recorded. Until about 2003, Poweshiek Dakota in 2001. Survey efforts in North documented sites, there are 12 sites skipperling was regarded as the most Dakota have been minimal between where we consider the Poweshiek frequently and reliably encountered 1998 and 2011, but surveys conducted skipperling to be present, 111 sites with prairie-obligate skipper butterfly in in 1997 documented more than 10 unknown status, 96 possibly extirpated Minnesota, which contains Poweshiek skipperlings at 1 site; 6 sites, and 79 where we consider the approximately 48 percent of all known individuals were counted at 1 site, and species to be extirpated (Table 2). The Poweshiek skipperling locations 0 were detected at 6 other sites. Surveys distribution and status of Poweshiek rangewide. Numbers and distribution conducted during the 2012 and 2013 skipperling in each State of known dropped dramatically in subsequent flight seasons in North Dakota resulted historical or extant occurrence are years, however, and the species was not in zero detections of the species. described in detail below.

TABLE 2—NUMBER OF HISTORICALLY DOCUMENTED POWESHIEK SKIPPERLING SITES WITHIN EACH STATE AND THE NUM- BER OF SITES WHERE THE SPECIES IS THOUGHT TO BE PRESENT, UNKNOWN, POSSIBLY EXTIRPATED, OR EXTIR- PATED

State’s percentage of the total Possibly State number of Present Unknown extirpated Extirpated Total historical sites

Illinois ...... 1.3 ...... 4 4 Indiana ...... 0.3 ...... 1 1 Iowa ...... 13.8 ...... 4 24 13 41 Michigan ...... 5.7 9 2 ...... 6 17 Minnesota ...... 48.3 1 58 64 21 144 North Dakota ...... 5.7 ...... 8 6 3 17 South Dakota ...... 23.2 ...... 36 2 31 69 Wisconsin ...... 1.3 1 3 ...... 4 Manitoba ...... 0.3 1 ...... 1

Total Number of Historically Documented Sites ...... 12 111 96 79 298 Percent of the Total Number of Historical Sites by Oc- cupancy ...... 4% 37% 32% 27% ......

Illinois although only one historical occurrence abundant Poweshiek skipperling is supported (Table 2). In the early occupying ‘‘the high rolling prairie that The Poweshiek skipperling 1870s, Dodge (1872, p. 218) reported forms the divide between the Illinois historically occurred in Illinois,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63689

and Rock rivers’’ in Bureau County, Poweshiek skipperling had been found at Hoffman Prairie in Cerro Gordo Illinois. In addition to Bureau County, previously recorded or where prairie County in 2008 (Selby 2009b, p. 3), but the Web site Butterflies and Moths of and butterfly surveys or infra-red none were found during surveys in 2009 North America lists Poweshiek photography suggested the presence of (Selby 2009b, p. 7) and 2010 (Selby skipperling historical occurrences for Poweshiek skipperling habitat 2010, p. 7). We initially assigned an Lake and Mason Counties, which were (Saunders 1995, pp. 7–8). Among the 65 unknown status to the Hoffman Prairie submitted to the Web site before the sites surveyed, Poweshiek skipperlings site because the species had not been date field was required, so a default date were found at 29 sites in 10 counties seen in the 2009 and 2010 survey years; of January 1, 1950, was assigned, which (Saunders 1995, p. 27). In 2000, however, Selby believes that the species is outside of the typical flight period Poweshiek skipperlings were found at may be extirpated from this site (Selby (http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/ six sites surveyed in and near Cayler 2012a, pers. comm.), so we assigned a species/Oarisma-poweshiek; accessed Prairie and Freda Haffner Kettlehole status of extirpated to this site, which August 16, 2012). The Web site State preserves in Dickinson County was confirmed with negative surveys in maintains a verifiable database on (Selby 2000, p. 19). Followup surveys of the 2013 flight season (Olsen 2013, p. 2). species occurrences, but there is no this complex in 2004, 2005, and 2007, To summarize, the Poweshiek accessible supporting data for the Lake however, produced no confirmed skipperling was historically and Mason Counties records (Lundh sightings (Selby 2010, p. 6). Extensive documented in 41 sites in Iowa. The 2012, pers. comm.). One additional surveys were conducted in 2007, and species occupancy is unknown at 4 of record, housed at University of included 32 of the 38 sites in the State those sites, and the species is Wisconsin–Oshkosh, was collected in with post-1990 records (Selby 2008, pp. considered to be extirpated or possibly DuPage County in 1968 and was 4, 6). Poweshiek skipperlings were extirpated at 13 and 24 sites, recently identified as a Poweshiek found at 2 of the 38 sites surveyed— respectively (Table 2). The species is not skipperling. The location where the Hoffman Prairie State Preserve in Cerro considered to be present at any of the specimen was collected has since been Gordo County and Highway 60 Railroad sites in Iowa. converted and is no longer a prairie, and Prairie in Osceola County (Selby 2008, Michigan it is presumed that the species is pp. 6–7). Five of the six sites not Michigan historically contained extirpated from that location (Borkin included in the 2007 surveys had very approximately 6 percent (N=17) of all 2014, pers. comm.). Poweshiek little quality prairie (Selby 2012a, pers. known records of Poweshiek skipperling is, therefore, presumed to be comm.). Supplementary surveys skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). extirpated from Illinois. conducted further west along U.S. Poweshiek skipperling has been Indiana Highway 18 in Hancock County also historically documented at 17 sites in 6 produced no confirmed sightings (Selby There is one supported historical counties in Michigan. The species was 2010, p. 7). No surveys were conducted occurrence of Poweshiek skipperlings in first recorded in Michigan in 1893 at at previously known Poweshiek Indiana (Table 2). Blatchley (1891, p. Lamberton Lake near Grand Rapids in skipperling sites in the State during the 898) reported small numbers of Kent County (Holzman 1972, p. 111) 2012 flight season. No Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperlings near Whiting, and then at nearby Button Lake Fen skipperlings were observed in surveys Indiana; Shull (1987, p. 49) expressed (also known as Emerald Lake Fen) in in 2013 at two sites with relatively confidence that this record is authentic. 1944 (McAlpine 1972, p. 83). Shrubs recent records of the species (2005 and The Poweshiek skipperling is have invaded both sites, however, and 2008) (Olsen 2013, p. 2). considered extirpated from Indiana. no Poweshiek skipperlings have been The Poweshiek skipperling is found at either of these two western Iowa presumed extirpated or possibly Michigan sites since 1944 and 1968, Iowa historically contained extirpated from all but four of the respectively (Michigan Natural Features approximately 14 percent (N=41) of all known sites in Iowa. The status of the Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). Holzman known records of Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling is unknown at (1972, p. 111) documented Poweshiek skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). The four sites: Highway 60 Railroad Prairie, skipperling in Oakland County in 1970, Poweshiek skipperling was historically Floete Prairie in Dickinson County, and the species has since been found at known to occur at 38 sites in 13 Florenceville Prairie, and Hayden a total of 15 locations in eastern counties in Iowa (Nekola 1995, p. 8; Prairie in Howard County. There have Michigan. Saunders 1995, pp. 27–28; Selby 2005, been no surveys at Highway 60 Railroad The Poweshiek skipperling is p. 18; Nekola and Schlicht 2007, p. 7; Prairie since the species was observed currently considered to be present at Selby 2010, p. 6); however, this number there in 2007 (Selby 2012a, pers. nine sites (Table 2) in four counties in may vary slightly (up to 41 sites) comm.). The last observation of Michigan: Jackson, Lenawee, Oakland, depending on how one divides sites Poweshiek skipperling at Floete Prairie and Washtenaw. The species has been along the Little Sioux River in the was in 1994, and the habitat ‘‘did not observed recently (2008–2013) at most Freda-Cayler area (Selby 2012a, pers. appear to be very good quality’’ in 2007, of those sites, except at the Liberty Bowl comm.). Early reports from Parker (1870, although the site was not surveyed for Fen in Jackson County, which has not p. 271) described Poweshiek skipperling butterflies that year (Selby 2012a, pers. been surveyed since one individual was as abundant on a prairie slope at comm.) or in subsequent years. The observed in 1996. The status of the Grinnell, Iowa, while Lindsey (1917, p. Poweshiek skipperling was last species is unknown at two sites; Bullard 352; 1920, p. 320) noted additional rare observed at the Florenceville Prairie in Lake in Livingston County, where occurrences in Story, Dickinson, 1994 (Saunders 1995, p. 27), but not Poweshiek skipperlings were last seen Poweshiek, and Woodbury Counties, during the 2007 survey year (Selby in 2007, but not in subsequent surveys Iowa—among these, habitat has long 2010, pp. 8–11). The species was last in 2008 and 2009 (Cuthrell 2012a, pers. since been destroyed in all but observed at Hayden Prairie in 2005, but comm.), and Liberty Fen (Grand River Dickinson County. not during surveys conducted in 2007 Fen) in Jackson County, where In 1993–1994, 65 sites were surveyed (Selby 2010, p. 10) or 2013 (Olsen 2013, Poweshiek skipperlings were observed in 17 counties where Dakota skipper or p. 2). Four Poweshiek skipperlings were in 2012 but not in 2013 surveys

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63690 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(Cuthrell 2013, pers. comm.). The of Poweshiek skipperling in the United in Michigan (Table 2). The species is species is presumed extirpated from six States. However, it is subjected to considered to be present at 9 of the sites, sites including the only two sites in intense development pressure, and although the numbers observed in 2013 Kent County and three sites in Oakland results from 2013 surveys show low were substantially less than in previous County: Rattalee Road, Fenton Road, numbers. A fourth site, Grand River Fen years with similar survey effort. The and Rattalee Lake Fen (Call C Burr (also known as Liberty Fen) in Jackson occupancy is unknown at 2 sites, and Preserve) fens. The species has not been County, is approximately 100 km (62 the species is considered to be observed at the Rattalee Road and mi) from the other three sites, and was extirpated at 6 sites. Fenton Road sites since 1970 and 1973, also considered to have good viability in Minnesota respectively (Michigan Natural Features 2011, but the viability is questionable Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). Four since 2013 surveys for the species were Minnesota historically contained Poweshiek skipperlings were seen in negative. In 2010, researchers counted approximately 48 percent (N=144) of all 2009 at the Rattalee Lake Fen (Calla C 54 (0.3/hr.) Poweshiek skipperling at known records of Poweshiek Burr Preserve), but none were observed Grand River Fen, and 114 (0.6/hr.) in skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). There during surveys conducted in 2010, 2011 (Michigan Natural Features are approximately 189 historical 2011, and 2012 (Cuthrell 2012a, pers. Inventory 2011, unpubl. data; Cuthrell Poweshiek skipperling occurrence comm.; Michigan Natural Features 2012a, pers. comm.). This number fell to records in 32 counties in Minnesota Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). The 14 (0.1/hr.) in 2012 and zero in 2013 [Minnesota Natural Heritage Inventory Michigan Natural Features Inventory (Cuthrell, 2012a, pers. comm.; 2012b, (MN NHI) database accessed June 19, (MNFI) also considers the two sites in pers. comm.; 2013, pers. comm.). 2013, plus additional surveys]. Clusters Kent County to be extirpated due to Small populations, immediate threats of records occur within five general habitat loss and destruction, Lamberton that have significant impacts on the areas from the State’s southwest corner Lake and Button Lake (also known as species, or both limit the viability of the to near the Canadian border in the Emerald Lake); the species has not been remaining five sites where we consider north. Based on the proximity of some observed at either site since 1968 and Poweshiek skipperling to still be present occurrences to one another (e.g., 1944, respectively. The species is in Michigan. In 2010, eight (0.1/hr.) overlapping or occurrences in close presumed to be extirpated at Whalen Poweshiek skipperlings were recorded proximity to one another in one general Lake Fen in Livingston County, where at Park Lydon in Washtenaw County; 12 location), there appear to be the species has not been observed since individuals were counted in 2011 (0.1/ approximately 144 distinct historical 1998 despite three subsequent years of hr.), 22 were counted in 2012 (0.2/hr.), site records in the State (Dana 2012d, surveys (Michigan Natural Features and 1 individual was counted in 2013 pers. comm; Service 2014, unpubl. Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). (Cuthrell 2012a, pers. comm.; 2013, geodatabase). Poweshiek skipperling are pers. comm.). Two individuals (0.02/hr.) Four of Michigan’s nine extant presumed extirpated or possibly were recorded at Goose Creek extirpated from at least 85 of these (present) Poweshiek skipperling Grasslands (also known as Little Goose known sites. The status of the species is occurrences were recently considered to Lake Fen) in Lenawee County in 2010, unknown at 58 sites, although 27 of have at least good viability (Michigan and nine (0.07/hr.) were seen in 2011 those locations have not been surveyed Natural Features Inventory 2011, (Cuthrell 2012a, pers. comm.; 2012b, since 2003, and the species has unpubl. data); however, 2013 survey pers. comm.). Only one Poweshiek undergone a sharp decline in the State results have put the viability in skipperling was seen during a 15- since then. question. Three of these sites, Buckhorn minute 3-person survey in 2007 at the Lake also known as Big Valley), Brandt Snyder Lake site. Fourteen individuals An extensive survey effort was Road Fen (also known as Holly Fen) and were observed during 2008 surveys at completed in 1993 and 1994 (Schlicht Long Lake Fen, are within 20 km (12 mi) Halstead Lake Fen (Michigan Natural and Saunders 1994, entire; Schlicht and of one another in Oakland County; all Features Inventory 2011, unpubl. data), Saunders 1995, entire). During those with relatively large numbers (61–389) and 18 were observed in 2012 (Cuthrell surveys, Poweshiek skipperlings were of the species recorded in 2010–2012 2012a, pers. comm.); neither survey year found in 11 of 19 sites on which the surveys (Michigan Natural Features had units of effort associated with the species had been previously recorded Inventory 2011, unpubl. data; Cuthrell counts at this site. One individual was and in 13 new sites, for a total of 25 of 2012a, pers. comm.). In 2013, however, counted at Bullard Lake fen in 2007, but 63 surveyed prairie sites; the species 2 individuals (0.008/hr.) were recorded the species was not observed in the two was present at 30 and 39 percent of the at Buckhorn Lake, which was down most recent survey years (2008 and sites in 1993 and 1994, respectively from 84 individuals (0.35/hr.) recorded 2009); therefore, the status is unknown (Schlicht and Saunders 1995, pp. 5–7). the previous survey year (2012) with at that site. We have only one year of These results contrast sharply with similar effort, and 53 individuals (0.33/ data from Liberty Bowl Fen, where the those from the surveys conducted in hr.) were recorded at Brandt Road in species was recorded in 1996. The Eaton 2007 and 2008, when the species was 2013, down from 71 individuals (0.59/ Road Fen is thought to be fairly viable, found at four and zero percent of sites, hr.) recorded the previous survey year where 15–20 individuals were observed respectively. Although the species was (2012) with similar effort. The largest on multiple occasions in 2005, and a apparently more common in 1993 and extant (present) Poweshiek skipperling high of 68 individuals were observed in 1994, numbers of Poweshiek skipperling population in Michigan may be at Long 2011 (Cuthrell 2012b, pers. comm.). The found during surveys were typically Lake Fen, where 25 individuals (0.2/hr.) Eaton Road site is approximately 0.6 km low. Large numbers were observed at were counted during 2013 surveys, (1 mi) from the Long Lake Fen site and only three sites (Schlicht and Saunders down from 389 individuals (2.2/hr.) and is considered a sub-site within Long 1995, p. 4). At one of these sites, Glynn 225 individuals (1.3/hr.) observed in the Lake Fen (Cuthrell 2012b, pers. comm.), Prairie, 25 Poweshiek skipperling were previous two survey years (2011 and but we consider it to be a separate site recorded during a 50-minute survey in 2012, respectively) with similar for the purposes of this rule. July 1993 (Schlicht and Saunders 1995, sampling effort. In 2012, Long Lake Fen To summarize, Poweshiek skipperling data sheet); no Poweshiek skipperling was thought to be the largest population was historically documented in 17 sites were observed at this site during the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63691

2007 survey despite good survey Additional surveys were conducted in North Dakota conditions (Selby 2009a, p. xxxv). 2012; however, Poweshiek skipperling North Dakota historically contained Until about 2003, the Poweshiek were not observed at any of the 18 sites approximately 6 percent (N=17) of all skipperling was regarded as ‘‘the most with relatively recent records (Runquist known records of Poweshiek frequently and reliably encountered 2012, pp. 4–25; Selby 2012, p. 2; Selby skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). prairie-obligate skipper in Minnesota’’ 2013, p. 2; Dana 2012c, pers. comm.; Poweshiek skipperlings have been (Dana 2008, p. 1). Signs of the species’ Runquist 2012a, pers. comm.; Olsen historically documented at 17 sites decline in Minnesota were noted in 2012a, pers. comm.). Fifteen additional (Table 2) in 7 North Dakota counties 2003 when Selby (2005, p. 20) found prairie sites with potential habitat or (Selby 2010, p. 18; Service 2014, sharply lower numbers in and near records of other skippers were surveyed unpubl. geodatabase): Cass, Dickey, Glacial Lakes State Park (Selby 2005, p. in 2012, but no Poweshiek skipperling LaMoure, Ransom, Richland, and 20) compared to those observed in 2001 were observed (Runquist 2012, pp. 4– Sargent in the southeastern corner of the (Skadsen 2001, pp. 22–24). For example, 25; Selby 2012, p. 2; Selby 2013, p. 2; State and Grand Forks County in the numbers recorded along four transects Dana 2012c, pers. comm.; Runquist Northeast. Poweshiek skipperling are that were surveyed in both years 2012a, pers. comm.; Olsen 2012a, pers. now considered extirpated or possibly decreased from 104 to 2 individuals comm.). Twenty-one sites with previous extirpated from nine sites and four (Selby 2006b, Appendix 2, p. ii). In 2004 records of the species were resurveyed counties (Cass, Dickey, LaMoure, and and 2005, Selby (2006b, Appendix 2, in 2013 and 7 additional sites, with no Grand Forks) in North Dakota. The p. 2) did not record a single Poweshiek previous records, were also surveyed for status of the species is unknown at 8 skipperling on any of these transects in the species (Runquist 2014, pp. 3–6; sites, where the species was last and around the park during 11 separate Selby 2014, pp. 2–5; Rigney 2013b, p. observed between 1996 and 2001, but surveys. An extensive survey effort was Appendix B). Three individual not during the most recent 1–2 year(s) conducted in 2007 and 2008 throughout Poweshiek skipperlings were observed surveyed. Four sites with fairly recent most of the species’ known range in the at one site in Polk County—this is the Poweshiek skipperling records were State (Selby 2009a, entire). Sites with first credible sighting of the species in surveyed in 2012; Poweshiek previous Poweshiek skipperling records the State since 2007 (Webster 2013, skipperling were not found at any of that were considered to have the pers. comm.; Dana 2014, pers. comm.; those sites (Royer and Royer 2012b, pp. greatest conservation importance to the Service 2014, unpub. database). 21–24; Royer and Royer 2012a, p. 6). species (large, high-quality prairie Nearly half (approximately 48 One additional site was surveyed, remnants) were surveyed, as well as percent) of all documented Poweshiek which had the potential for Poweshiek sites with no previous records that skipperling sites rangewide are in skipperling presence because of its appeared likely to support the species Minnesota, thus the apparent collapse of proximity to a known site for the (Selby 2009a, p. 2). In 2007, 70 sites in large numbers of Poweshiek skipperling species; however, no Poweshiek 15 counties were surveyed, including 26 populations across the State may pose a skipperling were found (Royer and sites with previous Poweshiek significant challenge for the long-term Royer 2012b, pp. 18–19; Royer and skipperling records (Selby 2009a, pp. 1, existence of this species. Although the Royer 2012a, p. 6; Royer 2012b, pers. 6). In 2008, 58 sites were surveyed in 13 possibility remains that the species is comm.). The species was not observed counties, including 22 sites with prior extant at some sites where recent (2007, at six sites with previous records of records (Selby 2009a, pp. 1, 6). A total 2008, 2012, or 2013) surveys were Poweshiek skipperlings that were of 34 sites with previous Poweshiek negative, it seems unlikely that it is surveyed in 2013. The species skipperling records were surveyed in present at those sites in any significant occupancy at two of these sites with both years combined. Poweshiek numbers. Extensive surveys in 1993 and 2013 surveys was updated from unknown to extirpated based on three skipperling presence was recorded on 1994 documented the species at about consecutive years of negative surveys only three of the 70 surveyed sites in 35 percent of all surveyed sites, whereas 2007; each of these three sites had just (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). the 2007 effort found them at only about The Poweshiek skipperling was one confirmed individual (Selby 2009a, 2 percent of all sites surveyed; no p. 1). No Poweshiek skipperlings were known from seven North Dakota sites Poweshiek skipperling were detected across six counties in the 1990s; observed on any of the 58 sites surveyed despite widespread and robust survey during the 2008 flight period (Selby however, only two of those sites were efforts involving multiple observers in considered to have extant populations at 2009a, p. 1). 2008 or 2012 (Dana 2008, p. 8; Selby In 2007, multiple transect surveys that time; three records were 2009a, p. 1; Dana 2012c, pers. comm.; were conducted in four sites with represented by incomplete or Runquist 2012a, pers. comm.; Olsen previously well-documented Poweshiek ambiguous locality data, and the species skipperling populations—transects 2012, pers. comm.; Runquist 2012, pp. was assumed to be extirpated at one site totaling 52,985 m (33 mi) were surveyed 4–25; Selby 2012, p. 2, 2013, p. 2). (Royer and Marrone 1992b, pp. 8–11). without observing a single Poweshiek Three individuals were sighted at one Surveys conducted in the State after skipperling (Dana 2008, p. 5). About location in 2013 (Webster 2013, pers. 1992 documented additional half of these transects (totaling 20,959 m comm.; Dana 2014, pers. comm.). populations, but the most recent surveys (13 mi)) were in the Prairie Coteau To summarize, Poweshiek skipperling at these sites were mostly negative. Scientific and Natural Area (SNA), was historically documented in Orwig discovered eight new populations where in 1990 Selby recorded 116 approximately 144 sites in Minnesota of Poweshiek skipperling (six in Poweshiek skipperlings during the flight (Table 2). The species is not considered Richland County and two in Sargent peak (Selby and Glenn-Lewin 1990, pp. to be present at any of these sites, except County) during 3 years of survey work 19–20) along a total of about 6,250 m (4 at one location (Table 2). The occupancy (1995–1997) in southeastern North mi) of transects (Dana 2008, p. 16). No is unknown at 58 sites, and the species Dakota (Orwig 1995, pp. 3–4; Orwig Poweshiek skipperling were observed is considered to be extirpated or 1996, pp. 4–6, 9–12; Orwig 1997, p. 2). during surveys of the Prairie Coteau possibly extirpated at 21 and 64 sites, The species was found at two of the SNA in 2012 (Runquist 2012, pp. 9–10). respectively (Table 2). eight sites surveyed in 1997 (Orwig

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63692 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

1997, p. 2) and at two additional sites was determined to be unknown at 36 and encroachment of woody vegetation in 1996 (Spomer 2004, p. 11). sites, possibly extirpated at 2 sites, and (Borkin 2011, in litt.). Up until 2013, the Once abundant at several known sites presumed extirpated at the remaining 31 largest population in Wisconsin was in North Dakota, Poweshiek sites (Table 2); at least 8 of the within a 6-ha (15-ac) prairie remnant on skipperlings have experienced a extirpated sites have been destroyed by Scuppernong Prairie SNA at Kettle dramatic decline over the last few conversion, gravel mining, loss of native Moraine State Forest, which had record decades. In 1977, McCabe and Post vegetation, flooding, or heavy grazing counts exceeding 100 individuals in (1977a, p. 38), for example, found (Skadsen 2012c, pers. comm.). 1994, 1995, 1998, and 1999 (Borkin Poweshiek skipperling to be abundant at The Poweshiek skipperling was not 1995, p. 10; Borkin 1996, p. 7; Borkin McLeod Prairie in Ransom County, detected at any site that was surveyed 2000, p. 4; Borkin 2011, in litt.). Four stating that they could ‘‘be collected two between 2009 and 2013: 6 sites in 2009, were found in 2007 (Borkin 2008, in at a time on the blossoms of Long- 10 sites in 2010, 1 site in 2011, 10 sites litt., p. 1), although these data were headed coneflower . . .’’ In 6 years of in 2012, and 25 sites in 2013 (Skadsen collected during a single transect survey subsequent monitoring (1986–1991), 2009, p. 12; Skadsen 2011, p. 5; Skadsen that may have been early in the flight however, Royer failed to find a single 2010, pers. comm.; Skadsen 2012a, pers. season and are, therefore, not Poweshiek skipperling at the site after it comm.; Skadsen 2012b, p. 3; Skadsen comparable to other survey years was converted to a cattle-loading area 2013, pp. 3–4). The 2009 to 2013 results (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.). A (Royer and Marrone 1992b, p. 10). Royer are in marked contrast to surveys maximum count of 42, 17, 63, and 45 and Marrone (1992b, pp. 10–11) conducted in 2002 when the species were counted in 2009, 2010, 2011, and assumed the species had been was recorded at 23 of 24 sites surveyed 2012, respectively (Borkin 2011a, pers. extirpated at this site. Similarly, the (Skadsen 2003, pp. 11–45). Cool and comm.; Borkin 2012c, pers. comm.). The number of Poweshiek skipperlings wet weather may have depressed relatively low maximum count in 2010 recorded during surveys at the West butterfly populations, in general, in may be due to the timing of the flight Prairie Church site along the boundary eastern South Dakota and west-central (early) and the timing of the survey of Cass and Richland counties, fell from Minnesota in 2009 as it apparently did effort (late); therefore, the peak flight hundreds in 1986, to four in 1990, and in 2004 (Skadsen 2004, p. 2; Skadsen may have been missed (Borkin 2013, zero in 1991 and 2012 (Royer and 2009, p. 2). In 2012 and 2013, five and pers. comm.). A controlled burn in late Marrone 1992b, p. 8; Royer and Royer nine additional sites, respectively, with March of 2012 may correlate with lower 2012b, p. 21). Poweshiek skipperlings potentially suitable native-prairie numbers observed during the 2012 flight are unlikely to persist at this small and habitat but with no previous records of (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.). While this isolated site (Royer and Royer 2012b, p. the species were surveyed, but no difference may be within the range of 21; Royer 2012c, pers. comm.). Poweshiek skipperling were observed variation observed over the previous 4 The last observation of a live (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). years (Wisconsin DNR 2012, in litt.), the Poweshiek skipperling in North Dakota range in variation may be skewed due was in 2001, at a new site discovered by Wisconsin to the low numbers observed in 2010 Spomer (2001, p. 9) in Ransom County. Wisconsin historically contained due to the timing of the flight and the Poweshiek skipperlings were not found approximately 1 percent (N=4) of all survey effort (Borkin 2013, pers. in subsequent surveys at this site in known records of Poweshiek comm.). No Poweshiek skipperlings 2002, 2003, and 2012 (Spomer 2001, p. skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). were observed at Scuppernong during 2; Spomer 2002, p. 3; Spomer 2004 p. Naturalists reported Poweshiek repeated surveys in 2013 (Borkin 2013, 36; Selby 2010, p. 18; Royer and Royer skipperling to be common to abundant pers. comm.)—this is the first time no 2012b, p. 22), although the 2012 survey on prairies in southeastern Wisconsin in individuals have been observed there may have been conducted too late in the the late 1800s (e.g., in Milwaukee and since regular surveys began in the 1990s year to detect the species at that site Racine Counties), although exact (Borkin 2014 pers. comm.). Each year, (Royer 2012b, pers. comm; Royer 2012d, localities are unknown (Borkin 2011, in surveys were conducted with similar pers. comm.). Therefore, the status of litt.; Selby 2010, p. 22). By 1989, effort—modified Pollard transect the species at this site is unknown. however, the species was listed as State To summarize, Poweshiek skipperling endangered (Borkin 2011, in litt.). The covering 15 ac (6 ha) in approximately was historically documented in 17 sites Poweshiek skipperling is considered to 40 minutes (Borkin 2014, pers. comm.). in North Dakota (Table 2). The species be present at one site in Wisconsin After brush was cleared from the area is not considered to be present at any of (Table 2); Puchyan Prairie State Natural in 2002, a small number of Poweshiek these sites (Table 2). The occupancy is Area (SNA) is approximately 100 km (62 skipperlings were discovered the unknown at eight sites, and the species mi) to the northwest of the Kettle following year in a small isolated prairie is considered to be extirpated or Moraine State Forest in Green Lake remnant patch at a second site in the possibly extirpated at three and six County. The status of the species is Kettle Moraine State Forest, (Borkin in sites, respectively (Table 2). unknown at three sites within the litt 2008). Once the intervening woody Southern Unit of the Kettle Moraine growth was removed, individuals South Dakota State Forest in Waukesha County. An presumably dispersed from the South Dakota historically contained additional 2010 record of a butterfly was Scuppernong SNA remnant prairie to a approximately 24 percent (N=69) of all incorrectly identified as a Poweshiek small habitat patch about 200 ft (61 m) known records of Poweshiek skipperling at Melendy’s Prairie Unit of away (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.). skipperlings rangewide (Table 2). The the Scuppernong Prairie SNA (Borkin Surveys at each habitat patch have Poweshiek skipperling has been 2012b, pers. comm.). consistently yielded counts of less than historically documented at The two occurrences of Poweshiek 10 (Borkin 2008, in litt.), with a approximately 69 sites (Table 2) across skipperling in the Kettle Moraine State combined high count of 11 to 15 10 counties in South Dakota (Selby Forest inhabit small areas that were individuals in 2011. A total of six 2010, p. 19). Based on expert review and once part of a larger prairie complex, individuals, with a high single day additional survey and habitat which was fragmented by conversion to count of three, were observed in eight information, the status of the species agriculture, other human development, surveys during 2012 (Borkin 2012c,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63693

pers. comm.; Borkin 2012a, pers. skipperling populations. Four of the skipperlings found at each site ranged comm.). No Poweshiek skipperlings eight sites surveyed in 1998 and 1999 from 10 to 15 per hour. These numbers were observed in 2013 (Borkin 2013, seemed to have adequate host plants, are up considerably from 2010, but not pers. comm). nectar resources, and size typical of as high as observed in 2008 (Dupont The status of the Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling habitat, but 2011, pers. comm.). In 2012, a total of skipperling is unknown at a third and Poweshiek skipperling were not present 50 individuals were observed, which much larger fragment of Kettle Moraine at any of the sites (Borkin 2000, pp. 5– was ‘‘low when compared to historic State Forest, the Kettle Moraine Low 7). densities’’ (Hamel et al. 2013, p. 17). Prairie SNA, which is adjacent to the To summarize, Poweshiek skipperling Poweshiek skipperling sites in Manitoba Wilton Road site. The Kettle Moraine was historically documented in 4 sites are often surveyed up to 7 times during Low Prairie SNA was overgrown by in Wisconsin (Table 2). The species is the flight period each year (Westwood shrubs including willows (Salix spp.), considered to be present at one site and 2013, pers. comm.). The preserve has quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), the occupancy is unknown at three sites detailed management recommendations and glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus) (Table 2). to facilitate recovery of the Poweshiek and has been managed with a series of Manitoba skipperling (Westwood 2010, p. 5). controlled burns, in addition to a 1975 Following an assessment and status wildfire (Borkin 2011, in litt; Borkin Manitoba historically contained less than 1 percent (N=1) of all known report completed in 2003 under the 2012a, pers. comm.; Wisconsin DNR Committee on the Status of Endangered 2012, in litt). The highest number records of Poweshiek skipperlings rangewide (Table 2); however, multiple Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), the recorded at the Kettle Moraine Low Poweshiek skipperling was listed under Prairie SNA was 28 on July 8, 1995 Poweshiek skipperling historical records occur in one general location— the Species at Risk Act as Threatened in (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.). Canada in July 2005 (COSEWIC 2003). Preliminary attempts in 2000 to 2003 to a complex of several nearby small sites within the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve—in A recovery strategy is now in place for augment the population with adults the species in Canada (Environment from Scuppernong SNA and captive- far southern Manitoba, near the United Canada 2012), which includes critical reared larvae were not successful States border. Poweshiek skipperlings habitat designations within and adjacent (Borkin 2012a, pers. comm.). A single were first recorded in Canada near Vita, to The Nature Conservancy of Canada Poweshiek skipperling was sighted Manitoba, in 1985 at each of seven Tall Grass Prairie Preserve there on July 2, 2004, but none were prairies surveyed, and populations were (Environment Canada 2012, p. ii). found in surveys conducted in 2007– described as abundant but localized 2009 and 2011–2012 (Borkin 2011b, (Catling and Lafontaine 1986, p. 63). Summary of Comments and pers. comm.; Borkin 2012a and 2012c, Poweshiek skipperlings were found at Recommendations pers. comm.). Two Poweshiek 15 of 18 locations surveyed within the skipperlings were recorded in 2010 at same area in 2002 (COSEWIC 2003, p. In the proposed rule published on this site (Wisconsin DNR2012, in litt.); 5). October 24, 2013 (78 FR 63574), we however, no photographs or voucher The Poweshiek skipperling is requested that all interested parties specimens confirm the sighting. This currently present at one location in submit written comments on the site was surveyed less intensively than Canada, The Nature Conservancy of proposal by December 23, 2013, during Scuppernong Prairie, because of the Canada Tall Grass Prairie Preserve near which we held public meetings on species’ relatively low density and Vita, Manitoba (Westwood 2010, p. 2; November 5, 2013, in Minot, North abundance at Kettle Moraine Low Westwood et al. 2012, p. 1; Hamel et al. Dakota; November 6, 2013, in Milbank, Prairie SNA (Borkin 2012a, pers. 2013, p. 1). Poweshiek skipperlings South Dakota; November 7, 2013, in comm.). Extensive brush cutting, were historically moderately common in Milford, Iowa; November 13, 2013, in additional burns, and restoration of the areas of the preserve (Klassen et al. Holly, Michigan; and November 14, hydrology have been undertaken in 1989, p. 27). In 2002, Webster (2003, p. 2013, in Berlin, Wisconsin. We also recent years (Borkin 2012a, pers. 5) counted approximately 150 contacted appropriate Federal and State comm.). individuals, and in 2006, approximately agencies, scientific experts and Poweshiek skipperlings are present at 126 individuals were sighted across 10 organizations, and other interested a third site in Wisconsin, Puchyan sites (Westwood 2010, p. 3). Surveys of parties and invited them to comment on Prairie SNA, in Green Lake County, 10 sites in 2008 and 2009 yielded 281 the proposal. Newspaper notices although this population is small and and 79 Poweshiek skipperlings, inviting general public comment were declining (Borkin 2009, pers. comm.). respectively (Dupont 2010, pers. published in the following papers: The Poweshiek skipperling was first comm.). Poweshiek skipperling Detroit Free Press, Detroit, MI; The discovered at Puchyan Prairie in 1995, numbers in the preserve declined Detroit News, Detroit, MI; Berlin and 6 to 30 individuals have been sharply after a 647-ha (1,600-ac) wildfire Journal, Berlin, WI; The Forum of Fargo- recorded in subsequent surveys (Borkin in fall 2009 burned much of the species’ Moorhead, Fargo, ND; Minneapolis Star- 2008, in litt.; Swengel 2012, pers. habitat, including areas that likely Tribune, Minneapolis, MN; Mukwonago comm). In 2012, Swengel (2012, pers. contained the largest and highest Chief, Mukwonago, WI; The Des Moines comm.) found a maximum of three density populations (Westwood 2010, p. Register, Des Moines, IA; Bismark individuals, despite several hours of 2); surveys of comparable effort to the Tribune, Bismark, ND; The Argus searching over 3 days. In 2013, Swengel 2008 and 2009 surveys yielded only 13 Leader, Sioux Falls, SD. We did not (2013, pers. comm.) found a total of Poweshiek skipperlings on the preserve receive any requests for a public three individuals during 2 days of in 2010 (Westwood 2010, pp. 7–22). hearing. All substantive information searching. Surveys of 45 sites within the Tall Grass provided during comment periods has Additional sites in eight counties Prairie Reserve during 2011 resulted in either been incorporated directly into (Crawford, Grant, Iowa, Jefferson, 13 sites with positive sightings, 9 of this final determination or addressed Monroe, Rock, Sauk, and Walworth) which were new sites (Westwood et al. below. Comments specific to the have been surveyed in an attempt to 2012, p. 11; Dupont 2011, pers. comm.). proposed designation of critical habitat find undiscovered Poweshiek The average number of Poweshiek for the two species (78 FR 63625) will

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63694 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

be addressed in the final critical habitat of Mexico. There are 21 recognized Food and Water determination. species in the genus Hesperia (ibid), not (8) Comment: Peer reviewers provided 18 as cited in the proposal. Peer Reviewer Comments corrections to the lists of flowers used Our Response: We corrected the as nectar sources and the importance of In accordance with our peer review statements in the Background section of several plants as nectar sources for the policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR this final listing rule. butterflies. 34270), we solicited expert opinion Our Response: We corrected the from ten knowledgeable individuals Species Biology nectar flowers for Dakota skipper with scientific expertise that included (4) Comment: One peer reviewer accordingly in the Background section familiarity with the Dakota skipper or provided details on Dakota skipper and of this final listing rule. Also, we the Poweshiek skipperling and its Poweshiek skipperling biology, removed upright prairie coneflower, habitat, biological needs, and threats. specifically, information pertaining to fleabane, and white prairie clover from We received responses from seven of the early life stages and larval food choices, our list of important nectar species. We peer reviewers. which were learned from captive- did not remove black-eyed Susan, We reviewed all comments received rearing trials at the Minnesota Zoo. from the peer reviewers for substantive because Rigney (2013a, p. 142) reported issues and new information regarding Our Response: We have incorporated Dakota skippers were frequently the listing of the Dakota skipper or the the updated information into the observed nectaring on that species in Poweshiek skipperling. The peer Background section of this final listing Canada. reviewers generally concurred with our rule. (9) Comment: One peer reviewer methods and conclusions and provided (5) Comment: Two peer reviewers stated that the assertion that Dakota additional information, clarifications, suggested that we incorporate the skipper larvae feed only on native and suggestions to improve the final findings of two recently published grasses has not been established, and rule. Peer reviewer comments are Master’s theses (Dupont 2013, Rigney further stated that when confined with addressed in the following summary 2013a) that have new information on the no other choice, Dakota skipper larvae and incorporated into the final rule as Dakota skipper and Poweshiek may feed on a variety of native and appropriate. skipperling, including data from surveys nonnative grasses. Exotic cool-season at several locations for both species in grasses, such as Kentucky bluegrass and General Manitoba. These studies also show a smooth brome are available, and (1) Comment: Peer reviewers thought greater decline in both species in generally of good nutritional quality, that the Service’s interpretation of Canada over the last 10 years than is when overwintering larvae emerge from literature addressing threats to these indicated in the proposed listing rule. hibernation and begin feeding. The tight species was well researched. However, Our Response: We incorporated data empirical correlation between some peer reviewers suggested that from the referenced Master’s theses in occurrence of this skipper and the further research would strengthen or the Dakota skipper Background section dominance of native plants in the refine our understanding of these in this final listing rule. The new habitat, however, indicates that the butterflies. information, although important to our species requires native grasses. Our Response: The Act requires us to full understanding of the status of the Our Response: We have incorporated make a determination on the status of species throughout their ranges, does this information into the final listing species based on the best available not change our listing determinations rule, and recognize that Dakota skipper information. However, we agree that for the two species. larvae can use both native and nonnative plants as food during certain that further studies of these species (6) Comment: A peer reviewer stated stages of larval development. Some would further our understanding and that based on personal observations and exotic cool-season grasses may be help us with the recovery planning and McAlpine’s 1972 report, upon hatching, suitable larval food plants during implementation. We will consider Poweshiek skipperling larvae crawl out limited times of larval development; further research needs in our recovery near the tip of grasses, and do not crawl however, the morphology and growth of planning efforts. to the base of grasses, as was stated in these grasses may determine the (2) Comment: One peer reviewer the proposal. stated that, in the Executive Summary, suitability for the species, and if those Our Response: We corrected the the Service did not describe the effects grasses dominate a site, the chances for statement regarding Poweshiek of habitat management on butterflies, larvae finding suitable food sources is skipperling larval behavior in the but rather focused on the impacts to decreased. Background section of this final listing native vegetation. (10) Comment: One peer reviewer rule. Our Response: We have updated the provided additional information on executive summary to include the direct (7) Comment: A peer reviewer noted observations of Poweshiek skipperling mortality that may occur due to that a species’ nectar preference is oviposition and larval food use in management activities or natural usually indicated by selection in greater Wisconsin. occurrences. This subject is discussed in frequency rather than the proportion of Our Response: We have incorporated further detail in the Background section the species among all available nectar the information into the Background of this final listing rule. sources (because random selection section of this final listing rule. would be expected to result in selection (11) Comment: One peer reviewer frequency equal to the species’ corrected our interpretation of his (3) Comment: One peer reviewer proportion of the available choices). All observations on Poweshiek skipperling provided a correction to the number of of the references cited in the rule report oviposition (egg-laying) to state that subfamilies in the family Hesperiidae nectar preferences as the relative larvae need to begin feeding on very and the number of species in the genus proportion among observed choices. fine, threadlike blade tips, and that Hesperia. Specifically, the family Our Response: We clarified this point females placed eggs on fine blade tips of comprises 7 subfamilies world-wide, 4 in the Background section of this final grasses during some observed of which occur in North America, north listing rule. ovipositions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63695

Our Response: We have incorporated capable of identifying them, makes the surface and 2 cm deep as stated in the this information into the Background absence of observations in unsuitable proposed rule. section of this final listing rule. habitats weak evidence for the absence Our Response: We have corrected the (12) Comment: One peer reviewer of movement over long distances. The statement regarding larval nesting zones stated that the summary of the best reviewer further stated that, since we in the Background section of this final available information for Dakota skipper have little basis for measuring dispersal rule. dispersal is adequate and incorporates in this species, but we have no evidence Occupancy all of the information of which the that it does much dispersing, we should reviewer is aware. The reviewer did assume that dispersal is very limited. (17) Comment: Ane peer reviewer correct our interpretation of Dana’s 1997 Our Response: The Burke et al. (2011) commented on the adequacy of the mark-and-recapture study. The reviewer paper was published in a peer-reviewed categorization of population status, and stated that roads and crop-fields were scientific journal (using expert stated that it was done in an suspected to be impediments to Dakota interviews); however, we recognize the appropriately conservative way, but did skipper movement; however, this was limitations of the data therein and, not think this would affect the ultimate not explicitly tested during the study. therefore, have arrived at our conclusion decision for either species Our Response: We developed the Another reviewer wanted clarification that the Dakota skipper has low occupancy criteria to be as objective as on our basis for the estimated maximum dispersal capability based on this paper possible in light of the information we dispersal distance of the Poweshiek in conjunction with other reports and had, which was complicated by the skipperling. observations. Our Response: We corrected the variability of the frequency and lack of dispersal section of this final rule to Habitat error quantification of the survey data. We applied the occupancy rules accurately present Dana’s 1997 mark- (14) Comment: One peer reviewer consistently, in the same way and-recapture study findings, and added corrected the statement that Type B throughout the range of each species, information from an additional study. In habitat (as explained in the Background one mark-and-recapture study in with discretion given to species experts section above) was the only habitat type who were familiar (e.g., who had Manitoba, the Poweshiek skipperling inhabited by the Dakota skipper in was found within 50 m (165 ft) of its conducted relatively recent site visits or Minnesota, as the species has been butterfly surveys) with the sites within original capture location (Dupont 2013, documented in other habitat types, p. 69). Besides this study in Manitoba, their State. Using the best information particularly in Type A habitat in Kittson available, we attempted to balance our which had too few recaptures to make and Stearns Counties. any statistically significant conclusions, determination as to whether the species Our Response: We corrected the we are unaware of any other dispersal was likely present or not at a particular statement regarding Dakota skipper studies for the species. Therefore, we location. We determined that at sites habitat types in Minnesota in this final used Dakota skipper (and dispersal where the species was detected during listing rule. It should be noted, however, studies on this species) as a surrogate the most recent survey, if the survey that there is only one recent (2009) species to estimate the maximum was conducted in 2002 or more record of a Dakota skipper in Kittison dispersal distance of the Poweshiek recently, this was a reasonable skipperling (e.g., Dana 1991, Dana 1997, County, Minnesota, and two sites in timeframe to assume its presence, if Skadsen 1999a), and verified our Stearns County where the species is there was no evidence of habitat assumptions with expert opinion and possibly extirpated. destruction or significant degradation of Burke (2011). Experts generally agreed (15) Comment: One peer reviewer the habitat. Some other comments, that 1.6 km (1.0 mi) was a reasonable stated that the assertion in our proposed however, indicated that the 10-year estimate for Poweshiek skipperling rule that Dakota skipper larvae are timeframe was too long to assume dispersal distance (Westwood 2012b, ‘‘particularly vulnerable to desiccation presence of an annual species, such as pers. comm.; Dana 2012b, pers. comm.). during dry summer months’’ was a these butterflies, while others thought However, according to Burke et al. hypothesis, with no confirming we should still be assuming presence at (2011), the Poweshiek skipperling was evidence. The paper cited only surveyed locations with detections much farther less mobile than the Dakota skipper. occupied habitat and did not test back (prior to 1993), if we had no Since experts generally assumed the unoccupied areas for the same evidence that the habitat hadn’t been maximum dispersal distance of the parameters. destroyed there. However, we believe Dakota skipper was 1 km (0.6 mi), we Our Response: We realize the that we have taken the most reasonable used 1 km (0.6 mi) as a conservative limitations of Royer’s 2008 study, and approach to defining occupancy, used maximum dispersal distance for the have corrected our interpretations the best available scientific information Poweshiek skipperling. accordingly in this final rule; appropriately, and have been consistent (13) Comment: One peer reviewer specifically, the sampling design in making this determination. questioned the accuracy of the mobility (edaphic parameters were measured (18) Comment: One peer reviewer value assigned to the Dakota skipper only in occupied areas, and no noted that it would be useful to clarify from the Burke et al. (2011) publication. unoccupied areas were examined to test the importance of unknown sites and to The reviewer suggested that the the significance of the findings) does not determine if habitat in ‘‘unknown’’ sites, strongest evidence for limited dispersal allow for statistically significant and sites where extirpation has capabilities is the absence of conclusions. presumed to have occurred, is actually observations outside of native-prairie (16) Comment: One peer reviewer in a condition to support future habitat. Butterflies that are highly corrected the definition given for ‘‘larval populations, particularly for future mobile are occasionally observed in nesting zones’’ measured for edaphic reintroductions. unsuitable habitat; however, factors characteristics in Royer (2008). The Our Response: It is important to such as the rarity of the species, its ‘‘primary larval nest zone’’ in which distinguish among sites where the small size and inconspicuous they measured temperature and species is likely extirpated, where the appearance, and the rarity of observers humidity is described as 0–2 cm above species is still present, and where we that are both interested in skippers and the soil surface, not between the soil are unsure of the species’ presence, in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63696 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

order to determine the current status of present at the remaining three sites (all necessary nectar plants and larval food these species. The habitat at individual in Minnesota), because the best plants, but presence of specific plant sites varies, but where we had evidence information indicates that the sites’ species and suitability for the Dakota that the habitat was destroyed, we habitats are still suitable for the skipper must be verified by other means considered those sites to be extirpated butterfly, and, therefore, despite the lack (e.g., on the ground plant surveys). The (and, thus, unsuitable for future of recent surveys, the species may still second statement refers to the reintroductions). The habitat at other be present there. possibility of yet undiscovered areas of sites may still be suitable for one or both (22) Comment: A peer reviewer noted suitable habitat where the Dakota species, and its role in future recovery that at several points the proposed rule skipper may exist, because not every efforts, such as reintroductions, will be indicates that survey efforts may vary in area that is suitable has been surveyed considered during the recovery number of visits, but that certain survey for the species. planning and implementation phase for results were not considered, because (24) Comment: A peer reviewer noted these species. they were not conducted at the that survey site selection may be (19) Comment: One peer reviewer appropriate time. The peer reviewer influenced by the expert’s knowledge of requested that we define some terms questioned whether we can presume potential habitats, land ownership, and used in the proposed rule; in particular, that the surveys that were considered the ability to gain landowner permission the terms ‘‘positive detections,’’ are comparable, regardless of the to access areas for surveys. ‘‘detection rate,’’ and ‘‘liv’’. number of visits visits, whether those Our Response: We acknowledge that Our Response: Positive detections surveys all meet some minimum survey sites may be selected for a refers to the number of times the species criteria, and whether there was a variety of reasons. A site may be was detected during a survey. Detection standard survey effort measurement. surveyed because there is known rate is calculated as the number of times Our Response: Since the purpose of suitable prairie habitat in an area, but the species was detected (at a singular site surveys differed by site, the amount the exact survey location may depend site or groups of sites), divided by the of effort also varied. For example, if the on other variables, such as the ability to number of surveys (at a singular site or goal of the survey was to verify if the gain landowner permission to survey. groups of sites). Finally, ‘‘liv’’ refers to species was present at a particular the page number in the preface of a location, a surveyor may have stopped Status and Trends cited publication (Roman numeral for the survey effort as soon as the first (25) Comment: One peer reviewer page 54). individual was detected, which may provided additional 2009 data for the (20) Comment: Does the definition of have occurred after a short, one-time Felton Prairie site in Minnesota. species extirpation from a site apply to visit. On the other hand, if the survey Our Response: We incorporated this surveys conducted in 1993, or to those purpose was to count individuals data into this final listing rule. done more recently? during the peak flight of a species, the (26) Comment: One peer reviewer Our Response: We considered the site may have been visited every day requested clarification on the butterfly species to be extirpated from a site if throughout the adult flight period, and survey methodology and how floristic there were at least three sequential years more quantitative measurements, such diversity was rated at some of the of negative surveys, no matter the year as number of individuals observed per survey locations. those sites were surveyed, and the hour, may have been recorded. We used Our Response: The survey species has not subsequently been all types of surveys, as long as they were methodology varied among locations, documented at the site. For example, if conducted during the appropriate time years, surveyors, and by other factors, a site was only surveyed in 1991, 1995, of the year (mid-June through mid- to and it is difficult to succinctly describe and 1999, and there were no positive late July), and during appropriate the methodology used for more than 20 detections of the species during all 3 conditions (e.g., generally wind speeds years of surveys for hundreds of survey years, we assumed that the species is less than 16 mph, unless the species sites. For that reason, we examined the extirpated from that site. The species was detected at higher speeds). data in terms of the rate of positive occupancy at that site would not change Furthermore, we only considered detections over the years at each survey unless the species is detected at that site surveys from individual surveyors who location as a way to compare data across in the future. We have clarified this are able to reliably identify the species multiple survey methods and years. We definition in the Background section of in the field. applied certain standards that each this final listing rule. (23) Comment: A peer reviewer noted survey must meet (see response to (21) Comment: One peer reviewer that the proposed rule states that comment 22, above). In this final listing, wanted further clarification on our existing models are unable to identify we describe survey methods or floristic justification for including four Dakota specific plant species, invasive species, quality determination methods for skipper sites with older records in the and floristic quality, and the Service specific locations when it is necessary present occupancy category. The concludes that unbroken grasslands to understand the results for a particular reviewer suggested we review the ‘‘may not contain the specific native survey, and describe typical survey and previous densities of the species at the prairie plants that the Dakota skipper floristic methodologies in the four sites and the proximity of nearby requires. . . .’’ This statement appears Background section of this final rule. sites from which individuals could to be contradicted later in the (27) Comment: A peer reviewer recolonize the sites in question. document. commented that the number of Our Response: The species occupancy Our Response: We clarified the historical populations of Dakota skipper at one of four South Dakota sites has statements in this final listing rule. The that remain extant is probably been updated to ‘‘unknown’’ after intent of the first statement is to overestimated, given the results of further review of the information acknowledge that existing habitat recent resurvey efforts. In particular, available for the site, including 2013 models cannot identify specific species this peer reviewer questioned whether it survey data that were not available to us or determine floristic quality necessary was realistic to assume species presence at the time we drafted the proposed to support Dakota skipper populations. at five Minnesota sites, given the rule. However, there is no evidence to The models may be useful in narrowing dramatic declines and apparent suggest that the species is not still down areas that may contain the extirpation of populations at some of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63697

best sites within recent years. The Our Response: We incorporated 2013 sites, the occupancy status at both sites reviewer suggested assigning those sites survey results in this final listing rule. is unknown. as ‘‘possibly present’’ or ‘‘status (30) Comment: A peer reviewer (34) Comment: A peer reviewer unknown’’ category, and targeting these suggested that the Dakota skipper commented that the low numbers of sites for future surveys to determine the population densities as described in Poweshiek skipperling observed in 2012 species’ presence, particularly because 2003 and 2007 status assessments may at Scuppernong SNA were at least recent declines do not appear to be due no longer accurately describe the partially due to the spring burns of 25– to habitat degradation or loss. populations and the threats causing 30 percent of their prime breeding Our Response: Based on 2013 survey population declines. For example, habitat at that location. The range of data, we changed the occupancy for reported sightings of Dakota skippers variation of the maximum numbers several sites. When determining species within the Riding Mountain National observed in 2009–2012 may be skewed occupancy at a site, we balanced Park in Manitoba (Walleyn 2002) are due to the low numbers observed in information on habitat succession with likely not valid; there are no voucher 2010, when the peak flight may have the available survey data to avoid falsely specimens to confirm the report. There been missed due to an early flight and assuming the species is absent from are no known sites that are owned by late survey effort. The anticipated less-surveyed sites that still have the Government in Canada. increase in the population in 2012 due suitable habitat. Our Response: We incorporated to a mild winter and early spring (28) Comment: A peer reviewer updated information regarding several phenology was not observed, which commented that, based on surveys sites in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. may indicate that the burn killed a high conducted in 2013, the status of both We have no records of any confirmed number of larvae. the Dakota skipper and the Poweshiek Dakota skipper sites within the Riding Our Response: We clarified the skipperling in Minnesota is likely more Mountain National Park in Manitoba. statements regarding the uncertainty of (31) Comment: One peer reviewer dire than suggested in the proposal. No the effect that the 2012 spring burn had noted that there has been a decline in Dakota skippers or Poweshiek on the Poweshiek skipperling the number of individual Dakota skipperlings were observed during population at that location. It is difficult skippers observed during the flight duplicate surveys conducted at 13 sites. to make cause-and-effect statements period compared to the populations During single surveys conducted later in without direct measures of larvae observed in 2002 and 2007. The current the flight period (the time when adult mortality following a burn. population estimates are much lower (35) Comment: A peer reviewer stated butterflies are able to fly) at two than those described in Webster’s 2002 that the same protocol has been used for additional sites in Clay County, MN, six and 2007 reports. Furthermore, the Poweshiek skipperling surveys in Dakota skippers were seen at one of methods for estimating densities have Wisconsin since the early 1990s—a those sites and no Poweshiek changed; survey methodology has modified Pollard transect count with a skipperling were observed at either site. become more rigorous, with 2 to 5 visits set transect pattern covering 6 ha (15 ac) Both sites had fairly good numbers per site per year from 2009–2013 of area and 40 minutes to complete. during 2008 surveys. Additionally, one compared to single visits prior to 2008. Our Response: We clarified the peer reviewer suggested that we Our Response: We incorporated 2013 methodology used at the Scuppernong incorporate results from 2013 surveys of data into this final listing rule. Due to SNA sites in the Background section of sites in Kittson County, Minnesota. No largely negative results from 2013 this final listing rule. Dakota skippers were observed at Lake surveys, the occupancy status of the Factors Affecting the Species Bronson in 2013; however, there was species at several sites has been updated one highly likely sighting, and the area in this final listing rule. (36) Comment: A peer reviewer contains moderate-quality habitat. The (32) Comment: One peer reviewer suggested that it would be useful to rank Frenchman’s Bluff sites in Minnesota stated that there is a DuPage County, or evaluate risks to the butterfly were surveyed on July 11, 2013, which Illinois, record of a Poweshiek populations as they relate to was during the period of peak skipperling—the specimen was management recommendations. For abundance in the phenologically collected in 1968 near the DuPage River, example, would haying carry a lower (relationship between a periodic and was only recently identified as a risk of causing extirpations? The level of biological phenomenon and climatic Poweshiek skipperling. risk, however, would depend on the conditions) delayed year, but the Dakota Our Response: We have added the type, duration, and timing of haying skipper was not observed. The DuPage County record to the Illinois activities versus the type of fire estimated probability of the species status and distribution section of this management applied to sites. presence at the site is 90 percent, based final listing rule. Our Response: Ranking management on the abundance of habitat and purple (33) Comment: One peer reviewer methods goes beyond the scope of this coneflower in bloom. stated that, because no Poweshiek final listing document and is more Our Response: We incorporated the skipperlings were observed in 2013 at appropriate for recovery planning. 2013 data into this final listing rule. Due Scuppernong Scientific and Natural Furthermore, management to several negative results from 2013 Area (SNA) in Wisconsin, nor at the recommendations may vary for each surveys, particularly in Minnesota, the nearby Wilton Road site, those location, based on the habitat type and occupancy status at several sites has populations may be extirpated. The peer condition; therefore, it may not be been updated in this final listing rule. reviewer also stated that the apparent possible to generalize the level of risk We still determine that the Dakota decline in numbers was also observed in associated with various management skipper should be listed as threatened, Michigan. types. and provide justification for our Our Response: We have updated the (37) Comment: One peer reviewer determination in this final listing rule. Background section of this final listing commented on the level of private (29) Comment: One peer reviewer rule to include the 2013 data for those landowner awareness of the species and suggested that we incorporate two locations. Because there are just one its status on their lands. Specifically, in information from a 2013 report of or two years of negative data at the Canada, most private landowners are butterfly surveys in South Dakota. Scuppernong SNA and Wilton Road unaware of the presence of the Dakota

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63698 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

skipper, and this may also be true for low impacts on the species, and the species control to more accurately private landowners in the United States. criteria we use to define those reflect the proceedings of the Service Even where current management on categories, were developed specifically workshop (Service 2006) and Smart et lands may be conducive to the species, to guide our analysis of the factors al. (2011). Smart et al. (2011) used it is not typically due to a conscious affecting the species, and are not repeated clipping methods to simulate effort to conserve the species. intended as guidelines for conservation intensive early-season grazing and Landowner apathy should be efforts. Conservation guidelines for the discusses the potential for using grazing considered a threat of considerable Dakota skipper are available (online at as a tool to improve native prairie under concern. http://www.fws.gov/midwest/ certain conditions. Our Response: We agree that some endangered//dask/ (42) Comment: One peer reviewer said landowners may not be aware of the DASKconservationguidelines.html), and that recent statistics related to habitat presence of either butterfly on their we are developing similar guidelines for conversion show that the statement, lands and that land may not be the Poweshiek skipperling. In those ‘‘The economic benefit of grazing to intentionally managed for the guidelines, we recommend that haying ranchers may also benefit the species at conservation of the species, but rather activities occur after the adult flight some sites by deterring conversion of used in ways that are inadvertently period. remnant prairies to row crop favorable to the species. We have (40) Comment: A peer reviewer asked agriculture’’ is out-of-date, and said this discussed this issue further in Factor E whether, in the grazing section of the sentence contributes little to the of this final listing rule. In the United proposed rule, did the Service mean argument that remaining habitat is States, we have notified private that even when grazing is hard enough secure. landowners of most of the sites where to eliminate the skipper, the habitat Our Response: We clarified the we believe the species is still present or potential isn’t completely destroyed, as statement on conversion in this final its status is unknown, and many of the it is by mining or plowing, and can be rule to reflect the current economic sites where the species is extirpated or restored? conditions that row crop agriculture is possibly extirpated, but where the Our Response: This is correct, and we generally more economically profitable habitat may still be suitable for the clarified the language in this rule to than light grazing. species. We will continue to focus on more clearly state that, unlike habitat (43) Comment: A peer reviewer noted public awareness and work destroyed by mining or plowing, for that the proposed rule includes little cooperatively with landowners example, intensely grazed habitat has discussion of soil compaction as a result following listing. potential to recover or be restored. of grazing. A field demonstration by (38) Comment: One peer reviewer Attempts have been made to restore Natural Resources Conservation Service asked for clarification on the reduction prairie remnants that have been plowed (NRCS) staff showed that soil of Dakota skipper range, specifically or mined (where significant soil compaction on a heavily grazed pasture what was meant by our statement of ‘‘an disturbance has occurred), but such was almost as hard as a brick, and very approximately 690-km (430-mi) restorations have not been successful for little of the water falling on it soaked in. reduction of its range’’ the Dakota skipper or Poweshiek Soil of this character would be quite Our Response: We have removed this skipperling, at least in observable difficult for the larvae of Dakota skipper phrase from this final listing rule, timeframes. to penetrate for shelter construction, because it was unclear. The Dakota (41) Comment: A peer reviewer noted causing them to be more exposed to skipper is considered to be extirpated that the proposal asserts that ‘‘grazing is predators, parasitoids, and other from Illinois and Iowa and no longer one of the primary treatments for environmental stresses. The Poweshiek occurs in eastern Minnesota. controlling smooth brome and skipperling would not be affected by enhancing native plant diversity in Factor A compaction, as it doesn’t burrow. prairies that have been invaded by this Our Response: We agree that soil (39) Comment: One peer reviewer nonnative grass species.’’ The peer compaction due to heavy grazing may recommended that the date of first reviewer stated that the assertion goes cause the Dakota skipper to be more allowable haying be after July 22, beyond anything in the cited document exposed to predators, parasites, and because some adult flight has been (Service 2006). There is no supporting other environmental stresses, such as documented after the date of July 16, research for grazing reducing brome, fire, than if they were able to build which was our recommendation for the while at the same time maintaining or underground shelters, and we have earliest haying. Another peer reviewer improving the native species taken this into consideration in our noted that in Manitoba, August 1 is the composition. There is, however, support evaluation of the threats to the species. recommended earliest haying date at for the opposite—that grazing can (44) Comment: A peer reviewer Dakota skipper and Poweshiek stimulate brome and reduce native commented that the effects of grazing in skipperling sites, although little haying diversity. Smart et al. (2011) discuss Manitoba and Saskatchewan, as stated is occurring where the Poweshiek grazing as a promising possibility, based in Webster (2007), may not be skipperling is present. Sites should not on inferential, circumstantial, and applicable under current population be hayed within 3 to 4 weeks of the anecdotal information, and the group scenarios. Even light grazing may be beginning of the adult flight period to agreed that experimental investigation is detrimental on dry short-grass prairie prevent destruction of nectar plants. a big need. More accurately, the citation sites prior to and during the adult flight While there may be situations in the would support this statement: ‘‘grazing period. United States where sites undergo may be a valuable tool for controlling Our Response: We incorporated this haying ‘‘no more than every other year,’’ smooth brome invasion and maintaining information into the Factor A threats most sites in Manitoba are hayed for native diversity in prairies, especially analysis of this final listing rule, below. several years in a row, but there are no where circumstances make the use of (45) Comment: A peer reviewer stated studies on the impact of repeat annual fire difficult.’’ that potash mining, gravel mining, haying. Our Response: We clarified the flooding, and associated flooding Our Response: Our categorization of statement regarding grazing as a protection activities may be significant stressors as having high, medium, or potential management tool for invasive threats to these species in Canada.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63699

Our Response: We incorporated this Our Response: We are aware of four conclude that the level of impact from information into the Factor A threats sites in Canada where the Dakota disease, parasitism, and predation is analysis of this final listing rule, below. skipper is now extirpated or possibly uncertain, but do not dismiss the (46) Comment: One peer reviewer extirpated due to habitat destruction. possibility that these factors may recommended that we not include the Only sites where we believed the become significant in the future. research from an unpublished paper by species is currently present or possibly Factor D Schlicht (2001a), due to serious flaws in present (unknown) were evaluated in the methodology. our threats assessment. (54) Comment: A peer reviewer Our Response: Because of serious (51) Comment: One peer reviewer commented that, in North Dakota, the concern over the methods used in this provided details on Poweshiek fundamental purpose of management of unpublished paper, we removed the skipperling populations following State School lands is economic, not information from Schlicht (2001a) from prescribed burns in Manitoba (based on scientific or environmental. this final listing rule (under Factor A— Dupont 2013). Specifically, Poweshiek Consequently, if such land does not Fire), below. skipperling populations were most produce income for the State, it may be (47) Comment: A peer reviewer stated numerous in sites burned 5 to 8 years subjected to deliberate change in that the discussion on threats from fire previously. The species was absent in management strategy, including sale at in the proposed rule focuses on sites that were burned the previous year, auction. The Dakota skipper’s security controlled burns, but wildfires are a in small numbers in areas that were at no fewer than two sites in North serious problem in Manitoba and burned 2 to 4 years prior, and absent Dakota, therefore, depends on the previously inhabited sites in from areas that were burned 10 or more economic value of hay, because those northwestern Minnesota. Due to the years before the survey. sites are on North Dakota Trustlands highly fragmented nature and Our Response: We have incorporated and are currently under haying comparatively small size of sites, this information under Factor A of this management. wildfire may be a greater threat than final listing rule, below. Our Response: We have incorporated either haying or grazing activities. Factor C this information into Factor D of this Our Response: We considered final listing rule. wildfires to have moderate to high (52) Comment: One peer reviewer (55) Comment: A peer reviewer stated impacts to Dakota skipper and provided additional information on that the Poweshiek skipperling was Poweshiek skipperling populations; the Wolbachia, a bacteria affecting many listed as State-endangered in Minnesota impacts would depend on the timing, butterfly species. on August 19, 2013. intensity, and extent of the burn. We Our Response: We incorporated the Our Response: We have updated the discuss wildfires in Manitoba in the new information into our discussion on State status of the Poweshiek Background (population distribution Wolbachia under Factor C of this final skipperling in Minnesota in this final and status) section and in Factor E of listing rule, below. rule. (53) Comment: A peer reviewer this final rule, and considered that Factor E fragmentation due to stochastic events, commented that parasitism, predation, such as wildfires, may lead to extinction and disease may be significant stressors (56) Comment: One peer reviewer at isolated sites (Factor E). to Poweshiek skipperlings and Dakota stated that, although the Service has not (48) Comment: One peer reviewer skippers. A hypothesis in the rapid collected much direct evidence of provided a link to the Northern decline of the Poweshiek skipperling, threats to populations of the Poweshiek Tallgrass Prairie and possibly the Dakota skipper, is that skipperling in North Dakota compared Conservation Conference Working a newly virulent pathogen or a new to Dakota skippers in the State, it is Group Reports Synthesis. parasitoid has increased mortality above reasonable to assume that the same Our Response: We added the normal levels. The small number of factors that affect the Dakota skipper reference to the discussion regarding predation and parasitization events that have similarly affected the Poweshiek conservation efforts under Factor A in were observed is evidence only of the skipperling, because the two species this final listing rule, below. difficultly in documenting such events. share a preponderance of habitat (49) Comment: A peer reviewer noted Dana (1991, pp. 26–27) reported characteristics, and often are sympatric that, in the Conservation Efforts To observing predation on the butterfly by (have overlapping ranges). Reduce Habitat Destruction, and large robber flies Our Response: The Service agrees Modification, or Curtailment of Its (Asilidae), which are common in upland with the reviewer’s statement. We also Range section of the proposed rule, prairie habitats. The peer reviewer also think that the reverse is true: It is there was reference to a 1995 expert cited and discussed several studies that reasonable to assume that Dakota panel and plan. The peer reviewer asked pertain to predation on butterflies. skipper may be vulnerable to the factors whether an actual plan was developed. Our Response: We reviewed the that have caused dramatic declines in Our Response: The group outlined a McCabe (1981) and Dana (1991) reports the Poweshiek skipperling, but perhaps plan for surveying populations and again and considered additional with a delay in timing. We consider this characterizing sites and habitats at information on the normal population possibility in our analysis. priority areas, identifying and dynamics of insects, how these factors (57) Comment: One peer reviewer recommending management needs, may explain the rapid decline of the provided detailed information on the monitoring, and outreach and Poweshiek skipperling, and perhaps the size and isolation of Dakota skipper education; however, this plan was not Dakota skipper, and how these factors sites in central Manitoba. These sites are drafted or finalized. may affect small, isolated populations in generally greater than 158 ac (64 ha), (50) Comment: A peer reviewer noted the future. We cannot conclude with and all are separated by 1 km (0.6 mi). that, in a number of incidences within certainty that parasitism and predation Several sites are separated by many the last decade in Canada, sites have are significant stressors, because these kilometers (miles). The reviewer also had general population declines or sites occurrences are extremely difficult to suggested that the Service consider the have been lost to intense agricultural observe, and only a few studies implications of the separation of the use. document these events. Therefore, we U.S. and Canada sites.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63700 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Our Response: We have incorporated will begin the recovery planning process landowners can comply with section 9 this information, supplemented by once the final listing becomes effective. of the Act. information in two recently published (61) Comment: One peer reviewer Our Response: The Service maintains Master’s theses (Dupont 2013, Rigney wanted to know how the species would a list of counties that are within the 2013a), to update our threats analysis be treated for law enforcement current range of the species on publicly for Canadian populations. Although we purposes, in order to ensure that private accessible Web sites. We suggest that were unsure of the size of many sites in landowners and others that may have project proponents contact their State’s Canada, most sites were separated by these species on their land would U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service more than 1 km (0.6 mi); therefore, comply with section 9 of the Act. The Ecological Services Field Office for approximately 25 of the sites evaluated reviewer asked specifically about specific information on their area. The in Canada were thought to be at least unauthorized collection, handling, and species are likely to be present only in moderately affected by small size and possession that could result in a areas with suitable native-prairie isolation. The Canada sites where violation of section 9 of the Act, as habitat, and may be present in nearby Dakota skippers are considered to be listed in the ‘‘Available Conservation grass-dominated areas suitable for present are approximately 115 km (71 Measures’’ section of the proposed dispersal during the adult flight period. mi) from the nearest U.S. sites, and the listing rule. The reviewer stated that it Suitable habitats are further described Manitoba site is approximately 166 km may be likely that private citizens have in the Background section of this final (103 mi) from the nearest Poweshiek specimens of these species in their listing rule. possession. skipperling site in Minnesota. 4(d) Rule (58) Comment: A peer reviewer noted Our Response: If private citizens hold (64) Comment: A peer reviewer that South Dakota State University specimens of either species that have suggested that the 4(d) rule should conducted a climate change analysis, been collected in the past, they should exempt take caused by haying only after with an emphasis on terrestrial habitats, report these specimens to their local July 22, because the Dakota skipper in association with the revision of the conservation officer or Service flight period extends until after July 15 South Dakota Wildlife Action Plan. enforcement official to receive the appropriate documentation that they at some sites in some years. Our Response: We reviewed that were collected prior to listing. Our Response: We acknowledge that report and incorporated relevant Collecting either the Dakota skipper or extending the earliest date of haying information into Factor E of this final Poweshiek skipperling after they are from July 15 to July 22 may further listing rule. We will also consider this listed would be a violation of section 9 minimize the likelihood of adverse report during recovery planning for the of the Act, unless the collector held an effects to the Dakota skipper, but we two species. appropriate permit from the Service. will retain the July 15 date for the (59) Comment: One peer reviewer (62) Comment: One peer reviewer following reasons: First, factors other queried as to whether either species has noted that the list of nonnative species than the date in the 4(d) rule will likely been evaluated using NatureServe’s in the ‘‘Available Conservation play a greater role in determining actual Climate Change Vulnerability Index Measures’’ section of the proposed haying dates, and those factors are likely (https://connect.natureserve.org/ listing rule are already well-established to cause much of the haying conducted science/climate-change/ccvi)? species. A more meaningful list would in areas where the Dakota skipper Our Response: The Service has not include species that are not already occurs to be carried out later than the evaluated either species using established, to prevent future invasive July 22 date suggested by the NatureServe’s Climate Change species issues that negatively impact commenter. Second, the July 15 date has Vulnerability Index, but will consider these and other native species, and that been used for many years in a variety of using this tool in the recovery phase. would inform land managers of plant conservation agreements as a date to We used several studies specific to the selection for grassland or wildlife- ensure that the effects of haying on Dakota skipper and Poweshiek related plantings. nesting birds is minimized. It is skipperling, as well as general studies of Our Response: We agree that glossy typically included, for example, as a climate-related changes in the Midwest buckthorn, reed canary grass, and leafy required provision in grassland and throughout North America. See the spurge are well established in many conservation easements purchased on Climate Change section of this final rule areas within the range of the species. It private lands by the Service. By for more details on the studies used. is still important for landowners to retaining the July 15 date, we minimize (60) Comment: A peer reviewer know that these nonnative species are the likelihood of causing confusion, and suggested that the Service should detrimental to the butterflies and their encourage greater cooperation with our provide more detail on the need for habitat, so they may avoid introducing conservation partners. Third, even if future planning, potential dispersal them to additional areas or conduct haying is conducted immediately after corridors, restoration of existing sites, activities that would spread their July 15, it may be sufficient to minimize and potential reintroduction and growth. We added purple loosestrife to adverse effects to Dakota skippers at augmentation sites. The high degree of the list of invasive plants as well. most sites and in most years. Moreover, habitat fragmentation and isolation of Purposeful introductions of any of the in years when the flight period is sites combined with the limited above species would be detrimental to ongoing past July 15, the Service can dispersal ability of these species have the butterflies and their habitats. This work voluntarily with landowners and potential for long-term implications, list is not exhaustive, and other land managers to delay haying until the and management actions, even if nonnative species may be destructive to flight period is over. effective in short-term conservation of the butterflies or their habitats. local populations, may not be enough to (63) Comment: A peer reviewer asked Comments From Federal Agencies prevent the species from extirpation. how the habitats in which the (65) Comment: The National Guard in Our Response: We agree with the peer Poweshiek skipperling or Dakota North Dakota (NDARNG) commented on reviewer that detailed planning will be skipper is known to occur will be their concern that training activities on needed to recover the Dakota skipper defined, and whether that information the Camp Grafton South (CGS) and and Poweshiek skipperling. The Service will be available to the public, such that Garrison Training Area (GTA) will be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63701

restricted and that the NDARNG would (68) Comment: A Federal agency to minimize disturbance of Poweshiek be overwhelmed with new permitting commented that some native-prairie skipperling habitat during their adult and reporting requirements due to the plant species decrease without proper flight period for the same reasons. listing of the Dakota skipper. The grazing management, and long-term (70) Comment: A Federal agency NDARNG requested that either State- monitoring is needed to properly noted that Britten and Glasford (2002, p. owned or federally-owned land that is examine plant species declines. 373), cited in the proposed rule, does operated and managed by the NDARNG Furthermore, plant species declines may not identify grazing as a disturbance, as be exempt from these proposed rules be due to other factors, such as the proposed rule indicates. per proposed § 17.47(b)(3) for military landscape position, climatic factors, Our Response: Although Britten and training conducted on lands covered historical and current management, and Glasford (2002) did not specifically under an Integrated Natural Resources other ecological site conditions. Several identify grazing as a disturbance, other Management Plan (INRMP). papers cited in the proposed rule information sources indicate that Our Response: Neither the CGS nor incorrectly identify forb species that grazing can disturb adult Dakota the GTA was included in the proposed decrease due to grazing, such as the skippers and Poweshiek skipperlings, critical habitat designation. However, purple coneflower. because it may remove important nectar according to section 4(b)(B)(iii) of the Our Response: We acknowledge that sources (e.g., Rigney 2013a, pp. 143, Act, the Department of Defense must long-term monitoring data would be a 153). Both the beneficial and negative still comply with section 9 of the Act, valuable indicator of important plant effects of grazing are further discussed including the prohibition preventing species declines. Unfortunately, we do in Factor A of this final listing rule, extinction and taking of endangered not have long-term monitoring below. species and threatened species. established at most sites; therefore, we Comments From States (66) Comment: The NDARNG must rely on the best information provided additional reports by Fauske available. Most references to grazing (71) Comment: A State commented for surveys conducted in the CGS and impacts on prairie butterflies are based that a comprehensive survey effort GTA in 2003 and 2004. The National on ancillary observations made during throughout the range of the two species Guard also mentioned surveys that were research focused on other management is prudent, if not necessary, before any conducted by Fauske in 2013 at those impacts. Some of these may be listing can occur. locations. Dakota skipper was not observational data of changes in site Our Response: Under the Act, we are observed at those sites in those years. conditions at a particular site from one obligated to use the best available Our Response: We incorporated the year to the next following changes in scientific and commercial information data from the 2003 and 2004 reports management regimes. We cite a few in decisions on whether to list a species. into this final listing rule. We have not studies that show that certain levels of In this case, the best available been able to obtain the data from grazing remove nectar sources and are, information included results from Fauske’s 2013 surveys, but did therefore, likely to adversely affect surveys, reports by scientists and incorporate the National Guard’s claim Dakota skipper populations (e.g., Rigney biological consultants, natural heritage of negative surveys in 2013 into this 2013a, pp. 143, 153). We discuss data, and expert opinion from biologists final listing rule. grazing, including the effects of grazing with extensive experience studying the (67) Comment: One commenter stated management in different habitat types, Dakota skippers and Poweshiek that two publications (Grant et al. 2009, further in Factor A of this final listing skipperling and their habitats, whether DeKeyser et al. 2009) that discuss rule, below. published or unpublished. We are management of prairies show that (69) Comment: A Federal agency required to make a decision based on sometimes prescriptions for long-term noted that the proposed listing rule that available data. Also, see response to management of habitat are at odds with states that a large portion of the Dakota comment 76. short-term management of the species. skipper habitat should remain ungrazed (72) Comment: The Minnesota For example, no or light grazing or late- or lightly grazed during the adult flight Department of Natural Resources (MN season haying may lead to invasion of period. Management focused on DNR) agrees with the Service’s cool-season exotic grasses and loss of preserving every life stage of the conclusion that these species warrant native forb and grasses. Thus no butterflies will actually lead to their protection under the Act and fully management could sometimes be demise by inadvertently destroying their supports the proposed threatened status considered a threat, just as prairie habitat. for the Dakota skipper and the proposed conversion may cause take. Our Response: Britten and Glasford endangered status for the Poweshiek Our Response: We agree that no (2002) recommend minimizing skipperling. The MN DNR has a long management or lack of disturbance may disturbance of Dakota skipper habitat history of commitment to the be a threat to Dakota skipper and during the flight period (late June to conservation of these species and has Poweshiek skipperling habitat and that early July) to maximize genetically been an active participant in recent haying, grazing, and fire may be an effective population sizes (the number efforts to assess their status in important management tool for these of adults reproducing), to offset the Minnesota. The MN DNR agrees with butterflies, if carried out appropriately. effects of genetic drift of small the Service’s conclusions regarding These topics are discussed further in populations (change in gene frequency factors affecting the species and their Factor A in this final listing rule, below. over time due to random sampling or resulting status. In light of recent Adaptive management may be necessary chance, rather than natural selection). findings, the MN DNR has reclassified at many locations to take into account All life stages are essential to the both species as endangered under the underlying causes of habitat survival of the species, including the Minnesota’s Endangered Species degradation and the long-term and adult flight stage, which is when Statute, effective August 19, 2013. short-term consequences of management breeding occurs. Removal of important Our Response: We appreciate our to the habitat and the species. We will nectar sources during the short adult partnership with MN DNR and their be addressing management at specific flight period can adversely affect the supporting comments, and have locations during recovery planning for Dakota skipper (e.g., Rigney 2013a, pp. updated the information regarding the both species. 143, 153). Thus, it is equally important reclassification of both species under

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63702 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ South Dakota and Minnesota, 79 and in Factor D of this final listing rule. section7/s7process/s7guid_ 148 additional locations, respectively, cons.html#dask. We will continue to were surveyed for the species in the Habitat refine these materials to help reduce period 1991–2013 (USFWS 2014, (73) Comment: The North Dakota uncertainty as to where Dakota skippers unpubl. geodatabase). Game and Fish Department suggests that may occur. Dakota skippers are present Many of these sites have been the Service use NRCS Ecological Sites of on only a subset of native grassland and surveyed multiple times over several North Dakota as a means to describe are unlikely to be present in areas where years. Surveys for the Dakota skipper specific potential habitat, rather than key habitat features are lacking. Those are typically conducted only in areas Type A and Type B habitat as described features are described in the that have the particular plant species in the proposed rule. The ecological site Background section of this rule and in the skipper requires. New potential sites descriptions and transition models the materials available on the Internet. surveyed are generally focused on would help direct the proper grazing As we work to conserve Dakota prairie habitat that appears suitable for prescription to promote and achieve the skippers, we will provide landowners the species and has a good potential of plant species composition appropriate and land managers with information hosting the species. Therefore, for the given site and requisites for these that is as accurate and up-to-date as researchers have a higher likelihood of two butterfly species. possible to describe the areas where the detecting the species at these sites than Our Response: We are considering species is likely to be present. In at sites randomly selected across the using NRCS ecological site descriptions addition, we will also work with these landscape. Based on these surveys, the as a tool for managers and others to parties to ensure that they understand likelihood that significant numbers of narrow down potential habitat for one what activities are likely to cause take undiscovered Dakota skipper or both species. However, NRCS of the species, whether or not the take populations occur in North Dakota, ecological site descriptions have not would be exempted under the 4(d) rule, South Dakota, or Minnesota is low. We been developed for all areas where the and what actions may be implemented acknowledge that there may be some species may be present. For the to conserve the species. undiscovered populations, however, purposes of this final listing, we found and are exploring using spatially that Type A and Type B habitat Population Status and Distribution explicit modeling to develop probability descriptions were descriptive of the (76) Comment: A State commented occurrence maps of both species, to help habitat and flowering forbs and grasses that surveys appear to be focused on direct future surveys and conservation necessary for the two butterflies. repeated visits to sites that were efforts. (74) Comment: North Dakota previously inventoried, and a systematic (77) Comment: Since the Poweshiek commented that, based on the specific search for additional sites has not been skipperling has not been detected in precipitation and evaporation rates of conducted. Furthermore, a few new South Dakota since 2002, South Dakota Dakota skipper habitat that McCabe sites have been discovered since 1996 should not be included in the listing suggests, the western area of North without such a systematic search for proposal. Further research needs to be Dakota should not be considered as part new sites, which suggests that many conducted to determine if this species is of the range for the Dakota skipper, as new sites may be found with a present in South Dakota before it is those areas do not meet those specific systematic search. Additionally, listed. rates. roadside searches for habitat are not a Our Response: According to our data Our Response: We have determined scientifically valid method for and analysis, the species’ presence is that the Dakota skipper is threatened identifying potential habitat. unknown at 36 of the total 69 sites throughout its range, which includes the Our Response: The search for where the species has been documented 18 counties where the species has been additional locations of both species has in South Dakota. The species was documented in North Dakota. The been conducted using a variety of detected at least once at all 36 of these Dakota skipper is historically known approaches over the years, and potential sites in 1993 or later; 19 of these sites from several counties in western North sites have been narrowed down on the had positive detections of the species in Dakota (e.g., McKenzie, Burke, Montrail, landscape using topographic and aerial 2002 or later. The most recent detection and Dunn counties) and is considered to maps, State natural heritage habitat of the species in South Dakota was at be present in at least two locations in mapping data, aerial surveys, roadside two sites in 2008. Surveys for the McKenzie County. The Dakota skipper surveys, and other methods. Other sites species were not conducted at any of the may still occur in areas of western North have been surveyed because of a 36 sites with unknown occupancy Dakota that may have conditions that proposed project and the known between the years 2007 and 2011, and are different from what McCabe (1981) potential for suitable habitat in the area we cannot presume that the species is describes for some of the eastern or proximity to other known locations of not persisting at a site only because counties. See the Background section of the butterflies. Many sites are repeatedly there have not been consistent annual this final listing rule for a list of surveyed to understand long-term surveys. At several sites, the species has counties in each State. trends in the presence of the species or persisted for longer than 20 years; for (75) Comment: North Dakota to quantify other population parameters. example, the Dakota skipper was first commented that it appears that any Although only a small fraction of all recorded at Scarlet Fawn Prairie in native grassland in North Dakota that grassland in North Dakota, South South Dakota in 1985 and the species has not been cultivated is potential Dakota, and Minnesota has been was detected during every survey since Dakota skipper habitat. surveyed, a significant proportion of the that date. Similarly, the Poweshiek Our Response: To more clearly define un-surveyed area is likely not suitable skipperling was first recorded at what constitutes Dakota Skipper habitat for the species. For example, the species Waubay National Wildlife Refuge in and where take of Dakota skippers may was not detected at approximately 108 1969 and was recorded during every occur, the Service developed tools to additional locations in North Dakota year the site was surveyed through help determine whether the species may that were surveyed for the species in the 2003. South Dakota is in the range of the be present in specific areas, which are period 1991–2013 (USFWS 2014, Poweshiek skipperling, and the species available on the Internet at https:// unpubl. geodatabase). Similarly, in is listed throughout its range. See our

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63703

response to comment 76 regarding current crop commodity environment cases in which the Service makes a additional surveys or research. and demand for additional cropland. jeopardy determination, the agency Our Response: We agree that offers reasonable and prudent Factor A conversion of remnant prairies is a alternatives for how the proposed action (78) Comment: A State commented significant concern. Conversion of land could be modified to avoid jeopardy. that careful implementation of grazing to agricultural and other uses is The Service will work with the and prescribed fire can be an effective discussed in Factor A of this final listing consulting agency as expeditiously as management tool in prairie remnants. rule, below. possible to complete the section 7 consulation process in a timely manner. The Service should provide clear and Factor E practical HMGs/BMPs (Habitat (84) Comment: A State asked, what Management Guidelines/Best (81) Comment: South Dakota would happen should a private Management Practices) for acceptable commented that, as part of the South landowner incidentally take either use of prescribed fire and grazing Dakota Wildlife Action Plan Revision, species during the course of routine implementation. experts at South Dakota State University farming operations on private land. Our Response: We developed Dakota conducted a climate change analysis Our Response: Under the Act, it is skipper conservation guidelines (http:// with an emphasis on terrestrial habitats. unlawful for a person to take a listed www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/ Our Response: The Service without a permit. Take is insects/dask/ appreciates this information. We defined as ‘‘harass, harm, pursue, hunt, DASKconservationguidelines.html) that reviewed the climate report and shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or address grazing, prescribed fire, weed/ included information from it into Factor collect or attempt to engage in any such invasive species control, and other E of this final listing rule. This report conduct.’’ Through regulations, the term topics, and are preparing similar will also help inform recovery planning ‘‘harm’’ is defined as ‘‘an act which guidelines for the Poweshiek and implementation. actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat skipperling. While some detail is Economic Concerns modification or degradation where it provided in terms of timing, periods of (82) Comment: A State questioned rest, and number and size of burn units, actually kills or injures wildlife by how a private landowner would be significantly impairing essential the Service stresses that effective compensated if, during the course of the implementation of the conservation behavioral patterns, including breeding, Service’s activities for monitoring the feeding, or sheltering.’’ Section 10 of the measures relies on a thorough and critical habitat areas, the private Act may be used by landowners accurate understanding of the landowner’s land or property is including private citizens, corporations, distribution and status of the Dakota damaged. Tribes, States, and counties who want to skipper and Poweshiek skipperling and Our Response: Surveys for either develop property inhabited by listed their habitat within a management area. species on private lands would only be species. Landowners may receive a These two species are likely to be non- conducted with landowner permission. permit to take such species incidentally uniformly distributed within habitat Surveys for the species and its habitat to otherwise legal activities, provided areas (e.g., Rigney 2013a, p. 140). are not destructive in nature and have they have developed an approved Therefore, a species expert should little, if any, impact on the land. habitat conservation plan (HCP). HCPs frequently assess and map habitat and (83) Comment: North Dakota include an assessment of the likely distribution of the species within commented that listing these two impacts on the species from the management areas to ensure that species will add a substantial workload proposed action, the steps that the managers may act based on correct and relative to highway improvement permit holder will take to avoid, up-to-date information. project development, construction, and minimize, and mitigate the impacts, and (79) Comment: A State asked whether maintenance, due to additional section the funding available to carry out the grazing of potential butterfly habitat 7 consultations with the Service. This steps. HCPs may benefit both other than low mesic sites will increased workload could add months landowners and the species by securing constitute take. to project timelines and would cause a and managing important habitat, and by Our Response: Such decisions will major and unnecessary disruption to the addressing economic development with require site-specific information. If a highway and road systems in North a focus on species conservation. project occurring in potential butterfly Dakota. We recognize that the Dakota skipper habitat may affect one or both species or Our Response: Although an increased and Poweshiek skipperling remain only its habitat, we suggest contacting the workload for section 7 consultations on lands where management has Service’s Ecological Service Office in may be associated with listing these two allowed them to survive. This is due to your State. species, section 4 of the Act requires good land-stewardship, and we want to (80) Comment: A State commented species to be listed as endangered or encourage management practices that that habitat modification and threatened solely on the basis of their support the butterflies. To minimize fragmentation may be a large threat to biological status and threats to their impacts to landowners and promote many grassland species. While other existence. Section 7 of the Act requires continued cooperation with them while factors may need to be addressed to Federal agencies to use their legal recovering the Dakota skipper, the protect the species, conversion of authorities to promote the conservation Service developed a 4(d) rule under the grasslands is the largest single issue. purposes of the Act and to consult with Act for that species. This 4(d) rule Once land conversions have occurred, the Service to ensure that effects of exempts incidental take of Dakota the land cannot be restored to match the actions they authorize, fund, or carry skippers caused by certain routine specific requirements of these specialist out are not likely to jeopardize the livestock operations and mowing species. Listing can be viewed by continued existence of listed species. recreational trails. Any ‘‘take’’ that private landowners as an encumbrance During consultation, the action agency results from private landowner activities and a disincentive to conserve receives a biological opinion or not exempted under the 4(d) rule would grassland; hence privately owned concurrence letter addressing the require a permit from the Service. grassland could be converted, due to the proposed action. In the relatively few Therefore, private landowners with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63704 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dakota skippers on their property Dakota, respectively, and unless the contact their local Service Ecological should become familiar with the species are discovered in additional Services field office if they are planning contents of the 4(d) rule and contact the counties, section 7 consultation would an activity that may affect one of these Service if they have questions. Actions be required only in those counties and species. For actions with a Federal that may cause ‘‘take’’ and require a on a subset of lands within those nexus, action agencies should contact permit from the Service include counties where the species may occur or their local field office to discuss the prescribed burns, haying before the where critical habitat has been timeliness of our section 7 consultation adult flight period ends, broadcast designated. You may obtain a list of process. For example, from the date that herbicide treatments, some insecticide counties in which the species may occur formal consultation is initiated, the treatments, and permanent conversion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Service is allowed 90 days to consult of the Dakota skipper’s grassland Ecological Services field office in your with the agency and applicant (if any) habitats. The 4(d) rule does not apply to State. Furthermore, these two species and 45 days to prepare and submit a take of the Poweshiek skipperling have specific habitat requirements biological opinion. Biological opinions because it is listed as endangered, and (native, unbroken prairies), and it is may include reasonable and prudent the Act does not allow 4(d) rules for likely that many action areas will not measures and terms and conditions, endangered species. Any activity that contain those types of prairie habitats. both intended to minimize the impact of would result in take of Poweshiek Therefore, project proponents should incidental take. skipperlings would first require a permit first provide the field office with a (89) Comment: A State asked whether from the Service. description of the area that would be State natural resource agencies be (85) Comment: A State commented affected by the proposed or ongoing expected to restore the species to State- that where section 7 consultations will action to determine whether a section 7 owned lands where they are considered be required is unclear. What areas consultation may be required or to be extirpated. would have to be surveyed to determine recommended. See our response to Our Response: The Service will work whether the species is present? A large comment 85 and the Background of this with the State agencies and other amount of potential habitat may need to final listing rule for additional stakeholders through recovery planning be surveyed during the short adult flight information regarding the habitats these to identify areas that would aid in period, and there are a limited number two species inhabit. recovery of these species, and determine of qualified entomologists to conduct (87) Comment: A State asked whether appropriate actions to take on those the surveys. reinitiation under section 7 of the Act lands. Our Response: The Dakota skipper will need to occur, or will any new (90) Comment: A state commented and the Poweshiek skipperling are both restrictions be recommended when new that incentive-based voluntary programs closely tied to native-prairie habitats projects begin or existing projects are work well for other species and may be and are unable to inhabit areas such as renewed. a better solution to conserving the nonnative grasslands, weedy roadsides, Our Response: Section 7(a)(2) of the species than listing and critical habitat or tame haylands. In addition, these Act requires Federal agencies to consult designations. The State would like to butterflies are not likely to inhabit with the Service to ensure that actions provide potential voluntary methods reconstructed prairies (e.g., former they fund, authorize, permit, or and programs to assist and incentivize cropland replanted to native-prairie otherwise carry out will not jeopardize landowners to implement conservation species). Therefore, the Service the continued existence of any listed measures and practices that enhance recommends that, to determine whether species or adversely modify designated butterfly habitat. a section 7 consultation may be required critical habitat. Therefore, reinitiation of Our Response: We appreciate any or recommended, action agencies section 7 consultations may be required assistance to incentivize landowners to should first coordinate with their local for ongoing, new, or revised actions that conserve these species. Voluntary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may affect the Dakota skipper or actions can have a significant Ecological Services field office and Poweshiek skipperling or their contribution to conservation. If such provide a description of the area that designated critical habitat. We measures are in place when we are would be affected, directly or indirectly, recommend contacting the U.S. Fish evaluating a species for listing, we by the proposed or ongoing action. If and Wildlife Service Ecological Services consider those measures and how they survey data are unavailable or field office in your State to determine affect the status of the species in our inconclusive for the action area, and the need for section 7 consultations on determination. The Service’s policy features of Dakota skipper or Poweshiek specific projects. regarding voluntary prelisting skipperling habitat are predominant in (88) Comment: A State asked what conservation actions (79 FR 42525, July at least part of the area, a survey by a types of conservation or mitigation 22, 2014), encourages voluntary qualified individual may be measures would be needed to offset conservation actions for non-listed recommended. The Service is potential impacts to the species or species. However, a species may still developing a list of qualified surveyors, designated critical habitat, and how will warrant listing if such voluntary actions which will be available through the the Service ensure timely approval of are not in place when we are evaluating field offices in each State. mitigation measures. a species for listing, or if those actions (86) Comment: North Dakota Our Response: The Service developed are not sufficient to affect the need to expressed concern that any impact to conservation guidelines for the Dakota list a species. We suggest you contact native grasslands in North Dakota will skipper that are available online the Service’s Ecological Services Field be considered take and require an (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/ Office in your State to discuss voluntary incidental take permit. Adjusting the endangered/insects/dask/ conservation programs in detail. timing of construction activities will not DASKconservationguidelines.html) and (91) Comment: A State suggested that avoid take because of the species’ is developing similar guidelines for the the Service should develop habitat biology. Poweshiek skipperling. We suggest that management guidelines and best Our Response: The Dakota skipper private landowners implement management practices (HMGs/BMPs) in and Poweshiek skipperling historically applicable guidelines to assist species close collaboration with State agencies occurred in 18 and 7 counties in North and habitat conservation efforts and and others knowledgeable about

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63705

effective prairie management. Many 4(d) Rule and spot application of herbicides to State-owned prairies are managed with (93) Comment: A state suggested that control noxious weeds. Our Response: In the final 4(d) rule, the support of Federal funding, and the 4(d) rule be expanded to exempt the Service clarifies that take would be HMGs/BMPs are needed immediately in take caused by prescribed burns, as it is exempted for certain activities listed in order for the State agencies to comply a valuable habitat management tool. with the Act. Such HMGs/BMPs should Our Response: Although we can the 4(d) rule when carried out in relation to routine livestock operations. include clear guidance on: Prescribed establish general guidelines for We did, however, also clarify that take fire; grazing; appropriate use of managers and landowners who are that occurred as a result of mowing herbicides on occupied sites; pesticide planning prescribed burns in Dakota native grassland for hay would be buffers around occupied sites and notice skipper habitats, we determined that it exempted if conducted after July 15 in to landowners adjacent to occupied would not be advisable to broadly transportation rights-of-way. sites; adherence to and enforcement of exempt take caused by burning in the pesticide labels; available tools and (96) Comment: A State commented 4(d) rule. The impacts of prescribed that, in the 4(d) rule, only exempting incentives, including incentives and fires on Dakota skipper populations management practices for expanding spot spraying of weeds is overly depend on numerous factors that restrictive. Leafy spurge, for example, prairie restoration to adjacent restorable warrant site-specific evaluation, lands; distinct measures for occupied cannot be effectively controlled at the including the number, proximity, and seedling stage by spot spraying. habitat and unoccupied habitat, size of populations in nearby unburned including lands targeted for restoration Our Response: We understand that areas; fuel loads; timing of the fire; there may be cases where spot-spraying or enhancement; measures for restored likelihood of escape from fire units; and habitat, and the point at which habitat is insufficient to control outbreaks of post-fire management of unburned noxious weeds. Frequent herbicide is considered restored; and importance units. If fires are proposed in areas of effectiveness monitoring and adaptive applications, however, have been where they are likely to result in take of associated with reduced diversity of management practices in ensuring that Dakota skippers, individual reviews native flowering plants in native HMGs/BMPs produce the desired should be conducted to determine rangelands (e.g., Smart et al. 2011, p. benefits to the species and their habitat. potential effects to the species. 184). Therefore, take caused by Our Response: We appreciate this (94) Comment: A state suggested that broadcast herbicide applications is not comment and look forward to working the 4(d) rule should specifically exempt exempted by the 4(d) rule. It many with our State partners in implementing mowing and haying of road rights-of- cases, Dakota skippers may not be conservation and providing assistance. way under all jurisdictions (State, present in areas where broadcast The Service has developed conservation county, or township). Exemptions applications are necessary. The Service guidelines for the Dakota skipper that should apply in the area from the road can provide technical assistance to help are available online (http:// surface to the right-of-way boundary. determine whether Dakota skipper may www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/ Our Response: We modified the 4(d) be present. If noxious weed control is insects/dask/ rule to exempt take of Dakota skippers needed where the Dakota skipper is DASKconservationguidelines.html) and caused by mowing native grassland for likely to be present, the Service will is developing similar guidelines for the hay after July 15 within transportation work with landowners or land managers Poweshiek skipperling. The Dakota rights-of-way. Except for mowing of to identify techniques that avoid take. skipper conservation guidelines section line rights-of-way and (97) Comment: One commenter address: Prescribed fire management, recreational trails, the 4(d) rule only requested guidance on whether grazing, haying and native seed harvest, exempts take of Dakota skippers that prescribed fire and the activities habitat preservation, habitat restoration, occurs as a result of mowing or haying described under the 4(d) rule could be weed/invasive species control, that is part of routine livestock ranching implemented ‘‘on sites that might have maintenance of genetic diversity within activities. Except for the two specific historically supported’’ Dakota skipper. populations, and coordinated cases mentioned above—mowing Our Response: Take of Dakota skipper management. The Service looks forward section line rights-of-way and is prohibited under the Act, unless it is to continued collaboration with State recreational trails—the 4(d) rule does a specific action that is exempted under agencies and other stakeholders to not exempt take of Dakota skippers the 4(d) rule, which applies to all State, further develop and refine these caused by mowing that does not private, or tribal lands. If an action is conservation guidelines. These produce hay for livestock consumption. implemented on a site where the Dakota guidelines will be used as a basis to Regardless, the 4(d) rule exempts take of skipper is no longer present, then take begin a discussion of HMGs/BMPs Dakota skippers only if the haying is is unlikely. An action could result in development. carried out after July 15. We also further take of Dakota skippers at sites where (92) Comment: A State suggested that, clarified that Dakota skippers do not the species has been extirpated if key if HMGs/BMPs cannot be completed inhabit tame hayland or grassland habitat features are still present and an before the effective date of the listing, (hayland or grassland planted to, and extant population inhabits a nearby the final rule should be delayed until composed primarily of, nonnative grass area. In those cases, Dakota skipper may the necessary guidance is available. species, such as smooth brome). have reoccupied the site, and we Our Response: Section 4(b)(6)(A) of (95) Comment: One commenting recommend coordinating with the the Act establishes that the Service must agency indicated its support for the 4(d) Service to ensure that a proposed make a final determination as to its rule, but also stated that it does not activity is not likely to result in take of proposed action within 1 year of support the exemption of the listed Dakota skippers. publishing the proposal, unless there is activities for purposes other than (98) Comment: One commenter stated substantial disagreement about the ranching and trail maintenance, and that the list of counties in which the sufficiency or accuracy of the available requested that the Service clarify that proposed 4(d) rule did not exempt take data on which that decision is based, for the listed activities would not be caused by grazing (Eddy, McHenry, which the Service may seek up to a 6- permitted if used for other categories of Richland, Rolette, Sargent, and month extension. actions. These activities include haying Stutsman) did not directly correspond

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63706 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

to the list of counties in which critical and this final rule, we used the best their habitats. For example, in habitat was proposed (McHenry, available scientific and commercial recognition of efforts that provide for McKenzie, Ransom, Richland, Rolette, information of which we are aware. We conservation and management of the and Wells). sought comments from independent Dakota skipper and its habitat in a Our Response: We revised the 4(d) peer reviewers to ensure that our manner consistent with the purposes of rule to exempt take caused by grazing determination is based on scientifically the Act, we developed a 4(d) rule that throughout the range of the species, and sound data, assumptions, and analysis. outlines the prohibitions, and not limited to certain counties. Thus, The peer reviewers stated that our exceptions to those prohibitions, the final 4(d) rule exempts take of proposed rule was based on the best necessary and advisable for the Dakota skippers caused by livestock available scientific information. conservation of the Dakota skipper. We grazing on all private, State, tribal, and Additionally, the results of 2013 surveys believe that exempting incidental take other non-Federal (e.g., county) lands. conducted throughout the range of both of Dakota skippers that may result from species in the United States and grazing in certain geographic areas will Public Comments information from recently published afford us more time to protect the General research conducted in Saskatchewan species’ habitats in these areas and will and Manitoba were considered in our facilitate the coordination and (99) Comment: A number of public final listing rule. partnerships needed to recover the comments opposed the listing of the (102) Comment: A commenter stated species. Dakota skipper and Poweshiek that listing under the Act and critical (105) Comment: The North Dakota skipperling as federally threatened or habitat designations are intertwined and Stockman’s Association commented that endangered species, but provided no cannot be separated, as the Service has they have policy supporting the use of substantive scientific or commercial done with these proposals. sound science in decisionmaking. Much evidence suggesting that listing is not Our Response: When a species is of the science used to develop these warranted. proposed for listing as endangered or proposals was not peer-reviewed or Our Response: While we appreciate threatened under the Endangered published, and was largely based on the opinion of all interested parties, the Species Act (Act), we must consider internal documents. The Service’s own Service must base its decision of whether there are areas of habitat we ‘‘Information Standards Under the whether to list the Dakota skipper and believe are essential to the species’ Endangered Species Act’’ policy calls Poweshiek skipperling solely on the conservation. The listing determination for ‘‘review of all scientific and other basis of the best scientific and and critical habitat determination for information used by the Services to commercial data available. the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek prepare biological opinions, incidental (100) Comment: Several comments skipperling were conducted at the same take statements, and biological stated that listing these species will time and in coordination with each assessments to ensure that any interfere with private property rights other. The proposed rules for each information used by the Services to and cause economic impacts, such as action were published on the same date, implement the Act is reliable, credible, reduction in land values, fines to but in separate documents. We are and represents the best scientific and citizens, prohibitions to development, currently working to finalize the critical commercial data available.’’ Sound, wasteful use of taxpayer money, and habitat determination for these two peer-reviewed science needs to be the intrusion to grazing and farming species, which will be published foundation of any proposal, but operations. shortly. particularly of those with such serious Our Response: For listing actions, the (103) Comment: A commenter implications for citizens. Act requires that we make requested that we clarify the status that Our Response: Under the Act, we are determinations ‘‘solely on the basis of is proposed for each species, as it is obligated to use the best available the best available scientific and confusing which is proposed as scientific and commercial information, commercial data available’’ (16 U.S.C. threatened and which as endangered. which in this cased included results 1533(b)(1)(A)) regarding the status of the Our Response: The Dakota skipper is from surveys, reports by scientists and species. Therefore, we do not consider listed in this rule as a threatened biological consultants, natural heritage any information concerning potential species, and the Poweshiek skipperling, data, and expert opinion from biologists economic or other possible impacts as an endangered species. with extensive experience studying the when making listing determinations. We (104) Comment: A commenter Dakota skipper and Poweshiek will work with entities to conserve the requested that the listing and critical skipperling and their habitats, whether butterflies and develop workable habitat designations for these species published or unpublished. The Service’s solutions. Furthermore, in this rule, we will create an adversarial atmosphere databases were also referenced several have included a 4(d) rule for the Dakota between the Service and the agricultural times within the document (e.g., Service skipper that exempts take from certain community, and punish producers, who 2014, unpublished geodatabase). These routine grazing activities. The presence are the best stewards of habitat for a databases were built using hundreds of of a listed species does not give variety of species. sources, including unpublished reports, government employees or Our Response: We based our listing published papers, and State heritage representatives any rights to access decisions on the basis of biological data. We referenced these databases in private property. information and have determined that the proposed and final listing (101) Comment: A commenter stated the Dakota skipper is threatened and the document, in places where we that the Service did not use the best Poweshiek skipperling is endangered summarized data across many sources. available science in the proposal. There under the Act. The Service is committed All of the reports utilized in these is a lack of evidence to justify the to working with private landowners, databases are publically available, upon proposed actions. public land managers, conservation request. Our Response: The comment did not agencies, nongovernmental Additionally, we sought comments provide details on what scientific organizations, and the scientific from independent peer reviewers to information we failed to consider in our community to conserve the Dakota ensure that our determinations are proposal. In preparation of the proposal skipper and Poweshiek skipperling and based on scientifically sound data,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63707

assumptions, and analysis. We solicited managed to maintain or increase the of endangered and threatened species. information from the general public, quality of native-prairie habitats. Private landowners often provide nongovernmental conservation (108) Comment: Commenters asked suitable ‘stepping stone’ habitat organizations, State and Federal whether those who are enrolled in the otherwise unavailable to public agencies that are familiar with the Conservation Reserve Program, agencies. The Federal status of the species and their habitats, academic Environmental Quality Incentive Karner blue butterfly facilitated habitat institutions, and groups and individuals Program, or other U.S. Department of improvements and public awareness that might have information that would Agriculture programs would be subject that may not have occurred but for the contribute to an update of our to special requirements. How will the protection of that species. The knowledge of the species, as well as the listing affect those who have Federal commenter believes that listing the activities and natural processes that crop insurance, have received a Federal Dakota skipper and Poweshiek might be contributing to the decline of loan or Federal disaster assistance, or skipperling will similarly benefit these either species. The existing body of own property that has a Federal two species. literature on the Dakota skipper and easement? If a landowner is required to Our Response: We thank you for your Poweshiek skipperling, including seek consultation before requesting comment and participation in species results from surveys, reports by Federal funding or authorization for an recovery efforts. The Service scientists and biological consultants, action that may affect a listed species or understands the importance of private natural heritage data, and expert critical habitat, what cost will be landowner participation and support in opinion from biologists with extensive involved, both in terms of money and recovery of the Dakota skipper and experience studying the Dakota skipper time? Will this be reflected in the Poweshiek skipperling and will and Poweshiek skipperling and their economic impact analysis the Service is continue to work with all stakeholders habitats, whether published or preparing? to this end. unpublished, is the best available Our Response: Proposed projects in (111) Comment: One commenter information. areas where one or both species may be expressed disappointment with the (106) Comment: A commenter noted present or on designated critical habitat Service stating that other Service that the Dakota skipper listing priority that has a Federal nexus (in other projects that are of great benefit to number indicating threats of moderate words, funded, authorized, or carried society, the commenter did not believe to low magnitude. out by a Federal agency) will be that listing the butterflies was one of Our Response: The Service believes required to undergo consultation with them. The commenter questioned why that the Dakota skipper warrants the Service under section 7 of the Act. these two butterflies are of such protection under the Act, as a In such cases, it is the responsibility of importance that they should be listed. threatened species, as discussed in the Federal agency involved to complete Our Response: In the preamble to the detail in this final listing rule. The the consultation. In those instances, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, listing priority number was changed action agency should contact the Congress recognized that endangered from 11 to 8 on December 6, 2007 (72 Service’s Ecological Services Office in and threatened species of wildlife and FR 69034), and the Dakota skipper their State if they are planning an plants ‘‘are of esthetic, ecological, remained a candidate species with a activity that may affect the species or its educational, historical, recreational, and listing priority number of 8 in critical habitat. For more information scientific value to the Nation and its subsequent notices through October 26, about section 7 consultations, visit the people.’’ In this statement, Congress 2011 (76 FR 66370). The listing priority Service’s Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ summarized convincing arguments numbers range from 1 to 12, indicating endangered/what-we-do/consultations- made by scientists, conservationists, the relative urgency for listing plants or overview.html). In accordance with the and others who are concerned by the as threatened or endangered. Act, we cannot consider possible disappearance of unique creatures. The The criteria used to assign this number economic impacts in making a listing Service is responsible for implementing reflect the magnitude and immediacy of determination. However, section 4(b)(2) the Act, and as such, must determine threat to the species, as well as the of the Act states that the Secretary shall whether any species is an endangered or relative distinctiveness or isolation of designate and make revisions to critical threatened species, based on the best the genetic material they possess. This habitat on the basis of the best available scientific and commercial data available latter criterion is applied by giving a scientific data after taking into regarding the status of that species, not higher priority number to species that consideration the economic impact, based on a certain benefit to society or are the only remaining species in their national security impact, and any other importance. genus, and a lower priority number to relevant impact of specifying any Although the Service does not subspecies and varieties. The listing particular area as critical habitat. consider the value of a particular priority number assigned to a species, (109) Comment: One commenter species when making a listing however, does not necessarily reflect the recommended that better determination, these butterflies are classification the Service ultimately documentation is needed when important and do provide a societal determines is appropriate for a species Landowner Incentive Program grants or benefit. Humans depend on the variety when making a listing determination, as other government funding is used. of life for food, clothing and medicines. new information may become available Our Response: Government-funded When we lose species we lose their that affects that decision. grant accomplishment reports are potential for the future and we lose their (107) Comment: A commenter typically available online. Information effect on other species which, in turn, questioned how this listing would on our grant programs available to aid have ecosystem roles and future value. adversely affect other species. species recovery can be found at Continued degradation of our lands and Our Response: We are unaware of any http://www.fws.gov/grants. waters that reduces our biological adverse effects that these listings would (110) Comment: Private landowners diversity—the variety of life—is have on other native species of plants or who are participating in the Service’s important. Habitat and water animals. Nonnative or invasive plant recovery program for the Karner blue degradation, and maybe even climate species and species of woody plants butterfly commented that private change, can be reversed, but the loss of encroaching into prairie habitats may be landowners are critical to the protection a species and its genes are irreversible.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63708 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Further, the prairie ecosystem is not both species (Samson and Knopf 1994, (115) Comment: A commenter stated completely gone, yet, but it will be if we pp. 418–419). Even further destruction that livestock owners are the original do not take measures to save its plants of remnant prairies has occurred since stewards of this land and other natural and animals. Protecting these small Samson and Knopf’s study. Conversion resources, and the general management butterflies means protecting their is discussed in Factor A of this final practices utilized by these owners are habitats, so that some of this ecosystem, listing rule, below. ecologically sound and enhance the with all its variety of life, remains. (114) Comment: A commenter stated productive capabilities of the land. Humans depend on the variety of life for that the limits and prohibitions on land These practices may even be enhancing food, clothing and medicines. The uses like grazing and haying that are a the habitat for these two butterflies. As variety of life that we have in this result of this listing will negatively private landowners and stewards of country, including functioning affect livestock producers. For example, livestock, land, and other natural ecosystems, is our natural heritage. the areas in North Dakota within the resources, we look for policies that (112) Comment: One commenter range of the butterflies are significant allow coexistence and do not threaten stated that change, both desired and beef-producing counties. Limiting our livelihood. undesired, is a natural part of the grazing or haying on those lands will Our Response: We appreciate your evolutionary cycle. have serious economic ramifications for comment. Landowners deserve great Our Response: Although extinctions the cattle-ranching landowners. Because credit for their land stewardship, and occur naturally, scientific evidence of the terrain, some of these lands are we want to continue to encourage those strongly indicates that the current rate suited only for livestock grazing. If those management practices that support the of extinction is much higher than the lands cannot be used for that purpose, butterflies. The Service also strives to natural or background rate of the past. their value will largely be diminished. find ways to work with people while The main force driving this higher rate Under the Service proposals, six North protecting imperiled species. To this of loss is habitat loss. Over-exploitation Dakota counties are deemed too end, the Act allows for some flexibility of wildlife for commercial purposes, the sensitive for grazing, and it appears that for species that are listed as threatened; introduction of harmful exotic grazing will be prohibited there the Service is able to tailor the (nonnative) organisms, environmental altogether. protections of the Act to what it deems pollution, and the spread of diseases Landowner concerns about as necessary and advisable to provide also pose serious threats to our world’s compliance could influence those for the conservation of such species. We biological heritage. None of these impacted to convert their grass and have developed a 4(d) rule for the creatures exists in a vacuum. All living haylands to other uses before a final rule Dakota skipper that provides for the things are part of a complex, often is in effect. This would be detrimental conservation of the species while delicately balanced, network called the to both the livestock industry and the biosphere. The earth’s biosphere, in butterflies the Service is aiming to allowing some flexibilities for turn, is composed of countless protect. landowners. This 4(d) rule exempts ecosystems, which include plants and Our Response: Through public incidental take of Dakota skippers that animals and their physical meetings, meetings with private is caused by certain routine livestock environments. No one knows the landowners, and outreach efforts, the operations and mowing of recreational myriad ways the extinction of organisms Service has attempted to reduce the trails. For more information on the 4(d) will affect the other members of its concerns of private individuals. It is rule for the Dakota skipper, refer to the ecosystem, but the removal of a single important for private individuals to Provisions of the 4(d) Rule for the species can set off a chain reaction know that only those projects or actions Dakota Skipper section of this final rule, affecting many others. Furthermore, that occur in areas where the butterflies below. many individual species are uniquely may be present or on designated critical Biology and Habitat important as indicators of habitat and that have a Federal nexus environmental quality. The rapid (in other words, funded, authorized, or (116) Comment: A commenter stated decline of the Poweshiek skipperling carried out by a Federal agency) must that the Service is correct to rely on and Dakota skipper may be an indicator undergo consultation with the Service Royer et al. (2008) for understanding of a greater environmental problem. under section 7 of the Act. In such and describing Dakota skipper habitat. Regardless of the reason for the species’ cases, it is the responsibility of the Dakota skipper data in Minnesota are decline, it it meets the definitions of a Federal agency involved to complete the overwhelmingly attributable to Type B threatened or endangered species under consultation. We suggest that private (upland prairie: Dry-mesic or dry). the Act, we are obligated list it under landowners contact their local Service However, type A and B habitats can the Act. Ecological Services Office if they are blend into each other. As correctly (113) Comment: A commenter noted planning an activity with a Federal described by the Service here, upland that prairie ecosystems are one of the nexus that may affect the species or its and lowland prairie are often most endangered ecosystems of the critical habitat. For more information intermixed in both habitat types (A and world. Currently only 4 percent of about section 7 consultations, visit the B). remnant tallgrass prairie remains in the Service’s Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ Our Response: We describe prairie United States, and the loss in habitat endangered/what-we-do/consultations- types as Type A or Type B habitat, but has led to the declines in the Poweshiek overview.html). Under the 4(d) rule for realize that the two habitat types may be skipperling and Dakota skipper. the Dakota skipper, take of Dakota intermixed, there may be smaller Furthermore, these two species play an skippers caused by certain routine patches that may be better categorized, important role in the prairie ecosystem, livestock operations on all non-Federal or specific microhabitats that the and by protecting them, we also protect lands is exempt from the prohibitions species uses at various times to fulfill other prairie plants and animals. under section 9 of the Act. For more their biological needs. Our Response: Native tallgrass and information on the 4(d) rule for the Occupancy mixed-grass prairies have been reduced Dakota skipper, refer to the Provisions by 85 to 99.9 percent of their former of the 4(d) Rule for the Dakota Skipper (117) Comment: A commenter stated area throughout the historical range of section of the preamble to this final rule. that the definition of occupancy is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63709

difficult to understand and should be declines have occurred in both species (either absence or undetectable levels) clarified. very recently and are still ongoing, and of a species at each particular site. Our Response: We clarified the the effects of historical declines These types of analyses may be an definition of occupancy in this final rule continue to impact both species today. appropriate approach for recovery by adding language that clarifies that the Populations that were historically planning and implementation, and we three sequential years of negative fragmented by habitat destruction will consider their utility at that time. surveys necessary to consider the continue to be isolated from one We believe the way we interpreted the species extirpated from a site could be another, which may have negative data in the listing rule is appropriate for from any survey year. We also clarified genetic consequences or increased looking at the overall trends in that the occupancy status of an vulnerability to stochastic events, for detections and non-detections of the extirpated site would not change unless example. species through the years across all of the species was detected at that location the known sites, without relying on the Population Status and Distribution during future surveys. We strove to be numbers of individuals observed at each as accurate as possible in defining (120) Comment: A commenter stated site during each survey year, since we occupancy for the purposes of the that the survey methods are inadequate often do not have those data. Although listing and critical habitat and poorly described. In particular, it many of the skipper sites have been determinations. If you are unsure appears that a high percentage of survey surveyed over multiple years, the whether either species may occur on sites are in close proximity to roads. frequency and type of surveys varied your property, we suggest you contact These sites may be disturbed sites, and among, and sometimes within, sites and the Service’s Ecological Services Field some literature indicates Dakota years. Surveys may have been Office in your state. skippers do not occupy formerly conducted using various protocols and (118) Comment: A commenter stated disturbed and subsequently restored with varied objectives and, therefore, that the Service’s methodology for sites. had varying results. For instance, some classifying occupancy is well supported. Our Response: As described in the surveys focused simply on documenting Given the difficulties of detecting these Background section of this final listing species presence while others small butterflies most observable in the rule, above, Dakota skippers occupy documented the numbers observed in a brief period per year when it is in the native-prairie sites that have never been certain area, distance, or period of time. adult life stage, a conservative approach plowed. During the adult flight period, Whether or not the species was detected is justified. The timing of the adult it is possible that Dakota skipper may in a given year is the only common flight period and the species’ abundance use lesser quality grassland dominated result of all the surveys, so that is the varies greatly among years, due to areas to travel (disperse) from one data we used to evaluate trends through climatic variation. At least 3 years of native-prairie site to another nearby time. surveys are needed before an area native-prairie site. Surveys were (122) Comment: One private citizen should be considered extirpated. conducted using various protocols (for commented that he has never observed Furthermore, those 3 years of surveys example, Pollard walks (Pollard 1975), the Dakota skipper and the Poweshiek need to be detailed efforts per survey, modified Pollard walks, wandering skipperling on his property or anywhere with multiple dates of surveys per year. transects, and timed transects) else. Our Response: We appreciate your depending on the objective of the Our Response: Dakota skippers and comment in support of our occupancy survey, funding, or available resources Poweshiek skipperlings have a single rationale. We agree that multiple dates and staff. Describing the details of adult flight period per year that of surveys per year are desired to verify survey methods for each site is beyond typically occurs from the middle of June non-detection of the species in a given the scope of this rule, however, those through the end of July. The actual year. We have added language to clarify details are described in the survey flight period varies somewhat across the that point in the Background section of reports that are cited within this final range of each species and can also vary this final listing rule, above. rule. We added some brief examples of significantly from year-to-year, but (119) Comment: A commenter stated commonly used survey methodologies typically lasts 2 to 4 weeks. Both the that the determinations to list these two in the Background section of this final Dakota skipper and Poweshiek butterflies are based on historical listing rule. skipperling are small and cryptic declines, although significant (121) Comment: A few commenters species. Therefore, it is unlikely documentation of butterfly fauna did suggested that there are multiple someone will observe these two species not occur until 1960, and it is, therefore, approaches to interpreting data and unless they are actively searching for impossible to determine anything about conducting trend analyses. One such the species in suitable habitat within the historical range or any possible suggested approach is to use the their ranges during the short adult flight historical declines. How are past concepts of Schlicht et al. (2009, Table period. The likelihood of observing declines relevant to the species now, 10, p. 439) and Swengel and Swengel these species recently is low, because and why is the Service listing these (2012b, Table 2). The observed timing of these two species have reached species now, as opposed to when those population declines may differ undetectable levels, even by declines were occurring? It is not depending on the approach used. As experienced observers, at most of their possible to characterize the magnitude such, the commenter cautions that the known locations. of threats to these species without information included in Figures 1 and 2 (123) Comment: One commenter knowing what has caused the historical of the proposed listing rule should be recommended that surveying and decline and understanding what interpreted carefully, and provides monitoring protocols be developed for constitutes natural levels of inter-annual specific suggestions for an alternate the two species. population fluctuation. approach. Our Response: Because the objectives Our Response: We consider historical Our Response: We acknowledge that of surveys may vary across the range of declines, and the ongoing effects of there are other ways to look at the data these species, we recommend contacting those historical declines, as well as and the approach suggested by the the Service’s Ecological Services Field current and recent declines, in our commenter would be a good way to Office in your State to discuss the determinations. Significant population determine the apparent disappearance appropriate survey protocol to use for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63710 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

particular projects, habitat types, and (40 percent); in 1998, the species was described in detail in this final listing geographic areas. To facilitate effective detected at 11 of the 17 sites surveyed rule. The results of that threat analysis cooperation among agencies, (65 percent); and in 2012, the species indicates that all of the Dakota skipper organizations, and individuals was detected at 15 of the 27 sites (56 sites where the species is considered to interested in the distribution of these percent) surveyed (where the species be present or unknown in North Dakota species, the Service will maintain a list had previously been observed). Royer have one or more documented threat of of individuals who meet certain (2012) was correct that the proportion of moderate to high levels. At least one qualifications for conducting reliable sites with detections versus non- moderate- to high-level threat is surveys for the target species. detections of Dakota skippers were documented in all Minnesota, North (124) Comment: One commenter similar (e.g., statewide proportions in Dakota, South Dakota, and Canada provided results from butterfly surveys 1996 (72 percent), 1997 (40 percent), Dakota skipper sites with present or conducted for the past 19 years (1995– and 2012 (56 percent)). Therefore, we unknown occupancy. 2013) in Clay and Polk counties, examined the results of sites that Royer (127) Comment: A commenter stated Minnesota. Low numbers of Dakota (2012) surveyed using methods that that the Service rightly states that most skippers were observed in 1996, 2006, quantified results such that they could Poweshiek skipperling decline likely 2007, and 2010. The Poweshiek be compared among years. went unrecorded because most prairie skipperling was observed in 1997–2002, Royer used the same survey protocol, destruction occurred prior to 1960, but 2004–2006, and two individual timed transect searches (where the most prairie butterfly surveys post-date Poweshiek skipperlings were observed number of individuals observed per those declines. Most decline during in 2013. hour were recorded), for the surveys 1960–2000 also went largely Our Response: We appreciate conducted in 1996–1997, 1998, and undocumented. This is evidenced by receiving the new information on 2012 (Royer 1997, Royer and Royer the large number of sites in Minnesota Dakota skipper and Poweshiek 2012b). Furthermore, Royer’s 1996, that fall into an uncertain occupancy skipperling occurrences in Minnesota. 1997, 1998, and 2012 surveys (Royer category. Longer term Poweshiek We verified the information with 1997, Royer and Royer 2012b) adhered skipperling decline has been masked by Minnesota Department of Natural to our acceptable survey standards (e.g., data paucity and turnover in sites Resources staff (a qualified surveyor), wind speeds, time of day). Therefore, surveyed. who confirmed the validity of the data. the variation in numbers observed Our Response: We agree that there is We confirmed that the individual was attributable to survey error is expected a paucity of data at many sites in recent capable of identifying the Poweshiek to be negligible. Average encounter years (1960–1993). However, most skipperling and that the 2013 frequencies observed across the State in Poweshiek skipperling sites and Dakota observations were valid. This 2012 (10.7 encounters per hour) were skipper sites have been surveyed at least information was incorporated into this lower than during the 1996–1997 and once in 1993 or more recently. The lack final listing rule. The Service has 1998 statewide surveys (North Dakota of surveys at a given site since 1993 prioritized the Polk County location for State average = 16.94 encounters per does mean that we are uncertain of the surveys in future years. hour and 22.67 encounters per hour, occupancy at many sites. We used a (125) Comment: A commenter noted respectively). At the site level, sites cautious approach; by assigning sites that the Service included two graphs surveyed in 1996–1997 or 1998 unknown status, we cannot say that the indicating a decline in Dakota skipper generally had higher numbers of Dakota species is truly absent or extirpated sites in Minnesota and South Dakota, skippers encountered per hour than in from a site, while acknowledging that but did not include a graph for North 2012. the species may still be present, Dakota. The 2012 abstract by Royer (126) Comment: A commenter stated possibly at undetectable levels, if indicates that ‘‘essentially the same that the proposed listing of the Dakota suitable habitat is still present. More proportion of count locations hosted skipper as a threatened species is surveys are needed at these sites to detectable Dakota skipper populations unwarranted at this time. In North determine if the species is present. . . .’’ in 1996, 1997 and 2012, but that Dakota, surveys show that essentially (128) Comment: A commenter stated the encounters per hour had decreased. the same proportion of locations had that, at the time of Swengel’s (1992) The commenter contend that fewer detectable levels of Dakota skipper in review, Poweshiek skipperlings had ‘‘encounters per hour’’ could be the 1996–1997 (46 percent) as in 2012 (46 fewer known populations, were more result of many factors, including the percent). Additionally, new sites have highly concentrated in preserves (a very specific conditions necessary to do been discovered in North Dakota, even single kind of ownership and land use an accurate sampling. The summary though a systematic survey has not been category), were in a narrower range, data does not provide the necessary conducted. A substantially lower were more concentrated in a highly background to determine other factors encounter rate in 2012 compared to destroyed ecosystem (tallgrass prairie), that could have influenced the historical surveys was reported, but one and had a worse immediate response to ‘‘encounters per hour’’ count. year of data does not justify listing. typical preserve management (fire) than Our Response: The detection versus Our Response: Although the Karner blue butterflies, which were non-detection data for Dakota skippers proportion of sites surveyed with federally listed in 1992. Poweshiek in North Dakota produced no clear positive detections of the species is skipperlings are capable of high local trend. If we examine years with more similar when comparing sites surveyed abundance in a few sites, but these than 10 sites surveyed, for example, we in North Dakota in 1996–1997 with population numbers are highly volatile, find that in 1991, the species was those surveyed in 2012, the numbers of and so extremely low numbers also detected at 19 of the 31 sites surveyed individuals observed recently were occur during these abundance (61 percent); in 1995, the species was substantially lower than in previous fluctuations. Compared to Dakota detected at 5 of the 10 sites surveyed (50 surveys; see our response to Comment skipper incidence within Poweshiek percent); in 1996, the species was 125. In addition to the survey data and skipperling range, Poweshiek detected at 13 of the 18 sites surveyed population trend information, the skipperlings occurred on relatively more (72 percent); in 1997, the species was Service also considers listing species preserves, but Dakota skippers had a detected at 10 of the 25 sites surveyed based on an analysis of threats, range further west, including mixed-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63711

grass prairie, less of which has been Factors Affecting the Species—General approaches, such as rotational grazing, destroyed. Also, the Dakota skipper is (130) Comment: A commenter stated that would support both the economic more compatibile with agricultural uses that, throughout the proposed listing viability of livestock operations and on ranch land (e.g., Royer 1992; rule, the Service attributes perceived butterfly population growth. Our Response: Conservation of Dakota Marrone 1992). Thus, the Dakota threats to the Dakota skipper as threats skipper and Poweshiek skipperling skipper had relatively more habitat, to the Poweshiek skipperling or vice populations relies on careful even if there were fewer known sites versa. The Service must independently implementation of management specifically in Minnesota. Furthermore, evaluate threats to each species and may practices that conserve its habitat while there is a tendency to assume that not assume that a threat to one species minimizing adverse effects to habitat protection (making a site a is necessarily a threat to the other. reproduction and survival. Rotational preserve) means the skippers in the Our Response: We have conducted late-season haying after the adult flight preserve are secure; thus, if few are the analysis of factors affecting the period, for example, can be beneficial to found on a given survey, the assumption species separately for the two species. the species’ habitat. We have developed is that this is due to the surveys being Since these two species have similar Dakota skipper conservation guidelines conducted at the wrong time, or due to biology and are often found in the same (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/ fluctuations in abundance resulting locations, they face similar or identical endangered/insects/dask/ from climatic variation. It is only threats at many locations. Therefore, DASKconservationguidelines.html), through consistent long-term monitoring when describing the factors, we discuss which describe those practices in more with the sites held constant (as in their effects to both species together detail, and are developing similar Swengel and Swengel 2013) that trend when they are the same or similar. For guidelines for the Poweshiek can be distinguished from those issues. example, if a remnant (untilled) native skipperling. We discuss both the harm Our Response: Because of the number tallgrass prairie is being considered for and the benefits that various of historical sites and the various ways a housing development, the resulting management practices may have on that data were collected at those sites, habitat conversion would affect both prairie habitats in Factors A and E of we examined the range-wide data using species by removing suitable habitat this final listing rule (below). detections and non-detections. We agree from the landscape. that there are few sites with consecutive (133) Comment: A commenter stated (131) Comment: A commenter stated that grassland easements are a broad- years of data, and even fewer that have that listing these species will impede data over the long term. We have brush approach to conserve native the use of certain grassland management prairies, but there is no targeted examined the data at individual sites tools such as grazing, haying, burning, where we had several consecutive years program or recovery plan specific to the and chemical spraying that are Dakota skipper that would provide of data, and found that Poweshiek necessary to meet the desired habitat for skipperling numbers have appeared to financial incentives and technical these butterflies. information for ranchers and farmers to decline, along with the number of sites Our Response: The listing of these manage habitat in a way that would with positive detections (vs. non- two butterflies will not necessarily expand the population of Dakota detections) of the species. impede the use of these grassland (129) Comment: A commenter stated skippers. management tools. The Service Our Response: Service programs, that the sudden recent decline in recognizes that management, including including Partners for Fish and Wildlife Poweshiek skipperlings over the last 10 grazing, haying, prescriptive fire or and State and tribal grant programs, are years is likely because there are few new targeted herbicide treatments, may be available to develop projects and populations being discovered to replace needed to benefit the species and their partnerships to conserve these and other the already undetectable, previously habitats, as discussed in Factor A and species. Following listing, the Service known populations. Furthermore, Factor E of this final listing rule, below. will develop a recovery plan for these conservationists identified the best sites The types, extent, duration, and two species. first; thus, more recently discovered intensity of various management (134) Comment: A commenter stated populations were not as large and robust regimes that would benefit the that beaver dams can cause water level as the earlier discovered populations. butterflies may depend on the specific fluctuations in some Poweshiek Those more fragile populations would past, present, or future threats at that skipperling areas in Michigan. The have less favorable prospects for long- location. The success of management commenter asked whether these term persistence. This also contributes regimes will need to be monitored and fluctuations, or the act of returning the to the sense that decline is now adjusted accordingly. water level to its normal level, harm occurring everywhere. In addition, in (132) Comment: A commenter noted Poweshiek skipperling larvae or habitat. some places, such as North Dakota, the that suggestions of ‘‘light,’’ ‘‘limited’’ Our Response: It is possible that dramatic population declines of the and ‘‘no’’ grazing and ‘‘late-season higher than normal water levels, for an Poweshiek skipperling primarily haying’’ are mentioned in the proposed extended amount of time, may harm occurred prior to 2000 (see Royer and rule to support rebuilding the butterfly larvae. We discuss fluctuating water Marrone 1992a, b; and Orwig 1994; populations. However, such practices levels in Factor E of this final listing 1995; 1996; and 1997). have proven to have long-term rule, below. Our Response: We acknowledge that implications that will actually do the there are documented declines in opposite. For instance, limiting or Factor A Poweshiek skipperling populations eliminating grazing and haying is likely (135) Comment: A commenter stated prior to 2000. However, in our to promote invasion by exotic grasses, that current Dakota skipper population comprehensive review, it appears that such as smooth brome grass and sites are already protected, and the many sites with known populations of Kentucky bluegrass, which will compete imminent threat to the species is Poweshiek skipperlings have with the very same native species that deemed to be on ‘‘remnant habitat.’’ simultaneously declined to undetectable the butterflies require for habitat. The Our Response: While some Dakota levels across much of the species’ range Service should encourage and skipper sites are on land that is in the early 2000s. incentivize grazing and haying protected from some threats, such as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63712 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

conversion of remnant prairies to other occur throughout the entire range of the reported stressors they observed at sites, uses, the Dakota skipper populations at two butterflies in the foreseeable future, such as invasive species encroachment these sites are still exposed to other there may be future development or or intensive grazing practices. We also stressors, as we detailed in the increases in current activities associated used other reports and publications to Summary of the Factors Affecting the with the shale-oil formations (such as inform the discussion regarding grazing Species section of this final listing rule, the Bakken formation in North Dakota) effects on the butterflies, which below. that may affect butterfly populations in included a discussion regarding types of (136) Comment: A commenter stated those areas. Finally, we used the Naugle animals, intensity of grazing, habitat that the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek et al. (2011) study and its impacts to type, proximity of nearby populations, skipperling do not warrant listing sage grouse as a surrogate to estimate associated herbicide use, and timing. In because the Service improperly the impacts of similar energy the conservation guidelines for the characterized oil and gas development development projects to the butterfly Dakota skipper (http://www.fws.gov/ as a threat to the Dakota skipper and habitat. Because the Powder River Basin midwest/endangered/insects/dask/ Poweshiek skipperling, overstated the development varies from the DASKconservationguidelines2013.html), amount of oil and gas development development in the Bakken formation, we further discuss grazing in terms of occurring in the ranges of the Dakota we have corrected our estimations and intensity, duration, season of use, and skipper and Poweshiek skipperling, analysis in this final listing rule (see type of habitat. incorrectly assumed that the level of oil Destruction and Conversion of Prairies (139) Comment: A commenter stated and gas development seen in western to Nonagricultural Development, that invasive plant control needs to be North Dakota will occur throughout the below). done very carefully and in small-scale species’ ranges, and erred by concluding (137) Comment: A commenter noted treatments to ensure any adverse effects that impacts from oil development in that wind energy is not a threat to the on the Poweshiek skipperling, or the western North Dakota to the two species in North Dakota. The Service’s vegetative conditions they specifically butterflies are similar to impacts from conclusion that wind energy require, are minimized, as invasive coal-bed natural gas in Wyoming on the development will expand into the plant and brush control is not greater sage-grouse. Accordingly, the ranges of the Dakota skipper and automatically beneficial to the butterfly. Service should withdraw the listing and Poweshiek skipperling, and thus is a Specifically, at the Puchyan Prairie site, critical habitat rules. threat to the species, is based on there is greater risk of unintended Our Response: The Act directs us to outdated data and is poorly supported. negative side effects of invasive plant determine whether a species is an The Service must justify its assumptions control on Poweshiek skipperlings endangered species or a threatened that wind energy will expand into themselves, or the specific types and species because of any factors affecting Dakota skipper and Poweshiek structures of vegetation they require, its continued existence. Listing actions skipperling range and consequently be a than risk of habitat deterioration in the may be warranted based on any of the threat to the species. next several years, if a more cautious five factors, singly or in combination. Our Response: We have evaluated the approach is used. More time should be We completed a comprehensive stressors to populations at sites where allowed to assess and describe the full assessment of the biological status of the we had sufficient information to do so. extent of the kinds of microhabitats Dakota skipper and Poweshiek Generally, we consider that wind used by the Poweshiek skipperling, skipperling, and all factors that might development will have localized which likely differ among years due to affect its existence. The effects from oil impacts in a few sites. We know of at climatic variation, and the extent of any and gas activities are just one of the least one site where a proposed wind change or deterioration in the vegetation factors we considered. Our development project poses a threat to in their core habitat areas. determinations that the Dakota skipper the Dakota skipper and its habitat. The commenter also stated that the is a threatened species and the Another wind farm is proposed within Service is also correct that fire Poweshiek skipperling is an endangered 2 miles of areas we proposed as critical management, without careful planning, species are based on numerous threats, habitat, with expansion phases that may have significant adverse effects on acting individually and synergistically, could overlap that critical habitat. Both these skippers; however, the Service that are leading to substantial of these projects are in the draft understates the risks of fire. A number population declines. Environmental Analysis stage of of areas of good Dakota skipper and Specifically with regard to our development. See Destruction and Poweshiek skipperling habitat have evaluation of impacts from oil and gas Conversion of Prairies to Agricultural been converted by fire management over activities, much of this activity is Land, below, for a full discussion on the last several decades from light currently occurring in areas of native impacts from wind energy development. agricultural land uses to areas lacking prairie overlying the Bakken and Three (138) Comment: The proposed listing the features needed by the butterflies. Forks formations, to the west of known determination relies heavily on the These converted areas in Iowa, locations for both butterfly species. work of McCabe and Royer for North Minnesota, and westward have few However, current Bakken oil and gas Dakota, who have both published recent records of either species. Fen development is occurring in two generalized statements about impacts of wetland preserves in Michigan do have counties that have records of Dakota grazing on the Dakota skipper. These recent Poweshiek skipperling records, skippers (McKenzie and McLean authors do not discuss the types of but some of these sites have new, not counties in North Dakota). In those animals, season of use, intensity of long-term, fire management. The areas, oil and gas development is a grazing, or whether a grazing system is Poweshiek skipperling has not fared stressor to the populations that may be involved. well in the working landscape; thus, present. Because there are few locations Our Response: The Service used deliberate conservation effort is needed. where the butterflies may still be extant, butterfly surveys and habitat reports Our Response: We agree that significant stressors to these few written by Royer, McCabe, Spomer, and conservation of Poweshiek skipperling populations can be threats to the species others to inform our determination on populations relies on careful as a whole. Furthermore, although oil the status of the species in North implementation of management and gas development is unlikely to Dakota. These authors also often practices that conserve its habitat, while

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63713

minimizing adverse effects to skipper (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/ (144) Comment: The data used for reproduction and survival, including endangered/insects/dask/ North Dakota in the proposed listing invasive species control at the few sites DASKconservationguidelines.html), and rule relies heavily on the work of where the Poweshiek skipperling are developing similar guidelines for McCabe and Royer, who have both remains, such as Puchyan Prairie. As Poweshiek skipperling. The published generalized statements about discussed in Factor A. The Present or recommendations will be reviewed for grazing and its effects on the Dakota Threatened Destruction, Modification, possible incorporation as we continue to skipper. These authors do not discuss or Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range, refine these guidelines. the types of animals, season of use, below, encroaching invasive plants may (142) Comment: A commenter noted intensity of grazing or whether a grazing replace or reduce the coverage of native that the proposed rule states that the system is involved. forbs and grasses used by adults and negative effects of fire persist for 1 to 5 Our Response: The Service relied on larval butterflies and, therefore, need to years, citing Swengel (1996, pp. 73, 79, butterfly surveys and habitat reports be controlled. However, we further 81) and Panzer (2002, pp. 1302–3). written by Royer, McCabe, Spomer, and discuss that control methods (such as These papers, however, include a range others to inform species and habitat data fire and herbicide spraying) may have of butterfly species found in prairies, in North Dakota. These authors also their own unintended consequences, not just localized prairie specialists like often reported stressors they observed at such as reduced native forbs and grasses the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek sites, such as invasive species and direct mortality of the butterflies, if skipperling. Panzer’s study contains no encroachment or intensive grazing not conducted carefully. Furthermore, data on the Poweshiek skipperling or practices. We used various other reports various habitat types at these sites may Dakota skipper. Swengel (1996) and publications to inform the respond differently to various types of includes specific analysis of both discussion regarding grazing in Factor A control treatments. Therefore, when species, but no explicit predictions are of this final listing rule and included a considering recovery planning for the made. Swengel (1996, pp. 73, 79) discussion regarding types of animals, species, it will be important to continue describes that the negative effects of fire intensity of grazing, habitat type, to individually assess sites to determine persist for specialists for 3 to 5 or more proximity of nearby populations, the need to control invasive species, years. Swengel (1996) does not indicate associated herbicide use, and timing. In exercise caution when implementing an expectation of recovery 1–2 years our conservation guidelines for Dakota treatments, monitor the response to any post-burn for these species. Thus, skipper, we further discuss grazing in treatments over the long-term, and Swengel’s analysis is better used to terms of intensity, duration, season of refine or modify treatments as needed to define when recovery has certainly not use, and type of habitat. get desired outcomes. Similarly, occurred (within years 0–3), but not (145) Comment: A commenter noted assessment and long-term monitoring of when recovery actually has occurred. that low-intensity grazing is mentioned the species’ needs, such as microhabitat Our Response: We corrected our as a potential management tool to help use, will help inform conservation interpretation of the Swengel (1996) and maintain habitat and abate other threats efforts at specific locations. the Panzer (2002) papers as discussed to these two species. In some cases, (140) Comment: One commenter under Factor A. The Present or high-intensity, short-duration grazing recommended that land managers be Threatened Destruction, Modification, may have a role in providing the advised as to the appropriateness of or Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range, disturbance that prairies require to prescribed burns in Poweshiek prevent them from being overrun by skipperling habitat. below, to better reflect the included data Our Response: The Service contacted and information. We also changed our woody plants, and invasive species. all of the landowners within proposed use of the word ‘‘recovery’’ in this Our Response: We have developed critical habitat designations as part of context to the term ‘‘rebound,’’ which conservation guidelines for the Dakota this rulemaking process. We have more accurately describes an upward skipper’s specific needs. These developed conservation guidelines for trend, but does not imply a stable guidelines include some grazing the Dakota skipper (online at http:// recovered trend in populations. recommendations; however, we are www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/ (143) Comment: A commenter noted interested to learn more details about insects/dask/ that Dana (1991, pp. 55–56) discusses the effects of grazing practices DASKconservationguidelines.html), and concern about grass growth structure implemented in various areas as we are developing similar guidelines for and height, namely that fire encourages continue to refine our Poweshiek skipperling. Contact the taller grass growth, but that Dakota recommendations, and will take this Service’s Ecological Services Field skippers prefer shorter grass. Therefore, information into consideration. Office in your State to discuss effectively controlling weeds and brush (146) Comment: A commenter noted prescribed burn practices on land where does not necessarily mean that the that data suggest Poweshiek skipperling one or both species may be present. management is creating suitable habitat populations at sites that were hayed (141) Comment: One commenter for skippers. In the long run, fire does prior to preservation did not recover to recommended that sites with Dakota not produce a suitable vegetative the same level following any subsequent skipper populations where fire structure for skippers. The long-term fire. management is not already occurring compounding indirect effect of fire on Our Response: We acknowledge that should remain fire-free, and that fire the vegetation (increasing grass height fire management may be detrimental to management should cease in core and thickness) may have a more lasting the Poweshiek skipperling, if not habitat for the Dakota skipper. Instead, impact on the species and be more conducted properly. We are developing cautious rotational haying or grazing difficult to manage. conservation guidelines for the regimes should be used to rehabilitate Our Response: We will consider the Poweshiek skipperling that will address grassland vegetation to the shorter turf longterm effect of fire on native fire management and other actions, and height that Dana (1991) recommends for vegetation growth and structure when are interested to learn more about the the species. developing and refining conservation implications of fire practices as we Our Response: We have developed guidelines for the Dakota skipper and continue to develop and refine our conservation guidelines for the Dakota Poweshiek skipperling. conservation recommendations.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63714 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(147) Comment: A commenter stated Our Response: McCabe’s 1981 report handling has adverse effects on that the Service should provide data to is used as a reference to prairie butterflies, documented for a wide range support that fire management, even if conditions prior to much habitat of species (e.g., Benson and Emmel applied to most or all of the patch degradation or exotic species invasions 1973; Singer and Wedlake 1981; occupied by the Dakota skipper or that are common in many locations Lederhouse 1982; Morton 1984). It is Poweshiek skipperling, has a low effect today. We acknowledge that an possible that some types of nonlethal on the long-term persistence of these understanding of prairie ecology sampling do not significantly increase populations. The Service does not cite requires long-term observations, as well the harm to the butterfly from capture long-term studies of impacts from fire, as knowledge of how past and current and handling, but the handling for such but instead provides a list of management activities have impacted sampling still causes harm compared to assumptions, such as the following: (1) and continue to impact plant the butterfly not being handled. Thus, Fire happens in prairie (although the community dynamics. the benefits of such sampling should be extent of that in a natural context is (149) Comment: One commenter weighed against the harm caused to open to great debate; see literature agreed that annual haying on or after individuals. review in Swengel and Swengel 2007, p. August 1 presents little or no stress to Our Response: As stated under Factor 264); (2) these skippers live in prairie; Dakota skippers. However, the B of this final rule, handling stress (3) fire has various effects on prairie commenter went on to point out that during scientific study may affect plants (although it should not be Swengel (1998b) found that Poweshiek individuals of both species. Adverse assumed that fire controls brush and skipperling abundance was strongly effects on butterflies have been weeds; see Swengel et al. 2011, p. 535); correlated with increasing number of documented for a wide range of species (4) those floristic effects are assumed to years since the last management action, (e.g., Benson and Emmel 1973, p. 329; be beneficial to these skippers (although of any management type, including Singer and Wedlake 1981, pp. 215–216; vigorous tall grass growth caused by fire haying. Thus, annual haying of the Lederhouse 1982, pp. 381–382; Morton may not be; see Dana 1991, pp. 5–56). entire habitat patch should be 1984, pp. 56–57; Mallet et al. 1987, pp. Based on these assumptions, the Service considered a high stressor for the 380–383). The Service will consider concludes that fire should be fine for Poweshiek skipperling. The Service is stress and other impacts to the these skippers. The Service needs to correct that alternate-year haying is butterflies from handling when issuing provide direct positive evidence better than annual haying, but it’s even scientific permits for genetic sampling indicating that the skippers, especially better when the haying is done and other sampling efforts. the larvae, actually succeed in the long rotationally (half per year, instead of all (151) Comment: A commenter noted term following a fire. every other year). Additionally, the that reliably effective captive Our Response: We will consider all moderate stressor category for haying is propagation has not been demonstrated factors and data regarding the effects of confusing. As it currently reads, a site for either of these species. However, the fire on the species during recovery could fall in the moderate category Service should consider and assess the planning and implementation and in because you do not know the timing of effect on wild populations of either developing and refining the the haying, but if you did know the species before attempting to develop conservation guidelines for these two timing, you would place it in the high captive propagation. species. We acknowledge that there are category. Our Response: The Service will no long-term (more than two decades) Our Response: We developed the consider incidental take for otherwise studies of fire management that stressor categories for the purposes of legal activities in our permitting (e.g., provided data showing long-term the threats analysis to inform our listing section 10 recovery permits) process. persistence of the populations. We determinations; these categories are not based our threats analysis and ranking intended to be prescriptive conservation Factor D of stressors as high, medium, and low measures or guidelines. We (152) Comment: A commenter stated based on the studies cited in our acknowledge that there is some that as of August 2013, the Minnesota discussion of impacts from fire under uncertainty in the ‘moderate’ stressor Department of Natural Resources listed the Summary of the Factors Affecting category for haying, but we wanted to both the Dakota skipper and the the Species section of this final rule, fairly capture sites where we were Poweshiek skipperling as endangered. below. The possibility that we may have unsure of the timing of haying activities, The Dakota skipper is also an underestimated the stressors of fire but that showed signs indicative of ‘‘endangered’’ species under Iowa law. management on the species further reduced nectar sources. It is true that Our Response: We have updated the supports our determinations that fire these sites could be moved into the low State-level protections for Dakota can be a significant stressor to or high category if we received more skipper and Poweshiek skipperling in populations of Poweshiek skipperlings. specifics on the timing of haying in Factor D of this final listing rule. (148) Comment: A commenter stated those locations, and those details will be that there are problems with some more important during the recovery Factor E reports that use McCabe’s 1981 planning stages for these species. (153) Comment: A commenter stated management recommendations, because that herbicides applied in skipper McCabe’s paper reflects a point-in-time. Factor B habitat can negatively affect nectar Prairie ecology requires long-term (150) Comment: A commenter noted resources for the species. However, observations and knowledge of how past that recent publications report that herbicide use can have benefits if and current management activities nonlethal sampling of genetic material carefully targeted to treating brush and impact plant community dynamics. adds an immeasurable or minor effect weeds, so long as bare ground does not Further, prairie management on survival or reproductive success of subsequently result from the treatment, conclusions based upon observations butterflies compared to handled as bare ground greatly facilitates made in 1981 are no longer valid, due individuals that were not also recruitment of new weed and brush to changes in ecological drivers caused genetically sampled (Marschalek et al. growth. by broad-scale invasion of exotic cool- 2013; Crawford et al. 2013). However, Our Response: We acknowledge that season grasses and forbs. there is abundant literature on how carefully targeted herbicide treatments

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63715

may result in the beneficial control of (isolated populations in fragmented experiencing moderate to high threat nonnative or invasive plants and brush, habitats that are under pressure from levels, especially since ‘‘Dakota skipper and have clarified our statements in habitat degradation and land . . . habitat is highly fragmented and Factor E of this final listing rule, below. management practices). because the species are subject to local (154) Comment: A commenter noted Our Response: We acknowledge that extinction . . . and approximately 84 that results of a preliminary analysis of multiple stressors are acting on percent of Dakota skipper sites with the genetic diversity of the Poweshiek populations of both species, and have present or unknown status are skipperling show limited levels of been so for many years. In our review, effectively isolated.’’ genetic diversity in the Wisconsin, however, it appears that many sites with Our Response: We agree that the Michigan, and Manitoba populations. known populations of the Poweshiek Dakota skipper is imperiled, which is Demographic factors are of greater skipperling appear to have why we determined that the species concern, specifically, small population simultaneously declined to undetectable warrants listing under the Act. sizes and numbers of populations are levels. A similar, but perhaps delayed, However, we believe that the Dakota more likely to lead to extinction than decline is being observed in Dakota skipper is not in immediate danger of loss of genetic diversity. The skipper populations. We did not want to going extinct at this point in time. widespread and intensive survey effort rule out the possibility that this decline Instead, we believe that, if trends showing continual extirpation of may be due to some unknown cause. continue as they currently are, the populations and reduced population However, we will focus on all potential species is likely to get to that point in sizes supports the listing of Poweshiek factors affecting the species in recovery the foreseeable future. Because there are skipperling as endangered. planning and implementation, not stable populations of the Dakota skipper Our Response: We have incorporated simply on any single factor. that do not appear to be currently information from the preliminary results suffering from high-magnitude threats, Determinations of Saarinen (2013, pers. comm.) under and the declining trends are happening Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade (158) Comment: A commenter stated at a slower pace, we determined that Factors Affecting Its Continued that the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek threatened species status is appropriate Existence, in the discussion on Habitat skipperling are both threatened by loss for the Dakota skipper (see Fragmentation and Population Isolation, of native prairie vegetation to Determination, below, for a full below, and look forward to receiving agriculture, development, altered fire discussion). final results from this research to inform patterns, and groundwater depletion. (160) Comment: A commenter stated future conservation efforts for this The Dakota skipper and Poweshiek that the Service determines that the species. skipperling are also threatened by Dakota skipper is a threatened species (155) Comment: A commenter stated pesticides, drought, and climate change. because ‘‘Canada has a fair number of that weather and climate events, such as In light of the population declines and populations that are being managed in the persistent drought in the Midwest, ongoing threats, both butterflies should a manner conducive to the conservation and their effects on the Dakota skipper be protected as endangered rather than of Dakota skipper, and the threats at and Poweshiek skipperling require as threatened. those sites are not imminent.’’ A ‘‘fair further study. Funding and staff are Our Response: The Dakota skipper is number’’ is not a biologically needed to accomplish these efforts. experiencing population declines and meaningful measure. The Service needs Our Response: In this rule, we used facing multiple threats. A few to explain this contention in a the best available information on populations in the United States are measurable manner. climate and climate change, however we doing relatively well, however, and are Our Response: We are aware of 14 agree that more study of weather and in habitats that have low or non- sites in Canada where the species is climate events will help us with immediate threats. Furthermore, Canada considered to be present and one site recovery planning and implementation has an estimated 15 populations on where the occupancy is unknown. for these two species, and will consider lands that are being utilized in a manner Those sites are managed by late-season new information when developing the conducive to the conservation of Dakota haying (after August 1) that is recovery plan. skipper, and the threats at those sites are conducted at least every other year, and (156) Comment: A commenter stated not imminent. Based on our review of there is no indication that native plant that, in its assessment of impacts to the the best available scientific and diversity is declining due to timing or butterflies from climate change, the commercial information, we conclude frequency of mowing. Service ignores model uncertainty that that the Dakota skipper is likely to (161) Comment: A commenter stated the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate become in danger of extinction in the that the Canadian populations are Change (IPCC) acknowledges. foreseeable future throughout all of its functionally isolated from each other Our Response: We appreciate your range and, therefore, meets the and from U.S. populations. The distance comment and understand that there are definition of a threatened species. For a between all these metapopulations uncertainties in the climate modeling. detailed discussion, see the makes interaction or recolonization We consider climate change to be a Determination section of this final rule, unlikely, as Dakota skippers may be potential threat to the species, while below. incapable of moving greater than 1 km acknowledging uncertainty of how (159) Comment: A commenter stated (0.6 mi) between patches of prairie changes may specifically impact these that the Service should list the Dakota habitat separated by structurally similar species or their habitats. skipper as endangered, as it is ‘‘in habitats. The Service did not conduct an (157) Comment: A commenter stated danger of extinction throughout all or a adequate analysis of ‘‘significant portion that, while it is possible that unknown significant portion of its range.’’ The of range,’’ to determine if the three threats to the species exist, it is species is present at 91 sites, at least 83 metapopulations (U.S., Manitoba, and inappropriate to focus too much effort ‘‘are subject to one or more threats that Saskatchewan) should each be on the search for unknown stressors. have a moderate to high impact on those considered ‘‘significant,’’ and if one is This distracts from addressing the populations.’’ The Service does not ‘‘in danger of extinction,’’ then the challenges of dealing with the stressors explain why 8 sites that are presumably species as a whole should be listed as that have been known for decades secure outweigh 83 sites that are endangered. The Service must

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63716 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

separately analyze threats to each proposed rule than were oil and gas destruction of its habitat would be isolated metapopulation because related activities. prohibited under section 9 of the Act, population isolation and accompanying Our Response: Although livestock but there are other reasons to loss of genetic diversity are ranching activities and mowing of promulgate the 4(d) rule. As we stated acknowledged to have significant recreational trails may be more in the proposed rule, the 4(d) rule will impacts on the species. widespread throughout the species facilitate cooperation with private Our Response: Under the Act and our range, livestock grazing also can be a landowners that will be needed to implementing regulations, a species key factor in the conservation of Dakota recover the species. About 47 percent of may warrant listing if it is endangered skipper habitat, by helping to ensure the sites where the Dakota skipper has or threatened throughout all or a that the species’ habitats are not been recorded in the United States and significant portion of its range. Because subjected to activities that result in their that may still harbor the species are on we have determined that the Dakota permanent destruction. That is, lands private land. Almost all of these sites skipper is a threatened species are likely to remain unplowed as long are working lands managed with grazing throughout all of its range, no portion of as the landowner chooses to continue to or haying. Conservation of the Dakota its range can be ‘‘significant’’ for use them for grazing. In addition, skipper on these sites, and in general, purposes of the definitions of grazing may also be implemented in a will require the Service and other ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened manner that provides significant conservation agencies and groups to species.’’ See the Final Policy on benefits to the species. In these ways oil develop and maintain cooperative Interpretation of the Phrase ‘‘Significant and gas production and grazing are partnerships with private landowners. Portion of Its Range’’ in the Endangered fundamentally different with respect to Without that cooperation, we are Species Act’s Definitions of Dakota skipper conservation. unlikely to realize the substantial ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened Regardless, the Service recognizes that a improvements in habitat conditions and Species’’ (79 FR 37577, July 1, 2014). variety of interests, including oil and public-private partnerships necessary to (162) Comment: A commenter stated gas activities, may hold the potential to conserve the species. that the Service has an obligation to contribute to Dakota skipper (167) Comment: A commenter stated make available the studies that form the conservation. that the proposed 4(d) rule does not basis of its action. The Service failed to (164) Comment: One commenter provide details as to how the Service provide any materials other than its own stated that the 4(d) rule would provide intends to ensure that infrastructure, draft species assessment and textual an important incentive to continue late- such as corrals, loading chutes, and descriptions of proposed critical habit summer haying where that practice is other livestock working facilities, are for either the proposed listing or critical currently being implemented. carefully sited so that impacts to the habitat designation in the Our Response: We agree that the 4(d) species are minimized. regulations.gov docket or on its Web rule will provide this incentive, as Our Response: These types of sites. The Service did provide a intended. Late-summer haying is facilities are unlikely to have significant bibliography; however, many references currently the primary management on impacts to Dakota skipper populations, cited were unpublished reports or numerous sites inhabited by Dakota except where the species has been internal documents. skipper that are important for the reduced to only very small areas. In Our Response: One element of the species’ conservation. grazed lands that are typically inhabited transparency and open government (165) Comment: One commenter by Dakota skipper, these facilities affect directive encourages executive requested that we also exempt take only small proportions of the available departments and agencies to make caused by ‘‘construction with minimal habitat. Therefore, we do not think that information about operations and disturbance, such as that for the small degree of impact posed by decisions readily available to the public. transmission lines, that occurs after July placement of livestock working facilities Supporting documentation used to 15th’’ in the 4(d) rule. The same would merit site-specific approval and prepare the proposed and final rules is commenter requested that the Service review by the Service. Instead, by available for public inspection, by ‘‘give consideration to exempting foregoing any requirement for appointment, during normal business transmission line maintenance activities landowners to seek Service approval for hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and existing right-of-way maintenance siting these facilities, we are likely to Service, Twin Cities Ecological Services in the same way that section line further facilitate continued development Field Office, 4101 American Boulevard maintenance is exempted in the of positive working relationships that East, Bloomington, Minnesota 55425. proposed 4(d) rule.’’ will be essential for recovering the Our Response: It is unclear which species. In addition, we can work with 4(d) Rule populations could be affected by these landowners on voluntary methods to (163) Comment: One commenter said activities, what the effects might be, and minimize any impacts that might result that the 4(d) rule proposed for the how the effects might be minimized. from installation of facilities associated Dakota skipper should be extended to Therefore, we have not included these with grazing. remove prohibitions for take incidental activities in the 4(d) rule. (168) Comment: One commenter to lawfully conducted oil and gas (166) Comment: One commenter stated that the protections afforded the operations and that this would not stated that ‘‘the proposed 4(d) rule will Dakota skipper through the 4(d) rule are undermine the goal of promoting the undermine, not advance, conservation not sufficient to reverse the trend healthy growth of these populations of the species’’ and that the 4(d) rule toward extinction because they do not throughout their entire range. The was not needed to prevent habitat ensure that the grazing practices commenter indicated that the activities destruction because it would already be exempted under the rule will benefit the that were addressed by the proposed illegal under section 9 of the Act and Dakota skipper. 4(d) rule—a variety of routine livestock uninhabited areas at risk for conversion Our Response: It may not be ranching activities and mowing of would be protected by designating them practicable to expect broad recreational trails—were far more as critical habitat. implementation of specific mandated widespread in the region and contribute Our Response: It is true that take of grazing practices on private land to more directly to the threats listed in the Dakota skippers that results from conserve the Dakota skipper without the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63717

willingness of the landowner to herbicides evenly across all or a portion the 4(d) rule, as long as it is associated implement those practices. of an area. Take of Dakota skippers that with livestock ranching activities. The Conservation of Dakota skippers on is caused by applications of herbicide 4(d) rule exempts take of Dakota grazed lands will require several steps that do not meet this definition of skippers caused by mowing recreational that include the development of site- broadcast spraying would be exempted trails, a term that is defined in the rule, specific grazing recommendations, by the 4(d) rule. even when it is not associated with monitoring the effects of the recommend Take of Dakota skippers is unlikely if livestock grazing. practices on the Dakota skipper and its they do not inhabit an area where habitat, and science-based adaptive broadcast application of herbicides is Summary of the Factors Affecting the management. Each step will require proposed. If the presence of Dakota Species access to private and other non-Federal skippers is suspected in an area where Factor A. The Present or Threatened lands by persons with expertise in broadcast application of herbicides is Destruction, Modification, or identifying and describing the Dakota proposed, we recommend that the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range skipper and its key habitat components Service be contacted to determine Habitat quality is a powerful and, in at least some cases, by grazing whether the action may be likely to determinant of extinction probability in experts and conservation partners. cause take of the species, and if butterflies such as the Dakota skipper Landowners and land managers may be reasonable measures may be adopted and Poweshiek skipperling (Thomas et less likely to grant access for these that would avoid take. al. 2001, p. 1795). Among butterfly activities if we broadly mandate specific Summary of Changes From the species in the United Kingdom, for grazing practices. Furthermore, although Proposed Rule example, equilibrium density of the incidental take permitting process butterflies at sites with optimum habitat would also provide an avenue by which Based on our review of the public are from 25 to more than 200 times to work with private landowners and is comments, comments from other often the best available option for some Federal and State agencies, peer review greater than those for occupied sites species, there is no clear avenue that is comments, issues addressed at the with suboptimal, yet suitable, habitat immediately available by which to public hearing, and any new relevant (Thomas 1984, cited in Thomas et al. engage the large and geographically information that may have become 2001, p. 1794). Consistently good widespread group of landowners in available since the publication of the habitat quality is especially important such a process for Dakota skippers. A proposal, we reevaluated our proposed for Dakota skipper and Poweshiek permitting process that would involve rule and made changes as appropriate. skipperling isolated populations, which more than a few landowners is likely to During the comment periods, the would not be naturally recolonized if take years and would have significant Service received additional survey they were extirpated. Protection or potential to become contentious and information, minor clarifications, and restoration of habitat quality at these unwieldy. additional information on the species isolated sites is critical to the survival (169) Comment: One commenter biology. New survey information has of both species, although stochastic suggested that, instead of listing changed the occupancy status at several events still pose some risk, especially counties in which take caused by sites, for example a site that we for smaller populations and at small grazing would not be exempted under considered to be ‘‘unknown’’ in the sites. the 4(d) rule, the Service should base proposed rule may now be considered The Poweshiek skipperling and this on habitat. ‘‘extirpated’’ due to three sequential Dakota skipper depend on a diversity of Our Response: We decided that it is years of negative survey data. native plants endemic to tallgrass more appropriate to exempt take of Consequently, some sites were dropped prairies and, for the Poweshiek Dakota skippers caused by grazing on all from our analysis of factors affecting the skipperling in Michigan, prairie fens. non-Federal lands in the United States, species because we no longer consider When nonnative or woody plant species regardless of geographic area, and have the species to be present or possibly become dominant, Poweshiek made this change in the final 4(d) rule. present (unknown) at a particular skipperlings and Dakota skippers We recommend, however, that lands location. In addition, we included new decline due to insufficient sources of where native prairie is currently information into our analysis of the larval food and nectar for adults. For maintained by haying continue to be factors affecting the species. Neither the example, at Wike Waterfowl Production hayed, and that any change to grazing new information nor the updated Area in Roberts County, South Dakota, on these lands only be done with the occupancy at some sites has the extirpation of Poweshiek skipperling prior input from experts in Dakota significantly changed our analyses such is attributed to the deterioration of skippers and range conservation. We that it changed our determinations of native vegetation, in particular, the loss suggest contacting the Service’s status under the Act for either species. of nectar sources for adult butterflies Ecological Services Office in your State The 4(d) rule now exempts take of due to invasive species encroachment for more information. Dakota skippers caused by grazing on all (Skadsen 2009, p. 9). (170) Comment: A commenter asked non-federal lands in the United States; Destruction of native tallgrass and what areas can be treated for weeds or the proposed 4(d) rule did not apply to mixed-grass prairie began in 1830 pests and still be exempted by the 4(d) certain lands in Minnesota and North (Samson and Knopf 1994, pp. 418–419). rule. Dakota. The final 4(d) rule no longer Extant populations of Dakota skipper Our Response: The 4(d) rule does not exclude some counties from the part of and Poweshiek skipperling are address control of animal pests; the rule that exempts take caused by restricted to native-prairie remnants and therefore, it does not exempt take that grazing. Other minor changes to the 4(d) prairie fens; native prairies have been may result from treatments that are rule include: Clarifying broadcast versus reduced by 85 to 99.9 percent of their applied to control animal pests. The spot-spraying of herbicides; defining former area throughout the historical 4(d) rule also does not exempt take of ‘‘recreational trail’’; and, that take of range of both species (Samson and Dakota skippers that would result from Dakota skipper caused by haying in Knopf 1994, pp. 418–419). Degradation the broadcast application of transportation rights-of-ways and and destruction of habitat occurs in herbicides—that is, application of corridors after July 15 is exempt under many ways, including but not limited

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63718 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

to: Conversion of native prairie to species in Minnesota, North Dakota, and sites with present or unknown status cropland or development; ecological South Dakota. Eight sites with an (Table 4). Although we did not evaluate succession to woody vegetation; unknown or present occupancy were Factor A stressors at all 87 Poweshiek encroachment of invasive species; past not evaluated. To determine the levels skipperling sites with present or and present fire, haying, or grazing of impact to the population at each site, unknown occupancy, the 60 sites that management that degraded or destroyed we used the best available and most were evaluated are representative of all the species’ habitats; flooding; and recent information for each site, the present or unknown Poweshiek groundwater depletion, alteration, and including reports, discussions with site skipperling sites in terms of geography contamination, which are discussed in managers, information from natural (range of the species, i.e., sites in Iowa, further detail below. heritage databases, etc. (Service 2012, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, We evaluated the level of impact to unpubl. data; Service 2014, unpubl. South Dakota, and Wisconsin were the population at each site of several geodatabase). We only evaluated a habitat-related stressors at 163 Dakota stressor to the population at any one site evaluated), ownership, and skipper sites where the occupancy if we had sufficient information to management. Many sites for both status of the site is considered to be determine if the level of impact was species (58 sites for Dakota skipper and present or unknown, as defined in the high, medium, or low as defined for 26 sites for Poweshiek skipperling) Background section of this final rule each stressor below. Similarly, the level experience at least two habitat-related (Table 3, above). These 163 sites are of impact to the population was stressors at a medium or high level of found across the current range of the evaluated at 60 Poweshiek skipperling impact (Tables 3 and 4).

TABLE 3—NUMBER OF DAKOTA SKIPPER SITES WITH EACH LEVEL OF IMPACT AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES THAT WERE RATED FOR EACH TYPE OF STRESSOR. A TOTAL OF 163 DAKOTA SKIPPER SITES WITH EITHER PRESENT OR UNKNOWN STATUS WERE EXAMINED; ONLY SITES WITH SUFFICIENT DATA FOR A PARTICULAR STRESSOR WERE RATED AS HIGH, MEDIUM, OR LOW [Service 2012 Unpubl. data; Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase]

High level Medium level Low level Total number Stressor of impact of impact of impact of rated sites

Destruction & Conversion (Agricultural & Nonagricultural Development) ...... 3 83 58 144 Wind Development ...... 1 0 8 9 Flooding ...... 2 6 6 14 Invasive Species ...... 12 33 20 65 Fire ...... 10 4 6 20 Grazing ...... 9 29 14 52 Haying & Mowing ...... 1 11 29 41 Lack of Management ...... 9 5 3 17 Size/Isolation ...... 50 50 63 163 Herbicide and/or Pesticide Use ...... 5 2 8 15

TABLE 4—NUMBER OF POWESHIEK SKIPPERLING SITES WITH EACH LEVEL OF IMPACT AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SITES THAT WERE RATED FOR EACH TYPE OF STRESSOR. A TOTAL OF 60 POWESHIEK SKIPPERLING SITES WITH EITHER PRESENT OR UNKNOWN STATUS WERE EXAMINED; ONLY SITES WITH SUFFICIENT DATA FOR A PARTICULAR STRESSOR WERE RATED AS HIGH, MEDIUM, OR LOW [Service 2012 unpubl.; Service 2014, unpubl. data]

High level Medium level Low level Total number Stressor of impact of impact of impact of rated sites

Destruction & Conversion (Agricultural & Nonagricultural Development) ...... 2 11 28 41 Wind Development ...... 0 0 5 5 Flooding/Hydrology ...... 2 3 14 19 Invasive Species ...... 6 29 11 46 Fire ...... 4 2 10 16 Grazing ...... 4 10 2 16 Haying & Mowing ...... 0 3 3 6 Lack of Management ...... 4 6 2 12 Size/Isolation ...... 21 22 11 54 Herbicide and/or Pesticide Use ...... 3 1 5 9

Destruction and Conversion of Prairies Euro-American settlement, but the Knof 1994, p. 419). Samson and Knof impacts of such conversion on extant (1994, p. 419) did not provide a figure Destruction and Conversion of Prairies populations is not well known. By 1994, for the decline of tallgrass prairie in to Agricultural Land tallgrass prairie had declined by 99.9 Saskatchewan, but mention an 81.3 Conversion of prairie for agriculture percent in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, North percent decline in mixed grasses from may have been the most influential Dakota, Wisconsin, and Manitoba; and historical levels. By 1994, mixed-grass factor in the decline of the Poweshiek by 99.6 percent in Minnesota; and 85 prairie had declined from historical skipperling and Dakota skipper since percent in South Dakota (Samson and levels by 99.9 percent in Manitoba and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63719

71.9 percent in North Dakota (Samson skipperling and Dakota skipper mines are considered a stressor with a and Knof 1994, p. 419). Destruction of populations in areas where such lands high level of impact to populations of tallgrass and mixed-grass prairie began still remain. Advances in technology both species because, where it occurs, in 1830, but significant documentation may also increase the potential of the habitat is completely destroyed. of the ecosystem’s butterfly fauna did conversions in areas that are currently Potash (salt that contains potassium) not begin until about 1960. Therefore, unsuitable for agriculture. mining is a stressor to Dakota skipper most of the decline of the Dakota We rated the level of impact to the populations in some Saskatchewan sites skipper and Poweshiek skipperling populations of the stressor posed by (Westwood 2013, pers. comm.), probably went unrecorded. habitat destruction or conversion for although the exact number of sites that Since about 1980, observers have both agriculture and nonagricultural are being considered for potash mining documented the extinction of several purposes (except for conversion for is unknown and were not included in populations of the Dakota skipper and wind energy development, which was our stressor evaluation. Poweshiek skipperling due to habitat analyzed separately) at 144 Dakota Energy development (oil, gas, and conversion to agricultural use in the skipper and 41 Poweshiek skipperling wind) and associated roads and United States and Canada. For example, sites with present or unknown status facilities result in the loss or four Dakota skipper sites in North (see Tables 3 and 4) where we had fragmentation of suitable prairie habitat Dakota were converted to irrigated sufficient information to evaluate the (Reuber 2011, pers. comm.). Major areas potato fields, and one in South Dakota stressor. In our evaluation of this of recent oil and gas development, such was converted for crop production stressor, we combined agricultural and as that occurring in the Bakken (Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 17). The nonagricultural impacts—our analyses formation, overlaps with parts of the Fannystelle site in Manitoba, where the are discussed below (see Destruction Dakota skipper’s range in North Dakota. Dakota skipper was last recorded in and Conversion of Prairies due to North Dakota, for example, is now one 1991, was subsequently converted for Nonagricultural Development). of the top two oil-producing states in row-crop agriculture (Webster 2003, p. the United States, and new development Destruction and Conversion of Prairies 7). In North Dakota, further conversion is occurring rapidly (MacPherson 2012, to Nonagricultural Development is a stressor to Dakota skippers in the p. 1; North Dakota Petroleum Council important Towner-Karlsruhe complex Conversion of prairie for 2012, p. 1). The number of drilling (Royer and Royer 1998, p. 22; Lenz nonagricultural land uses, such as permits in North Dakota nearly doubled 1999, p. 13), where the flat topography energy development, gravel mining, between 2007 and 2008, from 494 and high water table facilitate transportation, and housing are stressors permits issued in 2007 to 946 in 2008 conversion to irrigated crop production. to both Poweshiek skipperling and (North Dakota Petroleum Council 2009, Populations of Dakota skipper in Dakota skipper populations. For p. 2). Permits dropped to 627 in 2009 Manitoba typically occupy flat terrain example, a site where the Dakota (North Dakota Petroleum Council 2010, that may be vulnerable to conversion to skipper and Poweshiek skipperling were p. 2), but increased dramatically to cropland, although soil conditions may recorded in 1997 (Skadsen 1997, pp. 1,676 in 2010 (Ogden 2011, p. 1). While be unsuitable for row crops at some of 15–16, B–1) in the Bitter Lake area of much of the oil activity is currently these sites (Webster 2003, p. 10). Day County, South Dakota, is now a occurring in areas of native prairie Similarly, conversion of native prairie to gravel pit, and the species’ habitat no overlaying the Bakken and Three Forks cropland continues to be a threat to longer exists there (Skadsen 2003, pp. formations to the west of known Poweshiek skipperling habitat 47–48). locations for both species, mineral throughout its range (Royer and Almost all prairie remnants with exploration has occurred in all but one Marrone 1992b, p. 17). Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota county in North Dakota (North Dakota The Dakota skipper, and until skipper populations are associated with Petroleum Council 2012, p. 1). recently, the Poweshiek skipperling, gravelly glacial till soils (Service 2014, McKenzie County falls in the center of have largely persisted in areas that are unpubl. geodatabase); therefore, gravel this development and McHenry County relatively unsuitable for row crop mining is a potential stressor to is also within these formations (Mueller agriculture because of their steep terrain populations at a large number of sites. 2013, pers. comm.). The oil (e.g., in the Prairie Coteau of South Gravel mining is a stressor to Poweshiek development on the Bakken formation Dakota) or where soils are too wet or skipperling and Dakota skipper in North Dakota, for example, may be a rocky for row-crop agriculture (McCabe populations at several sites in future stressor to Dakota skipper 1981, pp. 189–190, Webster 2003, p. 10). Minnesota (Dana 1997, p. 15). For populations in McKenzie County (Royer Densely spaced, large glacial rocks, for example, gravel mining is a stressor in and Royer 2012b, p. 16). Oil production example, may have deterred cultivation at least three of the five sites that is anticipated to continue to expand at at the Chippewa Prairie in Minnesota comprise the Felton Prairie complex record levels (MacPherson 2012, p. 1; and ‘‘spared Chippewa Prairie in (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, pp. 16– MacPherson 2010, entire). Minnesota from the plow’’ (Dana 2012, 17); however, the Clay County Native-prairie habitat would be pers. comm.). In areas where Poweshiek Stewardship Plan (Felton Prairie destroyed in the footprint of an oil and skipperling and Dakota skipper habitat Stewardship Committee 2002) may have gas well pad, but the pads are relatively persists but is adjacent to agriculture, reduced the likelihood of the gravel small. However, each oil and gas well added nutrients from agricultural runoff mining stressor to populations at this pad requires new road construction, and affects groundwater and additional complex. On at least seven sites in evidence suggests that Poweshiek nutrients in the system contribute to the Minnesota, Dakota skippers inhabit skipperlings may avoid crossing roads dominance of invasive plants (Fiedler northern dry prairie plant communities, (Westwood et al. 2012, p. 18). Energy and Landis 2012, p. 51: Michigan which are generally impacted by gravel development can double the density of Natural Features Inventory 2012, p. 4). mining due to the predominance of roads on range lands (e.g., Naugle et al. In summary, conversion for gravel soils (Minnesota DNR 2006, p. 2011, pp. 493–494), increase pipelines, agriculture on lands suitable for such 221). Gravel mining is a stressor to and increase the number of gravel pits purposes is a current, ongoing stressor populations of Dakota skipper in central to accommodate the increased road of high level of impact to the Poweshiek Manitoba (Rigney 2013a, p. 28). Gravel construction (Mueller 2013, pers.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63720 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

comm.). Development for coal-bed occurred (Pruett et al. 2009, p. 1256; Poweshiek skipperling habitat was natural gas (as described in Naugle Shaffer et al. 2012,unpaginated). Wind destroyed or degraded on at least two 2011), for example, in areas with development was assessed at nine private properties in Roberts County, ranching, tillage agriculture, and oil and Dakota skipper sites and six Poweshiek South Dakota, for example, in gas development, 70 percent of the skipperling sites where we had association with the widening of U.S. developed land was within 100 m (109 sufficient information. The level of Highway 12 (Skadsen 2003, p. 47). yards (yd)), and 85 percent of the threat was considered to be low at most Roadside prairie remnants can help developed land was within 200 m (218 sites because, although the site may be support populations of both species and yd), of a human structure (Naugle et al. in an area with the potential for wind serve as dispersal corridors between 2011, p. 493). Researchers estimated development, there are no specific plans larger remnants; therefore, loss of these that, in those areas, every square km or proposals to develop wind power on areas to road expansion or construction (0.39 square miles) of land may be both the site. further reduces and fragments bounded by a road and bisected by a Wind development is considered a remaining habitat. In Michigan, at least power line (Naugle et al. 2011, p. 493). stressor of high level of impact to one Poweshiek skipperling site and its These coal-bed natural gas populations at sites where development habitat has been negatively affected by developments can be densely located is proposed and there are no actions or recreational ‘mud bogging’, which (e.g., 8 wells per 640 acres) and are plans to mitigate impacts to the species. destroys vegetation and creates drilled vertically, whereas shale-oil For example, a wind facility was conditions conducive to invasive wells in the Bakken formation are recently proposed at a Dakota skipper species (Hicks 2014, pers. comm.). drilled horizontally and ‘‘relatively far site in South Dakota (Skadsen 2012d, In summary, nonagricultural apart’’ (Conoco Phillips 2013, in litt.). pers. comm.), which poses a high-level development, such as gravel mining, The habitat fragmentation associated threat for the species at that site because activities associated with energy with oil and gas development may there are no plans to mitigate impacts of development, or housing and road amplify other stressors to both species, habitat destruction. Although wind development, poses a current stressor of such as the effects of population power development currently poses a moderate to high impact to populations isolation and the impacts of stochastic high level of impact to the population on those lands that are not protected events. at only one site, the extent of this from destruction or conversion through Energy development has additional stressor will likely increase in the a conservation easement or fee title undesirable and potentially significant future, due to the high demand for wind ownership by a conservation agency. cumulative impacts on wildlife. energy and the number of Dakota This type of development may become Catastrophic events, such as oil and skipper and Poweshiek skipperling sites more widespread as such practices brine spills, could cause direct mortality that are conducive to wind development increase in the future. of Dakota skipper or Poweshiek (e.g., Skadsen 2003, pp. 47–48). As discussed above in Destruction skipperling larvae that are in shelters at Furthermore, power transmission lines and Conversion of Prairies to or below the soil surface. Such spills may be developed in order to Agricultural Land, we rated the level of may also cause the loss of larval host accommodate the added power of wind impact to the populations of the stressor and nectar plants in the spill path. farms, for instance, a new power line is posed by habitat destruction or Additional plants may be lost during currently being planned in the Prairie conversion for both agriculture and spill response, particularly if the Coteau in South Dakota for that purpose nonagricultural purposes combined response involves burning. The (Mueller 2013, pers. comm.). (except for conversion for wind energy likelihood, however, of spills occurring Housing construction has likely development, which was analyzed on the small fraction of land that contributed to the loss of at least two separately) at 144 Dakota skipper sites remains native tallgrass prairie in North Poweshiek skipperling populations in with present or unknown status (see Dakota (less than one percent according Michigan, and the largest extant Table 3) where we had sufficient to Samsom and Knoff 1994, p. 419) is population in Michigan is located in an information to evaluate the stressor. The low. area under intense development level of impact of each stressor to the Wind energy turbines and associated pressure (Michigan Natural Features population at each site is high at three infrastructure (e.g., maintenance roads) Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). of those sites, due to ongoing are likely stressors to Dakota skipper Residential wells and drainage disrupt destruction of the native prairie, or there and Poweshiek skipperling populations, prairie fen hydrology by reducing water was a high likelihood of conversion particularly on private land in South levels and, thus, facilitating rapid because it is located close to other Dakota (Skadsen 2002, p. 39; Skadsen growth of woody vegetation. In converted areas and the land is 2003, p. 47; Skadsen 2012d, pers. addition, nutrients added to the conducive for agriculture. The level of comm.). Similar to oil and gas groundwater from leaking septic tanks threat is high at 3 sites, moderate at 83 development, wind development would contribute to the dominance of invasive sites, and 58 sites are protected from destroy native-prairie habitat in the plants, such as narrow-leaved cattail destruction or conversion through a footprint of the structure, add access (Typha angustifolia) and red canary conservation easement or fee title roads and other infrastructure that may grass (Phalaris arundinacea) (Michigan ownership by a conservation agency further fragment prairies, and could be Natural Features Inventory 2012, p. 4). (Table 3). This stressor occurs across the catalysts for the spread of invasive Road construction impacts Poweshiek range of the Dakota skipper; the stressor species. Further, it is unknown if the skipperling and Dakota skipper habitat has a medium to high level of impact to noise and flicker effects associated with because it increases the demand for Dakota skipper populations in wind turbines may impact Dakota gravel, and impacts also result from Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, skipper or Poweshiek skipperling routine maintenance (e.g., broadcast Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. The level populations beyond direct impacts from herbicide applications, early mowing, of impact was considered to be low if the turbines and/or infrastructure. Other and cleaning out ditches), the site is protected from destruction or wildlife species, such as birds, have improvements (e.g., widening roads or conversion by fee title ownership by a shown significant avoidance of converting two-lane highways to four- governmental conservation agency, grasslands where wind development has lane highways), or new construction. nongovernmental conservation

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63721

organization (e.g., The Nature and associated alteration of the Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). The Conservancy), or educational institution landscape (e.g., road work that causes status of Poweshiek skipperling is (e.g., South Dakota State University). changes to overland drainage) is a unknown at one fen site where the Similarly, 41 Poweshiek skipperling stressor to the species at some sites in hydrology was likely disrupted by roads sites with present or unknown status Manitoba (Rigney 2013a, p. 28). and extensive residential development were assessed that had sufficient Fluctuating water levels are a current in close proximity to the fen (Michigan information: The level of threat was stressor to populations across both Natural Features Inventory 2011, high at 2 sites and moderate at 11 sites, species’ ranges. Loss of habitat or direct unpubl. data). and 28 sites are protected from mortality due to fluctuating water The level of impact to populations destruction or conversion through a levels, such as permanent flooding or due to flooding was assessed at 12 conservation easement or fee title wetland draining, is a current stressor to Dakota skipper sites with present or ownership by a conservation agency populations in at least 14 Dakota unknown status that had sufficient (Table 4). At least 6 of the 12 sites where skipper sites with present or unknown information to evaluate the stressor the Poweshiek skipperling is considered status and 19 Poweshiek skipperling (Table 3); this evaluation only included to still be present have a medium or sites with present or unknown status. sites in North and South Dakota. high risk of conversion. This stressor For example, one of the three sites with Flooding is a stressor of moderate-level occurs across most of the Poweshiek present or unknown status of Poweshiek impact to populations at 6 of the sites, skipperling range; the stressor has a skipperling in Wisconsin, Puchyan where there is evidence of recent or medium to high level of impact to Prairie, is subject to flooding—the entire pending decrease in the quality or Poweshiek skipperling populations in prairie portion of the site was extent of suitable habitat at the site due Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and South submerged in 1993 (Hoffman 2011, pers. to a change in wetland vegetation, Dakota; the level of impact is low for the comm.; Wisconsin DNR 2012, in litt). wetland hydrology, or flooding—all of species at the Manitoba location. The number of Poweshiek skipperling these sites occur in North Dakota observed at that site is consistently low. (Service 2012 unpubl. data; Service Fluctuating Water Levels Flooding is a likely factor that has 2014, unpubl. data). Similarly, we Flooding is a stressor to Poweshiek contributed to the low numbers assessed 19 Poweshiek skipperling sites skipperlings and Dakota skippers at observed in at least part of this site with present or unknown occupancy for sites where too much of the species’ (Borkin 2012c, pers. comm.). the level of impact to populations due habitat is flooded or where patches are Conversely, groundwater disruption to water fluctuations (e.g., flooding or flooded too frequently. Poweshiek and draining is a stressor at all 9 of the draining) where we had sufficient skipperlings and Dakota skippers must Michigan prairie fen Poweshiek information to evaluate the stressor either survive flooding events in skipperling sites where the species is (Table 4). Water fluctuations is a numbers sufficient to rebuild present and high at one site with stressor with moderate impact to the populations after the flood or recolonize unknown occupancy. Interrupted populations at 3 Poweshiek skipperling the area from nearby areas that had not groundwater flow-through fens can sites (including a site in Wisconsin— flooded. In addition, the return interval reduce water levels and facilitate woody one of the 12 Poweshiek skipperling of floods must be infrequent enough to vegetation establishment and growth sites with a present status), and changes allow for recovery of the populations (Michigan Natural Features Inventory to hydrology is a stressor of moderate- between floods. Changes in hydrology 2012, p. 4). Agricultural and residential to high-level impact to populations at resulting from wetland draining and drains and wells can lower the all 11 Michigan sites (including 9 of 12 development may permanently alter the groundwater table, thereby reducing the Poweshiek skipperling sites that have a plant community and, therefore, pose a supply of calcareous seepage, which is present status) and 1 site in North threat to Poweshiek skipperling and an essential underlying component of Dakota (Service 2012 unpubl. data; Dakota skipper due to loss of larval food prairie fen hydrology (Michigan Natural Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). and nectar sources. Features Inventory 2012, p. 4). In summary, fluctuating water levels The Dakota skipper and Poweshiek Furthermore, nutrient additions is a current and ongoing stressor of skipperling are presumed extirpated associated with drain fields can moderate level of impact to populations from several sites due to flooding or contribute to invasive species where the habitat may be temporarily draining. For example, one Dakota encroachment. For instance, if lost due to intermittent flooding and is skipper site was lost to flooding due to groundwater flow to prairie wetlands is a stressor of high severity where a rising water levels at Bitter Lake, South severed, fen habitats may convert from change in hydrology may completely Dakota (Skadsen 1997, p. 15). At native grasses and flowering forbs to degrade the habitat quality of a site, Whalen Lake Fen in Michigan, dredging habitats dominated by invasive species particularly prairie fens. and channelization disrupted the or woody vegetation (Fiedler and Landis hydrology of the site and the fen has 2012, p. 51, Michigan Natural Features Invasive Species and Secondary since been invaded by glossy buckthorn Inventory 2012, p. 4). The site with the Succession and narrow leaf cattail; Poweshiek highest number of Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperlings and Dakota skipperlings are presumed to be skipperlings in Michigan, for instance, skippers typically occur at sites extirpated from the site (Michigan is partially bordered by residential areas embedded in agricultural or developed Natural Features Inventory 2011, and is under intense development landscapes, which make them more unpubl. data). The loss of a large area pressure (Michigan Natural Features susceptible to nonnative or woody plant of habitat at two sites in Manitoba, Inventory2011, unpubl. data). At least 8 invasion. Nonnative species including which were previously suitable for of the 11 fen sites with present or leafy spurge, Kentucky bluegrass, Dakota skipper, was caused by unknown status are at least partially alfalfa, glossy buckthorn, smooth brome, prolonged inundation of water that unprotected from development, and at purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), likely caused larval mortality and least 7 of those are closely bordered by Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), reed mortality of suitable nectar and larval roads, agriculture, or residential canary grass, and others, have invaded food plants (Rigney 2013a, pp. 28, 153). developments (Michigan Natural Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota In addition, flood protection activities Features Inventory 2011, unpubl. data; skipper habitat throughout their ranges

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63722 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(Orwig 1997, pp. 4, 8; Michigan Natural likely disrupted the hydrology of a of invasive species to populations on Features Inventory 2011, unpubl. data; prairie fen where the Poweshiek small and isolated sites (e.g., Big Stone Skadsen 2002, p. 52; Royer and Royer skipperling was last observed in 2007 NWR) is a current and ongoing stressor 2012b, pp. 15–16, 22–23). Kentucky and where 2008 and 2009 surveys for of high level of impact to populations, bluegrass and leafy spurge (and the Poweshiek skipperlings were negative because Dakota skipper and Poweshiek persistent efforts for chemical control of (Michigan Natural Features Inventory skipperling populations have little leafy spurge) have been cited as one of 2011, unpubl. data). Furthermore, on resilience to the resulting habitat the major stressors to native-prairie some sites, land managers intentionally degradation and to the often aggressive habitat at several public and privately facilitated succession of native-prairie management needed to control the owned Dakota skipper sites in North communities to woody vegetation or invasive plants. Loss of habitat or Dakota (Royer and Royer 2012b, pp. 15– trees, such as Ponderosa pine (Pinus degradation of the native plant 16, 22–23; Royer 2012, pers. comm.; ponderosa) or spruce (e.g., Dana 1997, community due to encroachment of Royer 2013, pers. comm.). Once these p. 5). This converts prairie to shrubland, invasive species or woody vegetation is plants invade a site, they replace or forest, or semi-forested habitat types and considered a high level of impact to reduce the coverage of native forbs and facilitates invasion of adjacent native populations at 12 of the 65 assessed grasses used by adults and larvae of prairie by exotic, cool-season grasses, Dakota skipper sites, a moderate level of both butterflies. Leafy spurge displaces such as smooth brome. Moreover, the impact to populations at 33 sites, and native plant species, and its invasion is trees and shrubs provide perches for low impact to populations at 20 sites. facilitated by actions that remove native birds that may prey on the butterflies Sites with high and moderate level of plant cover and expose mineral soil (Royer and Marrone 1992b, p. 15; 1992a, impact occur throughout the species (Belcher and Wilson 1989, p. 172). The p. 25). range in Minnesota, and North and seasonal senescence patterns (timing of We rated the level of impact to South Dakota (Service 2012 unpubl. growth) of grass species as they relate to populations of invasive species at 65 data; Service 2014, unpubl. data). the larval period of Dakota skippers Dakota skipper sites and 46 Poweshiek Similarly, invasive species are a stressor determine which grass species are skipperling sites that had sufficient of high level of impact to populations at suitable larval host plants. Exotic cool- information to evaluate the stressor 6 of the 46 evaluated Poweshiek season grasses, such as Kentucky (Table 3 and Table 4; Service 2012 skipperling sites, moderate level of bluegrass and smooth brome, are unpubl. data; Service 2014, unpubl. impact to populations at 29 sites, and available when Dakota skipper and data). This stressor is considered to have low level of impact to populations at 11 Poweshiek skipperling larvae begin a low level of impact to the populations sites—sites with high and moderate feeding; however, the morphology and if there was either no information to levels of impact are throughout the growth habit of these grasses are likely indicate a stressor or management was range of the species in Iowa, Minnesota, major determinants of their ongoing to control invasive species Michigan, North Dakota, South Dakota, unsuitability to support Dakota skippers using methods that are unlikely to cause Wisconsin, and Manitoba and include at (Dana 1991, pp. 46–47). Thus, a adverse effects to Dakota skippers or least 9 of the 12 sites where the species prevalence of these grasses reduces food Poweshiek skipperlings (e.g., spot- is still present (Service 2014, unpubl. availability for the larvae. spraying or hand-pulling). Sites were data). assigned a moderate level of impact to The stressor from nonnative invasive populations if invasive species are Fire herbaceous species is compounded by typically a primary driver of Dakota skipper and Poweshiek the encroachment of woody species into management actions and make it skipperling populations existed native-prairie habitat. Glossy buckthorn difficult for managers to specifically historically in a vast ecosystem and gray dogwood encroachment, for tailor management to conserve Dakota maintained in part by fire. Due to the example, is a major stressor to skipper or Poweshiek skipperling great extent of tallgrass prairie in the Poweshiek skipperling populations at habitat. The site was assigned a high past, fire and other intense disturbances the Brandt Road Fen in Michigan, level of impact to populations if one or (e.g., locally intensive bison grazing) which supports the second largest more nonnative invasive plant species likely affected only a small proportion population of Poweshiek skipperlings in are abundant or increasing and of the habitat each year, allowing for the State (Michigan Natural Features management activities are not being recolonization from unaffected areas Inventory 2011, unpubl. data). Invasion implemented to control their expansion; during the subsequent flight period of tallgrass prairie and prairie fens by or if necessary management actions (Swengel 1998, p. 83). Fire can improve woody vegetation such as glossy cannot be implemented without Poweshiek skipperling (Cuthrell 2009, buckthorn reduces light availability, themselves causing an additional pers. comm.) and Dakota skipper habitat total plant cover, and the coverage of stressor to the Dakota skipper or (e.g., by helping to control woody grasses and sedges (Fiedler and Landis Poweshiek skipperling populations at vegetation encroachment), but it may 2012, pp. 44, 50–51). This in turn the site. also kill most or all of the individuals reduces the availability of both nectar Invasive species are a current and in the burned units and alter entire and larval host plants for Poweshiek ongoing stressor with high levels of remnant prairie patches, if not properly skipperlings and Dakota skippers. If impact to Dakota skipper and managed (e.g., depends on the timing, groundwater flow to prairie wetlands is Poweshiek skipperling populations on intensity, etc.). Accidental wildfires also disrupted (e.g., by development) or sites where land management is may burn entire prairie tracts (Dana intercepted (e.g., digging a pond in conducive to their invasion or 1997, p. 15) and may hamper plans to adjacent uplands or installing wells for expansion or where they have become carefully manage Dakota skipper and irrigation or drinking water), it can so pervasive that even favorable Poweshiek skipperling habitat. A quickly convert to shrubs or other management may not be quickly human-set wildfire in late fall 2009 and invasive species (Fiedler and Landis effective. Succession is a current and another extensive fire in 2011, for 2012, p. 51; Michigan Natural Features ongoing stressor of moderate-level example, burned considerable amounts Inventory 2012, p. 4). For example, impact to populations at sites where of good prairie habitat in The Nature roads and residential development management is insufficient. The stressor Conservancy of Canada’s Tall Grass

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63723

Prairie Preserve in Manitoba (Hamel et inhabitance (dry uplands burn more relationship of mortality risk to the al. 2013, p. 1; Westwood 2010, pers. thoroughly than wetter habitats); (3) timing of spring burns. Experiments to comm.), which is the only location in nonvagility (low recolonization rate); evaluate the effects of early spring Canada where Poweshiek skipperlings and (4) univoltine (slower recovery rates versus late spring fires and of different are present; Dakota skippers are for species with only one generation per fuel levels on Dakota skipper mortality extirpated from the site. The fires at The year). Species exhibiting all four traits found that, despite higher ambient Nature Conservancy of Canada’s Tall should be considered ‘‘hypersensitive’’ temperatures during the early spring Grass Prairie Preserve may have killed to fire (Panzer 2002, p. 1306). While not burn, temperatures at the average depth overwintering larvae, and the specifically included in his study, the of buried Dakota skipper shelters (Dana population of Poweshiek skipperling in Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota 1991, p. 11) were 10 °C (50 °F) higher Canada ‘‘may have been greatly reduced skipper meet all of Panzer’s criteria for during the late-spring burn (Dana 1991, as a result of these fires’’ (Hamel et al. hypersensitivity (Panzer 2002, p. 1306) p. 41). Fuel load was positively related 2013, p. 1). and have additional life-history traits to subsurface soil temperature (Dana Intentional fires, without careful that further suggest hypersensitivity to 1991, pp. 41–43). Fuel loads that were planning, may also have significant fire. Panzer (2002) observed mean clearly associated with lethal subsoil adverse effects on populations of Dakota declines of 67 percent among fire- temperatures, however, were more skippers and Poweshiek skipperlings, negative species, although actual typical of mesic tallgrass prairie, which especially after repeated events (McCabe mortality was likely higher due to some had about twice the fuel loads of the 1981, pp. 190–191; Dana 1991, pp. 41– immigration into experimental areas dry-mesic habitats inhabited by Dakota 45, 54–55; Swengel 1998, p. 83; Orwig after the burn. When all or large skippers on the site (Dana 1991, pp. 41, and Schlicht 1999, pp. 6, 8). In portions of prairie remnants are burned, 54). Although Dana’s study was systematic surveys of Minnesota many or all prairie butterflies may be inconclusive in quantifying the risk of tallgrass prairies, for example, Dakota eliminated at once. Complete mortality in relation to the timing of skippers were less abundant on sites extirpation of a population, however, spring burns, he was able to conclude that had been burned, compared with may not occur after a single burn event that a late-spring burn in ‘‘moderate’’ otherwise similar hayed sites (Swengel (Panzer 2002, p. 1306), and the extent of fuels (430–440 g/m2) would have a 1998, p. 80; Swengel and Swengel 1999, effects would vary depending on time of devastating effect on Dakota skipper pp. 278–279). Similarly, Schlicht year and fuel load. populations, and that early spring (1997b, p. 5) counted fewer Dakota Poweshiek skipperlings lay their eggs burning would afford some amelioration skippers per hour in burned than on near the tips of leaf blades, and they (Dana 1991, p. 55). grazed sites in Minnesota. Orwig and overwinter as larvae on the host plants Rotational burning may benefit prairie Schlicht (1999, p. 8) speculated that (Borkin 2000, p. 2), where they are butterflies by increasing nectar plant inappropriate use of prescribed burning exposed to fires during their larval density and by positively affecting soil eliminated Dakota skippers from the last stages. Poweshiek skipperlings have temperature and near-surface humidity known occupied site in Iowa, a 65-ha also been documented laying eggs on levels due to reductions in litter (Dana (160-ac) preserve. The effects of fire on the entire length of grass leaf blades and 1991, pp. 53–55; Murphy et al. 2005, p. prairie butterfly populations are on low-growing deciduous foliage 208; Dana 2008, p. 20). Purple difficult to ascertain (Dana 2008, p. 18), (Dupont 2013, p. 133). If larvae are on coneflower and little bluestem, for but the apparent hypersensitivity of prairie dropseed or little bluestem, example, occurred more frequently on Poweshiek skipperlings and Dakota which occur in dry prairie, rather than burned areas than on unburned areas in skippers indicates that it is a stressor to spike-rush or sedges, which typically mixed-grass prairie at Lostwood both species in habitats burned too occur in wet prairie, then the larvae are National Wildlife Refuge in frequently or too broadly. The even more vulnerable to fire (Selby northwestern North Dakota (Murphy et Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota 2005, p. 36). Unlike Dakota skippers, al. 2005, pp. 208–209). An increase in skipper are not known to disperse Poweshiek skipperlings do not burrow purple coneflower, an important nectar widely (Swengel 1996, p. 81; Burke et into the soil surface (McAlpine 1972, source for Dakota skippers and al. 2011, p. 2279); therefore, in order to pp. 88–92; Borkin 1995, p. 9), which Poweshiek skipperlings, may last for 1– reap the benefits of fire to habitat makes them more vulnerable to fire (and 2 years after early spring fires, and quality, Poweshiek skipperlings and likely more vulnerable to chemicals females may preferentially oviposit near Dakota skippers must either survive in such as herbicides and pesticides) concentrations of this nectar source numbers sufficient to rebuild throughout their larval stages. Species (Dana 2008, p. 20). populations after the fire or recolonize whose larvae spend more time above Although fire tends to increase native the area from a nearby unburned area. ground, such as Poweshiek skipperlings, plant diversity in prairies (Murphy et al. In addition, the return interval of fires are likely more vulnerable to fire than 2005, pp. 208–209), several years may needs to be infrequent enough to allow species that form underground shelters. be necessary for Dakota skipper and for recovery of the populations between As the spring progresses, however, the Poweshiek skipperling populations to burns. Therefore, fire is a stressor to vulnerability of Dakota skippers to fire recover after a burn. Few studies have Poweshiek skipperlings and Dakota increases as larvae shift from buried documented recovery times for prairie skippers at any site where too little of shelters to horizontal shelters at the soil butterflies after a burn, and even fewer the species’ habitat is left unburned or surface (Dana 1991, p. 16). have measured the relationships where patches are burned too Studies of all life-stages may be between species abundance in tallgrass frequently. necessary to fully evaluate these prairies and time since burn. One such Panzer (2002, p. 1306) identified four species’ response to fire. Early spring study, however, found lower relative life-history traits of duff-dwelling burns may be less likely to harm Dakota abundances of Dakota skippers and insects (such as the Dakota skipper and skipper populations than late spring Poweshiek skipperlings in burned units Poweshiek skipperling) that were good burns, due to larval phenology and than in otherwise similar hayed units predictors of a negative response to fire: differences in subsurface soil even 4 years after burns (Swengel 1996, (1) Remnant dependence (occurring as temperatures during the fire; however, p. 83). Poweshiek skipperling had the small, isolated populations); (2) upland studies have not conclusively linked the most negative initial response to fire

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63724 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

among six species of prairie-obligate Poweshiek skipperling habitat that may documented at a high or moderate level butterfly species (Swengel 1996, p. 83). be burned in a single year or where all of impact to populations at several sites Numbers were still lower than expected of the species’ habitat is burned with no in North Dakota, South Dakota, 1 year post-fire, exceeded expectations likely source of immigrants to sustain Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Tallgrass after 2 years, and declined slightly after the population. This type of fire Prairie Preserve in Manitoba. 3 years (Swengel 1996, p. 83). In management is a documented cause of Grazing habitats that had not been burned for 4 extirpation (Selby 2000, p. 19). Sites or more years, Poweshiek skipperling with a moderate level of impact to As with fire management, grazing may abundance was about as low as in populations from fire management were maintain habitat for the Poweshiek habitats sampled less than 1 year after those where the habitat is divided into skipperling and Dakota skipper, but as being burned (Swengel 1996, p. 83). The at least three burn units and no unit is with any management practice, 2012 spring burn that comprised burned more frequently than once every appropriate timing, frequency, and approximately 25–30 percent of the 3 years; or, habitat is divided into two intensity are important. The level of breeding habitat at Scuppernong SNA or more burn units, each unit is burned impact of grazing on Dakota skipper and may have contributed to the apparent no more frequently than once every 3 Poweshiek skipperling populations also absence of the species in 2013—the years, but the entirety of the species’ depends on the type of habitat that is relatively small population that was also habitat is never burned in the same year being grazed. In contrast to the affected by the 2012 summer drought and the species is present at another site permanent habitat destruction and and the cold wet spring of 2013 (Borkin that is less than 1 km (1.6 mi) away. larval mortality caused by plowing or 2014, pers. comm.) Fire is considered to be a stressor of mining, for example, some habitats can Poweshiek skipperling numbers moderate severity at 4 of the 20 remain suitable for the Dakota skipper decline in burned areas for at least 1– evaluated Dakota skipper sites and 2 of and Poweshiek skipperling when grazed 2 years after the burn, and may take the 16 Poweshiek skipperling sites. Fire (Dana 1991, p. 54, Schlicht 1997, p. 5, several years to rebound, but may presents a low level of impact to Skadsen 1997, pp. 24–29), and native decline again if management does not populations at sites where the species’ plant diversity in tallgrass prairie may maintain the habitat (Skadsen 2001, p. habitat is divided into at least four burn recover from overgrazing if it has not 37; Webster 2003, p. 12). In general, units and no unit is burned more been too severe or prolonged. In rebound times of 1–5 years postburn frequently than once every 4 years; or, addition, grazing may be a valuable tool have been predicted (Panzer 2002, pp. the species’ habitat is divided into three for controlling smooth brome invasion 1302–1303); however, Vogel et. al (2010, or more burn units, at least three units and maintaining native diversity in p. 671) found that habitat-specialist are burned no more frequently than prairies, especially where circumstances butterfly abundance rebound time was once every 4 years, and the site contains make the use of fire difficult or approximately 50 months after more than 140 ha (346 ac) of native undesirable (Service 2006, p. 2; Smart et prescribed fires. Swengel (1996, pp. 73, prairie or where the site is separated al. 2013, pp. 685–686). Conversely, 78–79) describes that the negative from another occupied site by less than grazing may stimulate brome growth effects of fire persist for prairie 1 km (1.6 mi). Fire is considered to be and reduce native plant diversity. specialists for 3 to 5 plus years, and a stressor with a low level of impact to Grazing may benefit the Dakota these species were collectively the most populations at 6 of the 20 evaluated skipper and Poweshiek skipperling abundant after 5 or more years since the Dakota skipper sites and 10 of the 16 under some management scenarios (e.g., last fire. In Manitoba, Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling sites. adaptive management to adjust grazing skipperling populations were most In summary, fire may be an important prescriptions according to their effects numerous in sites burned 5–8 years management tool for these butterflies, if on essential features of the prairie previously—the species was absent in carried out appropriately. However, ecosystem). In some habitats, Dakota sites that were burned the previous year, where managers burn without ensuring skippers benefit from light grazing that in small numbers in areas that were a sufficient amount of contiguous or minimizes the area dominated by tall burned 2–4 years prior, and absent from nearby habitat from which immigrants grasses (e.g., big bluestem and areas that were burned 10 or more years can re-inhabit burned areas or if not indiangrass) (Dana 1991, p. 54). Dakota previous to the survey (Dupont 2013, conducted with conservation of prairie skippers were relatively abundant on pp. 4, 86–87). Recent survey results in invertebrates as a primary objective, fire prairies subjected to light grazing some areas, most notably, Iowa and is a current stressor that can have regimes, but absent on nearby idle Minnesota, indicate that other factors moderate impacts on populations. prairies that were no longer used for are acting independently (Dana 2008, p. Uncontrolled wildfires may also have grazing; moreover, more Dakota 18) or in concert with fire to forestall high or moderate levels of impacts to skippers were observed per hour on the post-fire rebound. populations, and would also depend on lightly grazed prairies than on nearby We assessed the stressor posed by fire the timing, intensity, and extent of the habitat managed with fire (Schlicht at 20 Dakota skipper sites with present burn. Poweshiek skipperlings may be 1997b, p. 5). Similarly, in eastern South or unknown status and 16 Poweshiek among the most sensitive of prairie Dakota, Dakota skipper populations skipperling sites with present or butterflies to fire, and thus, coordination were deemed secure at some sites unknown status where we had sufficient between habitat managers and butterfly managed with rotational grazing light information to evaluate the stressor experts is necessary to ensure that it is enough to maintain plant species (Tables 3 and 4; Service 2012, unpubl. not implemented in a manner that diversity (Skadsen 1997, pp. 24–29), but data; Service 2014, unpubl. data). We degrades population viability. Fire is a the species was since extirpated at one considered fire a stressor of high level current and ongoing stressor of high site where a change in ownership of impact to populations at 10 of the 20 level of impact where burns occur resulted in significant overgrazing evaluated Dakota skipper sites and 4 of without ensuring there is a sufficient (Skadsen 2006b, p. 5). The economic the 16 Poweshiek skipperling sites. Sites amount of contiguous or nearby habitat benefit of grazing to ranchers may also that face a high level of impact to from which immigrants can re-inhabit benefit the species at some sites by populations were primarily those with a burned areas. Fire is an ongoing stressor deterring conversion of remnant prairies high proportion of Dakota skipper or rangewide for both species and has been to row crop agriculture; however, recent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63725

evidence indicates that conversion is skipperling, and grazing may have a (McCabe and Post 1977, pp. 36–38; more economically viable (Dowd 2013, larger impact on the Poweshiek Royer and Marrone 1992a, pp. 10, 17, pers. comm.). skipperling than the Dakota skipper 28; Royer and Marrone 1992b, pp. 17– Bison (Bison bison) grazed at least (Westwood 2013, pers. comm.). Grazing 18; Royer and Royer 1998, p. 22). some Dakota skipper and Poweshiek reduces Dakota skipper numbers in Webster (2003, pp. 7–8) described very skipperling habitats historically direct proportion to its intensity, due to similar Dakota skipper habitats in (McCabe 1981, p. 190; Bragg 1995, p. 68; the reduction in flowers that provide Manitoba and, although grazing Schlicht and Orwig 1998, pp. 4, 8; nectar and perhaps by influencing adult generally does not occur in these Trager et al. 2004, pp. 237–238), but behavior (Dana 1997, p. 4). Dana (1997, habitats that are occupied by Dakota cattle (Bos taurus) are now the principal p. 5) predicted that privately owned skipper, they may be as sensitive to grazing ungulate in both species’ ranges. pastures in Minnesota’s Hole-in-the- grazing as similar habitats in North Bison and cattle both feed primarily on Mountain complex, for example, will Dakota; in a later report, he described grass, but have some dissimilar effects likely only support low densities of the conversion of lands from haying to on prairie habitats (Damhoureyeh and skippers if they continued to be heavily grazing as a major stressor to Dakota Hartnett 1997, pp. 1721–1725; Matlack grazed and sprayed with herbicides. skipper in the wet-mesic habitats of et al. 2001, pp. 366–367). Cattle Surveys at this habitat complex in 2007, Manitoba (Webster 2007, pp. i–ii, 6). consume proportionally more grass and 2008, and 2012 failed to record any More recently, it is thought that the grasslike plants than bison, whereas Poweshiek skipperlings (Dana 2008, p. effects of grazing in Manitoba and bison consume more browse and forbs 8; Selby 2009a, pp. xxxi–xxxii; Runquist Saskatchewan, as stated in Webster (flowering herbaceous plants) 2012a, pers. comm.; Runquist 2012, pp. (2007, entire), may not be applicable (Damhoureyeh and Hartnett 1997, p. 13–14, 18–20), and Dakota skippers under current population sizes, and that 1719). Grasslands grazed by bison may were not detected in 2012 surveys even light grazing may be detrimental also have greater plant species richness (Runquist 2012, pp. 13–14, 18–20; on dry short grass prairie sites prior to and spatial heterogeneity than those Runquist 2012a, pers. comm.). and during the Dakota skipper flight grazed by cattle (Towne et al. 2005, pp. While most references to grazing period (Westwood 2013, pers. comm.). 1553–1555). Both species remove forage impacts on prairie butterflies are based In the drier and hillier habitats that for larvae (palatable grass tissue) and on ancillary observations made during the species inhabits, grazing may benefit adults (nectar-bearing plant parts), research focused on other management Dakota skipper depending on its change vegetation structure, trample impacts, one Minnesota study (Selby intensity. For example, in eastern South larvae, and alter larval microhabitats. 2006b) focused on the effects of grazing Dakota, Dakota skipper populations Livestock grazing was identified as a on all life stages of the Dakota skipper, were deemed secure at some sites stressor to populations on most of the and also included data for the adult managed with rotational grazing that privately owned sites and some public stage of the Poweshiek skipperling. Both was sufficiently light to maintain native sites on which Dakota skippers occurred species were too scarce to collect data plant species diversity (Skadsen 1997, in 2002 (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, adequate to test the hypotheses (Selby pp. 24–29), and grazing may also benefit pp. 62–69). Swengel and Swengel (1999, 2006b, p. 2), but observations based on Dakota skippers by reducing the area p. 286), for example, noted that at the 2 years (2003 and 2004) of surveys dominated by tall native grasses, such as Sheyenne National Grassland in North suggested that numbers in the lightly to big bluestem and Indiangrass (Dana Dakota, grazing appeared to be moderately grazed pasture were similar 1991). Proximity of nearby populations unfavorable for the Poweshiek to those in the best portions of nearby or contiguous habitat may alleviate skipperling and Dakota skipper. ungrazed habitats (Selby 2006b, p. 30). some of the negative impacts of grazing. Reduced availability of nectar Poweshiek skipperlings were almost Royer and Marrone (1992b, p. 29; 1992a, resources and larval food plants is likely absent from the study sites (Selby p. 18) stated that heavy grazing was a the primary factor leading to declines in 2006b, pp. iii–xxiii). Within the grazed stressor to Dakota skippers and Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota study area, the number of Dakota Poweshiek skipperlings, but that skipper populations on heavily grazed skippers declined with increasing occasional light grazing is not a long- sites. In South Dakota, for example, grazing intensity; Dakota skippers were term stressor in some habitats as long as Higgins (1999, p. 15) found lower plant absent from the most heavily grazed there are areas of contiguous habitat that diversity on privately owned prairies, areas (Selby 2006b, p. 16). Skadsen remain ungrazed. At Chekapa Creek which were mostly grazed, than on (2001, p. 55) found that native forb Ridge and Knapp Pasture in South publicly owned prairies, which were diversity was poor on the grazed lands Dakota, heavy grazing apparently almost all idle (no grazing or fire and predicted the extirpation of both extirpated both the Poweshiek management). McCabe (1981, p. 189) species unless management practices skipperling and Dakota skipper observed that grazing eliminated Dakota were changed. The Dakota skipper is (Skadsen 2002, p. 38; 2004, p. 7; 2006a, skippers on North Dakota wet-mesic now extirpated at one of these sites, and p. 11). Due to its proximity to other prairies; nectar plants such as yellow its status is unknown at the other; Poweshiek skipperling populations and sundrops and bluebell bellflower Poweshiek skipperling status is a return to fall haying in 2005, the rapidly diminished with light grazing, unknown at both sites (Service 2014, Poweshiek skipperling recolonized and heavy grazing eliminated upright unpubl. geodatabase). Spomer (2004, p. Chekapa Creek Ridge in 2006 (Skadsen prairie coneflower and purple 4) found that larval host plants and 2006a, p. 12), but more recent surveys coneflower. In Manitoba, certain levels nectar sources were missing from indicate that the Poweshiek skipperling of grazing are likely to adversely affect heavily grazed pastures at Sheyenne has again been extirpated from this site Dakota skipper populations in National Grassland, North Dakota. due to habitat degradation because of a proportion to its intensity because it Grazing intensity combined with change from haying to grazing (Skadsen removes nectar sources (e.g., Rigney varying habitat type may also affect the 2012a, pers. comm., Skadsen 2012c, 2013a, pp. 143 and 153). level of grazing impacts. On wet-mesic pers. comm.). The intensity at which grazing occurs habitat in North Dakota, for example, As with fire, Dakota skipper and may dictate the level of impact to the Dakota skippers and Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling populations may Dakota skipper and Poweshiek skipperlings tolerate little to no grazing persist through intense grazing episodes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63726 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

or be restored afterwards, if sufficient Grazing also causes direct mortality of (number of cattle or bison over a given numbers survive and reproduce in larvae due to trampling and altering area) have little or no evidence of lightly grazed patches or if nearby larval microhabitats (Royer et al. 2008, grazing effects on Dakota skipper or habitats provide sufficient numbers of pp. 10–15). In North Dakota, grazing can Poweshiek skipper habitat quality, we immigrants to reestablish the population compact soils in wet-mesic prairie found the level of impact to populations after habitat quality is restored. Years of inhabited by Dakota skippers and of grazing to be low. For Type B habitat grazing without rest, however, may Poweshiek skipperlings, altering vertical (Royer et al. 2008, p. 14), we assumed preclude recovery from the effects of water movement in the soil, which may that the level of impact of grazing to intense grazing, although the capacity lead to larval desiccation (Royer et al. populations would be low if the dry- for restoration of suitable plant 2008, p. 16) and may inhibit subsurface mesic slopes were grazed only before community and other habitat features shelter construction, potentially June 1 with at least one year of rest may be highly variable among sites. On increasing larval vulnerability to between rotations and if the pasture some sites, plant diversity may not be predators, parasites, and other were only spot-sprayed with herbicides restored when grazing pressure declines environmental stressors (Dana 2013, when and where necessary, or, the best (Dana 1997, p. 30; Jackson 1999, pp. pers. comm.). Cattle may also kill larvae available information does not indicate 134–135; Spomer 2004, p. 4). Grazing by trampling them, particularly in wet- that grazing practices are degrading intensely (where a high proportion of mesic prairies (McCabe 1981, p. 189). habitat quality for the species (i.e., no plant biomass is removed) or for long Livestock grazing is the predominant apparent diminishment of nectar plant duration leads to native plants being use of privately owned tallgrass prairie density and diversity and habitat is replaced with exotic, cool-season remnants in South Dakota (Higgins good or excellent for Dakota skipper). European forage grasses and legumes 1999, p. 15) and was identified by the At grazed sites where extirpation of that are tolerant of continuous grazing Service as a stressor on most of the the local population is not imminent, (Jackson 1999, p. 128, Minnesota DNR privately owned sites on which Dakota but habitat quality is fair to poor and the 2006, p. 232). In overgrazed native skipper occurred when the species was relative abundance of Dakota skippers prairie in Minnesota, for example, the identified as a candidate species in 2002 or Poweshiek skipperlings is often low, prairie is dominated by exotic grasses (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, pp. 62– we found the level of impact of grazing with a low native forb species diversity 69). The presence and density of purple to populations to be moderate. Sites and abundance, and foliage height is coneflower may serve as an indicator of with a moderate level of impact to less than 10 cm (4 in) (Dana 1997, p. 3); grazing impacts to Dakota skippers and populations due to grazing may be these prairies lack the native plants Poweshiek skipperlings where the lightly grazed for less than 4 months or necessary to sustain adult and larval species occur in dry-mesic prairie less than 25 percent of the above-ground prairie butterflies. In comparison, sites (Skadsen 2006a, p. 2); grazing from mid- biomass of native grasses and forbs is less disturbed by grazing have a high June through July may reduce purple consumed (Smart et al. 2011, pp. 182– native forb (nectar) species diversity and coneflower abundance (Skadsen 2007, 183), are grazed after June 1, or are not abundance foliage height is generally pers. comm.)—as discussed in the given a year of rest between grazed more conducive to perching and Background section of this rule, purple years. At sites where grazing is reproductive activities (between 25 and coneflower has been identified as a conducted season-long, or for more than 40 cm (10 and 16 in)) (Dana 1997, p. 2). primary source of nectar for both 4 months during the year, or more than Land managers also frequently use species, particularly in dry prairie 50 percent of the above-ground biomass herbicides, often through broadcast habitats. of native grasses and forbs is consumed application, to control weeds and brush Britten and Glasford (2002, p. 373) and herbicide use is frequent, we found on grazed remnant prairies, which recommended minimizing disturbance the level of impact of grazing to further reduces native forb diversity and of Dakota skipper habitat during the populations to be high. At sites where abundance (Dana 1997, p. 3; Stark et al. flight period (late June to early July) to grazing is a high-level stressor, 2012, pp. 25, 27) necessary for adult maximize genetically effective extirpation of the population is likely nectar sources. Skadsen (2006, p. 11), population sizes (the number of adults imminent and habitat quality is poor. for example, documented the likely reproducing) to offset the effects of On public lands inhabited by the extirpation of Dakota skippers at Knapp genetic drift of small populations species, grazing is typically used to Ranch in South Dakota after a July 2006 (change in gene frequency over time due control nonnative cool-season grasses application of broadleaf herbicide in to random sampling or chance, rather and invasive species. Cattle are often concert with heavy grazing. Herbicide than natural selection). Therefore, a removed by July 1 to minimize adverse and pesticide use is discussed further large portion of the habitat of any impacts to warm-season grasses, but this under Factor E of this final rule. Dakota skipper population should type of management minimizes the While reduced availability of nectar remain ungrazed or only lightly grazed density of nectar species that are resources and larval food plants may be during the flight period, and similar important to the Dakota skipper and the primary factors leading to declines precautions should be taken for the Poweshiek skipperling. Invasive species in Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota Poweshiek skipperling. are often present at grazed sites, which skipper populations on heavily grazed We assessed the level of impact to often leads to further management sites, changes in vegetation structure populations from grazing at 52 Dakota actions (see Invasive Species and may also be important. For example, skipper sites and 16 sites currently Secondary Succession). grazing prairie each year during mid- occupied by Poweshiek skipperling Of the 52 Dakota skipper sites summer eliminates nectar plants, such with present or unknown status that had assessed, we found the level of impact as purple coneflower, and native warm- sufficient information to evaluate the to Dakota skipper populations from season grasses that function as larval stressor (Tables 3 and 4; Service 2012 grazing to be high at 9 sites, moderate host plants (Skadsen 2007, pers. unpubl. data; Service 2014, unpubl. at 29 sites, and low at 14 sites (Service comm.). In South Dakota, vegetation data). This analysis was conducted 2012 unpubl. data; Service 2014, height and litter depth were lower on differently for different habitat types. unpubl. data). Moderate- to high-level prairie remnants that were mostly For Type A habitat (Royer et al. 2008, impacts to populations were primarily grazed (Higgins 1999, pp. 27–29). pp. 14–16) where stocking rates at South Dakota sites (N=27)—other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63727

sites with moderate- to high-level of the site. For instance, stubble heights Swengel 1996, p. 79; Webster 2003, p. impacts were in Minnesota (N=7), North of 6–8 inches may be difficult to attain 10). Royer and Marrone (1992b, p. 14), Dakota (N=3), and Manitoba (N=1). As in certain dry-mesic sites (ND NRCS for example, ascribed the loss of a North described above as part of our 2013, pers. comm.). Dakota Poweshiek skipperling assessment of grazing, we examined the Conversely, Dakota skipper and population to June and July haying. habitat quality ratings that were Poweshiek skipperling populations may Several years of July haying may have primarily assigned by researchers be reduced or extirpated when too much led to the Poweshiek skipperling’s during surveys for the species, during plant material is removed, when fields extirpation at Wakidmanwin Prairie in separate habitat assessments, or that are not rested for some portion of the South Dakota (Skadsen 2006b, p. 13). were available from State heritage growing season, or fields are grazed The Dakota skipper was observed at the databases or other sources of scientific during the same period each year. Wakidmanwin Prairie in 2010 (Skadsen data. The habitat quality was rated as Grazing poses a current and ongoing 2010, p. 6); however, it is not clear if the poor at 7 of the 9 sites where grazing stressor of moderate to high level of management has changed since the poses a high level of impact to Dakota impact to populations where its observation. Early June haying may have skipper populations. At each of the 14 intensity is such that Dakota skippers eliminated Dakota skippers from at least sites where grazing pressure is low, and Poweshiek skipperlings are unlikely one site in North Dakota (Royer and habitat quality was good or excellent, to thrive or even persist. Grazing poses Royer 2012a, p. 72). with two exceptions where habitat was a likely future stressor where current Hayed prairies are important rated as fair to good. Among the 29 sites management is conducive to Dakota reservoirs of native-prairie plant where grazing is a moderate level of skipper or Poweshiek skipperling diversity; however, long-term annual impact to Dakota skipper populations, 6 conservation, but where landowners haying negatively impacts prairie plant had habitat rated good or excellent. may allow excessive grazing in the diversity (Jog et al. 2006, pp. 164–165). Of the 16 Poweshiek skipperling sites future, for example, where management Jog et al. (2006, pp. 164–165) for which we had sufficient information may change as a result of the changing recommended diversifying management to assess grazing, the level of impact to market prices of agricultural products. to include, for example, periodic fire populations from grazing is high at 4 Unsuitable grazing is an ongoing and to forego annual haying to increase sites, moderate at 10 sites, and low at 2 stressor throughout much of the range of plant species diversity. In a long-term sites—all but 2 of these sites were in the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek study of a prairie in southeastern South Dakota. No sites in Wisconsin or skipperling (primarily in flat wet Wisconsin, a switch from late-season Michigan were assessed for grazing prairies of Minnesota, North Dakota, haying to fire management led to impacts to populations, where the and South Dakota); grazing is not a increased native plant diversity and grazing does not occur. Among the 10 documented stressor at the Poweshiek coverage of warm-season grasses, sites where grazing is a moderate level skipperling sites with present or although woody plant species also of impact to Poweshiek skipperling unknown status in Wisconsin, increased (Rooney and Leach 2010, p, populations, 8 have habitat rated as fair Michigan, and Iowa or at most Dakota 319)—this increased plant diversity was to excellent. The habitat quality was skipper sites in Canada. likely an expression of plants that were rated as poor at 2 of the 4 sites where already at that location. Haying grazing is having a high level of impact Late-season haying may benefit to Poweshiek skipperling populations. As with grazing and fire, haying Dakota skipper populations (McCabe In summary, grazing may benefit (mowing grasslands and removing the 1981, p. 190), and Dakota skipper Dakota skippers and Poweshiek cuttings) may maintain habitat for the populations might be more common on skipperlings in native tallgrass prairie Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota hayed prairies than on idle (not hayed) by increasing native plant diversity and skipper, but as with any management prairies (Webster 2003, p. 10). Swengel patchiness of fires (Minnesota DNR practice, appropriate timing, frequency, and Swengel (1999, p. 279) observed 2006, p. 232). The economic benefit of and intensity are important. Poweshiek significantly greater relative abundance grazing to ranchers may also be a benefit skipperling habitat at Scuppernong of Dakota skippers on hayed tracts to the species by deterring conversion of Prairie in Wisconsin, for example, compared with either idle or burned remnant prairies to row crop would have succeeded to shrubby or tracts in Minnesota, and Skadsen (2004, agriculture. Grazing is a stressor to these forested habitat if it had not been hayed p. 7) documented the extirpation of species, however, if it is not managed each fall (Borkin 2011, in litt.)—it is Dakota skippers from a site after its with the goal of conserving native- now one of the few sites in Wisconsin management switched from haying to prairie vegetation that comprises that is occupied by the Poweshiek intensive grazing. Some remnant Dakota suitable habitat for Dakota skipper and skipperling. Nearly all of the Dakota skipper populations in the eastern Poweshiek skipperling. Dakota skippers skipper sites in Canada where the Dakotas are found on fall-hayed prairies and Poweshiek skipperlings may benefit species is present are privately owned, (Skadsen 1997, pp. 10–23; Royer and when prairie habitat is rested from fall-hayed prairies (Westwood 2013, Royer 2012b) as are many of the sites in grazing for at least a part of each pers. comm.). Manitoba (Webster 2003, p. 10). Webster growing season, if livestock are Haying generally maintains prairie (2003, p. 8) found ‘‘healthy precluded from removing too much vegetation structure, but it may favor populations’’ of Dakota skippers in plant material (e.g., are moved when expansion of invasive species such as Manitoba on sites used as hay fields, as stubble heights are 6–8 in (15–20 cm) Kentucky bluegrass. If done during the described by the absence of standing (Skadsen 2007, pers. comm.), and if the adult flight period, haying may kill the dead grass, low numbers of shrubs, timing of grazing for each field varies adult butterflies or cause them to shorter bluestem grasses, and abundant from year to year (Skadsen 2007, pers. emigrate, and if done before or during and readily observable nectar flowers, as comm.). Grazing management the adult flight period, it may reduce compared to un-hayed sites. Scarlet recommendations may not be nectar availability (McCabe 1979, pp. Fawn Prairie in South Dakota, which is universally applicable to all locations, 19–20; McCabe 1981, p. 190; Dana 1983, hayed in the fall, is considered one of and may depend on the habitat type and p. 33; Royer and Marrone 1992a, p. 28; the highest quality prairies in that State other ecological and physical conditions Royer and Marrone 1992b. p. 14; (Skadsen 2012, pers. comm.). In the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63728 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dakotas, late-season (mid-August to hayed annually. Haying is a stressor butterflies and lower floristic quality at October) haying appears to minimize with a high level of impact on sites with no disturbance versus sites impacts to the prairie butterflies, populations at 1 of the 41 Dakota managed by grazing or fall haying although annual haying may diminish skipper sites assessed and a stressor of (Skadsen 2006a, p. 3). For example, the vigor of native, warm-season grasses moderate-level impacts to the Dakota skippers returned to an idle site, and reduce forb density in north-central populations at 11 of the 41 Dakota Pickerel Lake State Park, after a burn North Dakota (wet-mesic) habitats (Lenz skipper sites assessed. Of the 6 conducted in 2007 resulted in a 1999, p. 14; Skadsen 2009, p. 8). Poweshiek skipperling sites evaluated, significant increase in forbs, particularly Consistent late-season haying of haying was a stressor with moderate- purple coneflower (Skadsen 2008, p. 2). Poweshiek skipperling habitat in South level impacts on populations at 3 sites In a separate study, Higgins et al. (2000, Dakota, appears to have facilitated the and was not considered to have high- p. 24) found that prairie habitats left expansion of green needlegrass ( level impacts to the populations at any idle had lower plant diversity and viridula), a cool-season grass, and of the 6 sites. quality than prairies managed with fire. prevented seed development in warm- In summary, haying is a current and Populations of Dakota skippers and season plants (Skadsen 2009, p. 8). ongoing stressor of moderate to high Poweshiek skipperlings may also be at We assessed the level of impact of level of impacts to Dakota skippers and risk at sites where a private landowner haying to populations at 41 Dakota Poweshiek skipperlings at the few sites is not aware of the presence or potential skipper sites and 6 Poweshiek where the site is normally hayed before presence of the species, but would skipperling sites with present or August and where annual haying is conserve the land if they were made unknown status where we had sufficient reducing availability of larval food and aware. The land use in some areas in information to assess the stressor adult nectar plants. However, fall Canada, for example, are currently (Tables 3 and 4; Service 2012 unpubl. haying is beneficial to both species, inadvertently used in ways that are data; Service 2014, unpubl. data). specifically if it is conducted after the favorable to the species (for example, Haying was considered to be a stressor flight period (after August 1), no more fall haying), but the land use may with a low or no negative impact on than every other year, and there is no change in the future (Westwood 2014, populations where it is implemented indication that native plant species pers. comm.). In the United States, the after the flight period (after diversity is declining due to timing or Service has notified private landowners approximately August 1) and when frequency of haying. Haying is a current of the presence or potential presence of there is no reduction in the availability stressor at a small number of sites for one or both species on their land at most of native plant species. Haying was both species; these sites occur primarily sites with present or unknown considered to be a stressor with a in North Dakota and South Dakota. occupancy and many sites that are moderate level of impact on considered extirpated or possibly Lack of Disturbance populations, where the exact timing or extirpated but still may have suitable extent of haying was unknown, but While inappropriate or excessive habitat. there are: (1) One or more indications grazing, haying, and burning are We assessed the stressor posed by that haying is resulting in a reduction in stressors to some Poweshiek skipperling lack of management for populations at nectar or larval food sources important and Dakota skipper populations and 17 Dakota skipper sites and 12 to the species due to timing or have led to the extirpation of others, Poweshiek skipperling sites with frequency of mowing; (2) part of the both species are also subject to the stress present or unknown status where we Dakota skipper or Poweshiek of no management practices being had sufficient information to evaluate skipperling habitat on the site is hayed implemented. Prairies that lack periodic the stressor (Tables 3 and 4; Service before August 1, but a substantial disturbance become unsuitable for 2012 unpubl. data; Service 2014, proportion of habitat is not hayed and Poweshiek skipperlings and Dakota unpubl. data). Lack of management was not clearly subject to other stressors, skippers due to expansion of woody considered to be a stressor of moderate- such as frequent fire or grazing (e.g., plant species (secondary succession), level impacts to the population where Smokey Lake site, North Dakota); or (3) litter accumulation, reduced densities of the species’ habitat is degraded or likely where haying occurs before or after adult nectar and larval food plants, or to become degraded due to secondary August 1, but the site is hayed no more invasion by nonnative plant species succession, invasive species, or both, frequently than once every 3 years (e.g., (e.g., smooth brome) (McCabe 1981, p. but actions to restore habitat quality are Roy West Game Production Area, South 191; Dana 1983, p. 33; Dana 1997, p. 5; planned or ongoing, or where the site is Dakota). Higgins et al. 2000, p. 21; Skadsen 2003, idle with no evident plans to initiate We considered haying to be a stressor p. 52). For example, Dakota skipper management (e.g., fire, grazing, haying), with a high level of impact on numbers were reduced at Felton Prairie, and there are signs of ongoing or populations where the site was hayed Minnesota, in tracts that had not been imminent secondary succession. Lack of prior to August 1 (e.g., Oaks Prairie, hayed or burned for several years management was considered to be a North Dakota). At 29 of the 41 evaluated (Braker 1985, p. 47). Another study also stressor with a high level of impact to Dakota skipper sites, current haying observed significantly lower Dakota the population where the habitat quality practices are conducive (beneficial) to skipper abundance on unmanaged or at a site is degraded or likely to become Dakota skipper conservation, because it idle sites, compared with hayed sites; degraded due to secondary succession is conducted after August 1 and is not however, Poweshiek skipperlings were or invasive species, and there are no reducing native plant species diversity. significantly denser with idling ongoing or planned actions to maintain One or more indications that current (Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 285). or restore habitat quality. Lack of haying practices are slowly degrading Skadsen (1997, pp. 10–23; 2003, pp. 8, management was considered to be a habitat quality for Dakota skippers has 35, 42) reported deterioration of several stressor of low-level impacts to Dakota been documented at 11 of the 41 sites. unburned and unhayed South Dakota skipper or Poweshiek skipper At several sites in North Dakota, for prairies in just a few years due to populations at sites that are managed by example, Royer and Royer (2012b, pp. encroachment of woody plants and grazing, haying/mowing, or fire that 15, 21, 24, 45) noted a decrease in the invasive species and found lower precludes loss of Dakota skipper or diversity and density of forbs at sites species richness of prairie-dependent Poweshiek skipperling habitat to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63729

secondary succession and invasive in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat species (e.g., smooth brome). Dakota, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan Destruction, Modification, or Nine of the 17 Dakota skipper sites (Service 2012 unpubl. data; Service Curtailment of Its Range assessed are under high level of impact 2014, unpubl. data). Fifty-eight sites In the past, funding for conservation to population due to lack of have 2 or more documented stressors of of rare species was primarily directed management and 5 sites are under moderate to high levels of impact to toward federally listed or candidate moderate level of impact to the populations, and 24 sites have 3 or more species, so while the Poweshiek population. Four of the 12 Poweshiek documented stressors of moderate to skipperling may have benefited skipperling sites assessed are under high level of impact to populations. indirectly from conservation activities high level of impact to the population Sites with three or more stressors are focused on species such as the Dakota due to lack of management, and 6 sites skipper and Mitchell’s satyr are under moderate level of impact to found across most of the current range (Neonympha mitchellii mitchelli), it has the population. The Dakota skipper and of the species; these sites occur in not generally been the primary focus of Poweshiek skipperling are unlikely to Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, those activities. As a result, survey data persist at those sites where the level of and Manitoba (Service 2012 unpubl. and incidental life-history observations impact to the population due to lack of data; Service 2014, unpubl. data). have been accumulated as a part of management is high. Sites currently Furthermore, concurrently acting projects focused on other species, but under stress by lack of management stressors may have more intense effects occur throughout the range of both than any one stressor acting surveys were not necessarily focused on species; however, most of the present or independently. Therefore, based on our Poweshiek skipperling sites and detailed life-history, population, and unknown sites that lack appropriate analysis of the best available demographic data have generally not management are in North Dakota, South information, present and future loss and been collected for the species. Various Dakota, Minnesota, and Michigan. In modification of Dakota skipper habitat summary, lack of disturbance is a conservation activities directed at the is a stressor that has significant impacts Dakota skipper also indirectly benefit current and ongoing stressor to Dakota on populations of the species skipper and Poweshiek skipperling the Poweshiek skipperling; these throughout all of its range. Habitat- activities are summarized below. populations where woody vegetation or related stressors occur at sites with invasive species expansion will reduce Conservation agencies have Dakota skipper populations within recognized the need to address the native-prairie grasses and flowering every State and province of occurrence. forbs. status of prairie butterflies for more than Similarly, of the 60 Poweshiek 30 years beginning with a 1980 Summary of Factor A skipperling sites with present or workshop held to initiate studies of We identified a number of stressors to unknown status that we analyzed for Dakota skippers and other prairie the habitat of the Dakota skipper and one or more habitat stressors, 46 of them butterflies. In June 1995, the U.S. Fish Poweshiek skipperling that operated in have at least one stressor at moderate to and Wildlife Service convened Dakota the past, are impacting both species high levels of impact to the population. skipper experts to outline tasks needed now, and will continue to impact the These sites are found across the current to preserve enough viable populations to ensure long-term security for the species in the future. The decline of range of the species and occur in Iowa, species. The group outlined a plan for both species is the result of the long- Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, surveying populations and lasting effects of habitat loss, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Manitoba fragmentation, degradation, and characterizing sites and habitats at (Service 2014, unpubl. data). Twenty- modification from agriculture, priority areas, identifying and five sites have 2 or more documented development, invasive species, recommending management needs, secondary succession, grazing, and stressors that have moderate to high monitoring, and outreach and haying. Although efforts have been levels of impact to the population. education; however, this plan was not made to effectively manage habitat in These sites are found across the current drafted or finalized. In 1999, a Dakota some areas, the long-term effects of range of the species and occur in Iowa, skipper recovery strategy meeting was large-scale and wide-ranging habitat Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, held in South Dakota with State, modification, destruction, and South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Manitoba Federal, and nongovernmental curtailment will last into the future. (Service 2014, unpubl. data). Eleven of biologists attending (Skadsen 1999b, Invasion of the species’ habitat by exotic them have at least three documented entire). In 2011, researchers in Canada species and woody vegetation, stressors that have moderate to high organized a Poweshiek Skipperling overgrazing, long-lasting or permanent levels of impact to the population. Workshop and followup conference call alterations in water levels or hydrology, These sites are found across the current that brought together researchers and and too frequent or improperly timed range of the species and occur in Iowa, managers from across the range of the haying remove or significantly reduce Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, Poweshiek skipperling to provide the availability of plants that provide and Manitoba (Service 2014, unpubl. updates on survey data, discuss ongoing nectar for adults and food for larvae. data). Furthermore, concurrently acting activities, and plan future work. The Fire and flooding cause direct mortality stressors may have more intense effects workshop resulted in specific or destroy nectar and food plants if the than any one stressor acting conservation action plans for the intensity, extent, or timing is not independently. Therefore, based on our species. The Minnesota Zoo organized a conducive to the species’ biology. analysis of the best available followup conference during March 2013 Of the 160 Dakota skipper sites we information, present and future loss and to assess progress of the 2011 Poweshiek evaluated for one or more habitat Skipperling Workshop Action Plans, modification of Poweshiek skipperling stressors, at least 131 sites have at least facilitate discussion on the potential habitat is a stressor that has significant one documented stressor with moderate effects of management activities on to high levels of impact to impacts on the species throughout its prairie butterflies, identify needed populations—these sites are found range. information and data gaps, establish across the current range of the species new priorities for research and a draft

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63730 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

action plan for 2013, and facilitate and 1994, respectively. The Dakota there are approximately 54,000 ac networking and collaborations focused skipper is extirpated from Chippewa (21,853 ha) of fee title lands in grassland on the conservation of the Dakota Prairie, and the status of the Poweshiek that are managed by the Service in 12 skipper and Poweshiek skipperling, as skipperling is unknown at the site; the of the counties within the historical or well as other tallgrass prairie butterflies last positive observations of the species current range of the Dakota skipper and in the Midwest—the Northern Tallgrass were in 1995 and 1994, respectively 365,000 ac (147,710 ha) protected by the Prairie Lepidoptera Conservation (Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Services’ grassland easement program Conference Working Group Report The Service purchases easements to (HAPET 2012, unpubl. data; Larson Synthesis is posted at http:// prevent prairie conversion for 2013, pers. comm.). These acreages do www.mnzoo.org/Prairie agriculture and provide cost-share to not include an additional 4,000 ac LepidopteraConference/Northern% support rotational grazing and other (1,619 ha) of grass protected by 20Tallgrass%20Prairie% practices that may benefit Dakota acquisitions that have occurred in 2012 20Lepidoptera%20Conservation% skippers and Poweshiek skipperlings. (HAPET 2012, unpubl. data; Larson 20Conference%20Working%20Group% For example, in 12 counties in South 2013, pers. comm.). Not all of these 20Reports%20-%20Synthesis.pdf. Dakota within the range of the species, lands, however, may be managed in Research and survey work has the Service’s grassland easement such a manner that is conducive to occurred throughout the range of both program has protected 365,193 ac Dakota skipper populations. species to document populations, to (147,788 ha) of grassland that are About one-half of the present or study the life history of both species, primarily native prairie (Larson 2013, unknown Dakota skipper sites (total and to examine the effects of various pers. comm.; HAPET 2012, unpubl. number of present/unknown sites is management practices, such as fire and data), although it is not clear whether 171) in the United States are privately grazing, on the species and their habitat. these lands are suitable habitat for either owned (excluding populations on land For example, research and survey work species. Other Service fee title lands, owned by The Nature Conservancy). on Dakota skippers began with Dana’s State lands, and Natural Resources Twelve of these populations are on (1991, entire) doctoral study on fire Conservation Service (NRCS) easement private land on which the Service has effects at Hole-in-the-Mountain, lands may also protect areas from purchased conservation easements that Minnesota, beginning in 1978 and conversion, depending on the preclude plowing and haying before McCabe’s (1981, entire) 1979 surveys for protections in those areas (Larson 2013, July 16. Manitoba Habitat Heritage the Garrison Diversion project in North pers. comm.). If easements are near Corporation has an easement that Dakota. Additional work has been prairie butterfly habitat they can overlaps with one Dakota skipper site in completed on characterizing habitat at minimize the impacts of conversion and Canada (Friesen 2013, pers. comm.). important Dakota skipper sites in may provide dispersal corridors or Similarly, of the 70 privately owned Minnesota (Dana 1997, entire) and buffer sites from external stressors (e.g., sites where Poweshiek skipperling has North Dakota (Lenz 1999, entire, Royer pesticide drift). been recorded since 1985, 8 sites (all in and Royer 1998, entire, Royer and Royer Prairie easements generally prevent Minnesota) have conservation 2012a, entire). Royer (2008, entire) grasslands from being plowed or easements. These easements do not assessed abiotic habitat parameters of destroyed and prevent haying before prescribe grazing practices but are soil in relation to management and July 16, but may not restrict grazing, intended to prevent grassland conservation of Dakota skippers to pesticide use, or other practices that can conversion to cropland, which is complement prior floristic degrade the status of Dakota skipper or detrimental to Dakota skippers or characterization of these habitats. The Poweshiek skipperling populations. For Poweshiek skipperlings. Additional Minnesota DNR and the Service example, one property with a Service measures on some easement properties planned to cooperatively study the easement was recently overgrazed to the could ensure grazing practices do not effects of grazing on the Dakota skipper extent that Dakota skipper was inadvertently impact either species. and Poweshiek skipperling (Selby 2003, extirpated from the site (Skadsen 2006b, The Nature Conservancy’s Minnesota entire; Selby 2006b, entire); however, p. 5). Cost-share partnerships on and Dakotas offices initiated a Prairie skipper numbers were too low to collect easements and other areas, however, Coteau Coordinated Conservation sufficient data to test hypotheses (Selby may further enable landowners to Planning Effort and Plan in 1998 to 2006b, p. 30). manage grasslands to benefit Dakota facilitate conservation actions by In the past, the Service funded some skippers and other prairie endemic various landowners, including private, management activities intended to species. The Service may implement county, state, tribal and Federal, on high benefit the Dakota skipper, including such actions through the Partners for biodiversity prairie sites (Skadsen habitat management at Big Stone Fish and Wildlife program or in 1999b, entire). Additional partners National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota collaboration with NRCS or other include conservation organizations, (Olson 2000, entire), landowner contacts agencies. Since 1990, the Service has local conservation districts, and and education on conservation practices purchased easements to prevent universities. The Nature Conservancy in South Dakota (Skadsen 1999b, grassland conversion on millions of acquired a reserve in the Sheyenne entire), and prairie vegetation acres in Minnesota, North Dakota, and Grassland area, Brown Ranch, which is restoration at Chippewa Prairie in 2000 South Dakota (HAPET 2012, unpubl. a Dakota skipper site with an unknown and at Twin Valley Prairie SNA, data). Only some of these areas include status, and manages some of the most Minnesota, in 2001. The results of these Dakota skipper or Poweshiek significant habitats for the two species efforts are varied; for instance, the skipperling sites, are within the range of in Minnesota, including the Hole-in-the- prairie habitat at Twin Valley Prairie either species, or include suitable Mountain Prairie preserve. Based on SNA was recently rated as excellent habitat for either species. intensive surveys in 2007, Dana (2008, quality (Service 2014, unpubl. Conservation-interested agencies, p. 19) found ‘‘considerable reassurance’’ geodatabase), but the status of both individuals, and Tribes in South Dakota that the rotational burning approach species at that site is unknown; the last have made concerted efforts for decades used at Prairie Coteau SNA and Hole-in- positive observation of Dakota skippers to conserve native prairie within the the-Mountain Preserve is compatible and Poweshiek skipperlings was 1993 Dakota skipper range. For example, with long-term persistence of the Dakota

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63731

skipper, for example, by controlling controlled burn was conducted in one In Manitoba, August 1st is the woody vegetation encroachment. The unit at Hartford Beach State Park in recommended earliest haying and Minnesota DNR also manages the Prairie 2008, and shrubs were removed from grazing date at Dakota skipper sites. The Coteau SNA with rotational burning two of the units (Skadsen 2008, p. 4). At recommended intensity of grazing is to (Dana 2008, p. 19), which may control Pickerel Lake State Recreation Area, a be as low as economically feasible to woody vegetation encroachment. The controlled burn was conducted in 2007, prevent permanent damage to sites (e.g., Clay County Stewardship Plan (Felton and in 2008 the site was hayed and destruction of nectar plants). In Prairie Stewardship Committee 2002) shrubs were removed. The Dakota Manitoba, it is recommended that sites may have reduced the likelihood and skipper was present in the burned unit that have burned or have been impacted severity of gravel mining within the for the first time since 2002 after ‘‘a by other factors such as extensive Felton Prairie complex in Minnesota. dramatic increase in forbs, especially flooding, should not be grazed for at Many of the best sites for Dakota purple coneflower, occurred after the least one year following these events. skipper and Poweshiek skipperling in burn’’ and ‘‘apparently attracted Dakota Poweshiek Skipperling South Dakota are on tribal lands skippers from a nearby site’’ (Skadsen managed by the Sisseton-Wahpeton 2008, p. 2). The Poweshiek skipperling Most of the conservation initiatives Sioux Tribe (e.g., Scarlet Fawn and Oak is extirpated from both sites, but the discussed above were put in place to Island Prairies) (Skadsen 1997, Skadsen reasons for its disappearance are not benefit the Dakota skipper, but may also 2012b, p. 3), with late-season haying. known (Service 2012, unpubl. data). At benefit the Poweshiek skipperling. According to Skadsen (2012, p. 3) ‘‘. . . each site, prescribed fire and brush Conservation initiatives are also in place as in prior years, the fall hayed prairies control are implemented on a rotational at several Poweshiek skipperling sites in held in trust by the Sisseton Wahpeton basis (Skadsen 2011, pp. 1–4); at Wisconsin and one or two sites in Oyate had the most diverse native flora Pickerel Lake State Recreation Area, Michigan. At least two sites occupied by and thus the largest numbers of Dakota forbs were planted in 2011 to diversify Poweshiek skipperling in Michigan are skippers.’’ Although these lands nectar resources for prairie butterflies at least partially owned and managed by generally contain high-quality habitat (Skadsen 2011, pp. 2–4). for prairie butterflies in eastern South the Michigan Nature Association A privately owned ranch with Dakota (MNA); however, the MNA does not Dakota (Skadsen 2012b, p. 3), a change skippers in Day County, South Dakota, to alternate year haying—instead of specifically manage for Poweshiek is managed with a patch-burn grazing skipperling conservation. The State of annual haying—may further improve system in which each grazing unit is habitat quality by ensuring that plants Michigan owns part or all of four rested for a full year (Skadsen 2008, p. that flower during the Dakota skipper occupied Poweshiek skipperling sites; 10), which may be beneficial to the and Poweshiek skipperling flight however, most of those lands are species. The effects of patch-burn periods are able to produce seed (Royer managed as State recreational areas, not grazing at this site are being studied and Royer 2012b, p. 15). for prairie butterfly conservation. The Day County Conservation jointly by The Nature Conservancy and Landowners at one fen site are District, South Dakota, places a high South Dakota State University (Skadsen participating in a Michigan DNR Land priority on implementing prescribed 2008, p. 10). Incentive Program, and a portion of grazing on rangelands known to support In 2005, the Service’s National another occupied site is part of the Burr Dakota skippers and bordering sites in Wildlife Refuge System in North Dakota Memorial Prairie Plant Preserve the Upper Waubay Basin Watershed and South Dakota adopted the (Michigan Natural Features Inventory (Skadsen 1999b, p. 3). Their efforts Conservation Strategy and Guidelines 2011, unpubl. data). The Poweshiek include soliciting grants and providing for Dakota Skippers on Service Lands in skipperling may benefit from education on grazing management, the Dakotas, which are based on the conservation activities in place for the controlled burning, and integrated pest Service’s Dakota Skipper Conservation federally endangered Mitchell’s satyr at management to control leafy spurge, Strategy and Guidelines and on versions one Michigan site. through workshops and a demonstration of the Service’s conservation guidelines Poweshiek skipperling sites in site. There are five Poweshiek for Dakota skipper. The guidelines were Wisconsin are owned and managed by skipperling sites in Day County with revised in March 2013 (http:// the Wisconsin DNR, who manage the unknown occupancy and no sites where www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/ land to maintain and improve prairie the species is considered to be present. insects/dask/DASKconservation habitat. The Wisconsin DNR recently There are a total of 24 Dakota skipper guidelines2013.html). In the Dakotas, received a Sustain Our Great Lakes sites in Day County: 3 sites where the the Service plans to implement the (SOGL) grant to conduct invasive species is considered to be present, 11 conservation guidelines on all of its species management on several SNAs, sites that have an unknown occupancy, lands where the Dakota skipper is including Puchyan Prairie (Wisconsin and the remaining are extirpated or known to occur—the Service owns 12 DNR 2012, in litt.). The Scuppernong possibly extirpated. It is not known how Dakota skipper sites in the Dakotas Prairie SNA, Wilton Road, and Kettle many of these sites are benefiting from where the species is considered present Moraine Low Prairie SNA are managed these efforts and to what degree. or has unknown occupancy. The primarily through fire and invasive In South Dakota, completed guidelines also suggest that the Service species control. management plans guide habitat examine other lands under its Furthermore, the Minnesota Zoo restoration at Hartford Beach State Park ownership to determine whether recently initiated a propagation research and Pickerel Lake State Recreation Area unrecorded populations of Dakota program for the Poweshiek skipperling (Skadsen 2008, pp. 4–7; Skadsen 2011, skippers may be present and to conduct and Dakota skipper to develop methods pp. 1–4). At each site, the lack of surveys in those areas or manage the site to propagate these and other species in haying, grazing, or fire had allowed in accordance with the Dakota Skipper the future. If this program is successful, plant succession to degrade and reduce Conservation Strategy and Guidelines. a conservation benefit could be possible the extent of Dakota skipper habitat. These guidelines will be reviewed and if the program could facilitate Dakota skipper habitat at these sites is updated to reflect new information as it reintroduction and augmentation efforts divided into 3–4 management units. A is developed. into areas where the species has

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63732 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

declined or disappeared. Furthermore, both species. Adverse effects on plans to conduct Wolbachia screening this propagation effort may lead to butterflies have been documented for a and strain identification of genomic increased knowledge of basic biology wide range of species (e.g., Benson and DNA samples that the University of and life history of both species. Emmel 1973, p. 329; Singer and Michigan (at Dearborn) extracted from To summarize, the conservation Wedlake 1981, pp. 215–216; Lederhouse both species. The effects of predation by initiatives discussed above may 1982, pp. 381–382; Morton 1984, pp. birds or insects on Dakota skipper or ameliorate one or more stressors on 56–57; Mallet et al. 1987, pp. 380–383). Poweshiek skipperling population populations of Dakota skipper and Although recreational collection is dynamics are not known and may Poweshiek skipperling at a relatively not a threat to these species at this time, impact the species. small number of sites. Approximately due to the few populations, small McCabe (1981, p. 187), noted three 12 Dakota skipper sites and 8 Poweshiek population size, and restricted range, if kinds of predators to Dakota skippers, skipperling sites benefit from any recreational collecting did occur in including Ambush bugs (Hemiptera: conservation easements; an additional the future, even limited collection from Phymata sp.), flower spiders (Aranaea: 12 Dakota skipper sites are owned by the remaining small and isolated Misumena spp.), and orb weavers the Service and may benefit from populations could have deleterious (various Araneldae). Flower spiders and implementation of Dakota skipper effects on these species’ reproductive ambush bugs are effective predators of conservation guidelines; 2 sites in State and genetic viability. nectar-feeding insects (McCabe 1981, parks are undergoing prairie restoration pp. 187–188) and may cause mortality Factor C. Disease or Predation and management; approximately 5 to some individuals, but it is difficult to additional Dakota skipper sites and 4 Diseases or parasites that are specific quantify the population-level impacts of Poweshiek skipperling sites are to the Dakota skipper or Poweshiek predators to either the Dakota skipper or managed to benefit prairie butterflies, skipperling are not known, but some Poweshiek skipperling. Dana such as rotational fire management. parasitism or predation likely occurs documented predation on adult Since numerous sites have two or more during each of the life stages. Disease skippers by robber flies (Asilidae), stressors of moderate to high-level and predation are part of the natural which are common in upland prairie impacts to one or both species, all population dynamics of any , habitats, and noted the incidence of stressors are likely not completely including the Dakota skipper and wing damage indicative of an ameliorated at many sites. Initiatives Poweshiek skipperling—without high unsuccessful attack by a bird or similar such as captive propagation and studies rates of mortality before reproduction, predator (Dana 1991, pp. 26–27; Dana of the effects of various management populations would increase 2013, pers. comm.). Several incidences techniques may be applied broadly and exponentially. The small amount of of predation by crab spiders and robber may be beneficial to each species as a observations of predation and flies on both the Dakota skipper and whole—the timeframe for these benefits parasitism makes documenting those Poweshiek skipperling have been to be realized, however, will not be phenomenons difficult (Dana 2013, documented in Canada, although it is immediate. pers. comm.). Only a few studies have not thought to be a common occurrence attempted to document parasitism and (Westwood 2013, pers. comm.). McCabe Factor B. Overutilization for predation. For example, 10 of 130 eggs (1981) failed to observe bird or Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or tagged for field observation in a 1994 dragonfly predation; however these Educational Purposes study of a Wisconsin Poweshiek events are difficult to observe (Dana Although its biology could make the skipperling population appeared to have 2013, pers. comm.). Orb weaver spiders Dakota skipper sensitive to collection at suffered from predation or parasitism appear to be successful predators of some locations, the present level of (Borkin 1995, p. 5); some were ‘‘old, worn individuals’’ (McCabe 1981, scientific collection is minimal and punctured and had the contents p. 188), but bird and other animal recreational collecting is unlikely (Royer extracted, and others turned black and predation on young and old adults and Marrone 1992a, p. 27). Collection is dried up. Dana (1991, pp. 19–21) likely occurs when the butterflies are not known to be a stressor for the documented some parasitism of Dakota roosting or torpid and unable to escape Poweshiek skipperling (Royer and skipper and Ottoe skipper (Hesperia (Dana 1991, p. 27). Marrone 1992b, p. 16). Collection is not ottoe) eggs and larvae by various wasp Disease, parasitism, and predation are currently a stressor to either species in species and predation by various important parts of population dynamics Canada (COSEWIC 2003, p. 18). insects, such as ants, but escaping his of normal populations of insects, but Scientific Collectors Permits are observation would have been predation may have an amplified effect on small required in states where both species by birds and small mammals on these populations. Furthermore, as we discuss have legal protection, and permission is immature stages (Dana 2013, pers. in the possibility of unknown factors often required to collect specimens on comm.). that may be affecting the species (in protected areas. Furthermore, these Wolbachia, ubiquitous intercellular Factor E of this final rule), it is possible species are not collected for commercial bacteria estimated to affect 20–70 that a new virulent pathogen or purposes; the drab coloration likely percent of all insect species, including parasitoid may have increased mortality makes both species less desirable for many butterfly species, affects the above normal levels and may be causing collectors and the remoteness of reproductive ecology of its host the rapid decline in the Poweshiek occupied habitat and limited flight (Kodandaramaiah 2011, pp. 343–350). It skipperling and possibly also the Dakota period would make recreational is uncertain if Wolbachia are affecting skipper (Dana 2013, pers. comm.). collections difficult (Borkin 2012, pers. the Dakota skipper or Poweshiek Disease and parasitism are a serious comm.). Therefore, overutilization for skipperling. An infection of Wolbachia hypothesis that may explain the rapid commercial, recreational, scientific, or may reduce already small population decline of the Poweshiek skipperling, educational purposes is not currently a sizes and increase the probability of and perhaps the Dakota skipper, and threat to Dakota skipper and Poweshiek extirpation (Nice et al. 2009, pp. 3137– these factors, along with predation, are skipperling. 3138), particularly if the population is extremely difficult to observe. Handling stress during scientific infected with a novel strain (Runquist Therefore, we are unsure if either study may be stressors to individuals of 2013, pers. comm.). The Minnesota Zoo disease, parasitism, or predation are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63733

significant stressors to the Dakota the species. With the exception of the lands. The Poweshiek skipperling has skipper or Poweshiek skipperling regulation of some incidental take in been documented at two sites on the populations at this time, and we are not Wisconsin and Minnesota, the statutory Sheyenne National Grasslands; certain if these stressors will contribute protections afforded by these State however, it has not been observed since to significant population-level impacts statutes may do little to protect or 2001 at one site and 1996 at the other. in the future. However, in the future, mitigate Poweshiek skipperling or Therefore, these Forest Service disease, parasitism, and predation may Dakota skipper from non-collection objectives, although promising, have have an amplified effect on these small threats. While some stressors may result little ability to affect the rangewide and isolated populations. in direct mortality of both species, such status of the species. If Forest Service as ill-timed fires, most stressors to the Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing lands were to be occupied by either species are indirect and State laws that Regulatory Mechanisms species in the future, these objectives regulate direct harm to the species do may benefit the species at a local scale. Existing regulatory mechanisms vary not address these factors. In Iowa, for by location, but generally do not example, Poweshiek skipperling Canadian Regulations mitigate for the numerous stressors that populations are likely now extirpated Dakota skipper and Poweshiek the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek due to habitat destruction and skipperling are listed as threatened skipperling face. conversion and other undetermined under Canada’s Species at Risk Act State Regulations stressors, despite the species’ presence (SARA) (Environment Canada 2012. on the State’s list of threatened species Species at Risk Act Public Registry. The Dakota skipper is listed as since 1994. In Wisconsin, where endangered under Minnesota’s . Accessed September 19, 2014). Minnesota statute, a person may not skipperlings may be addressed in take, import, transport, or sell any Under SARA, take of both species is conservation plans, State endangered prohibited on Canadian Federal lands, portion of an endangered species of species protections do not protect the wild animal or plant, or sell or possess but the Poweshiek skipperling occurs species from stochastic events and only on non-Federal lands in Canada, with intent to sell an article made with habitat fragmentation that are stressors and only four or five Dakota skipper any part of . . . an endangered species to the State’s small and isolated sites are on Federal lands (Coalfields of wild animal or plant’’ except as populations. permitted by the Minnesota DNR In North Dakota, the fundamental Community Pasture) in Canada. The (Minnesota Statutes 2012, 84.0895). The purpose of the North Dakota Trustlands Federal Cabinet may create an order Poweshiek skipperling was listed as (e.g., State school lands) management is extending SARA’s powers (e.g., to State-endangered in Minnesota, and the to obtain a ‘‘fair market’’ return from the private lands) if a species is status of Dakota skipper was changed lands while maintaining or improving insufficiently protected by provincial from threatened to endangered on their condition and value (ND laws; however, such action has not been August 19, 2013 (Minnesota DNR 2013). Department of Trustlands Web site taken for either of these species. In May The Poweshiek skipperling is listed as http://www.land.nd.gov/surface/ 2014, the COSEWIC status designation threatened under State endangered About.aspx). Consequently, if such land of Dakota skipper was changed from species statutes in Iowa and Michigan does not produce income for the State, threatened to endangered (http:// and as endangered in Wisconsin. The www.cosewic.gc.ca/rpts/detailed_ it may be subjected to deliberate change _ _ Dakota skipper is listed as endangered in management strategy or ownership species assessments e.html accessed under State endangered species statutes (e.g., sale at auction). The major source September 19, 2014). The Dakota in Iowa. South Dakota has an of income on the North Dakota skipper is listed as threatened under the endangered species act, but no Trustlands is from grazing and Manitoba Endangered Species Act, and invertebrates are currently listed. South agricultural leases, with additional it is, therefore, unlawful to kill, injure, Dakota put forth a proposal to add the revenue generated from rights-of-way, possess, disturb, or interfere with the Dakota skipper to the State endangered salt water disposal, and gravel and Dakota skipper; destroy, disturb, or species act list, but it was not finalized. scoria mining (ND Department of interfere with its habitat; or damage, Although the Dakota skipper is not Trustlands Web site http:// destroy, obstruct, or remove a natural listed as threatened or endangered www.land.nd.gov/surface/About.aspx). resource on which the species depends under South Dakota’s endangered At least two Dakota skipper sites are for its life and propagation (Manitoba species statute, the State natural under North Dakota State School Endangered Species Act http:// heritage program considers the species management and are managed as hay www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/wildlife/ to be imperiled because of rarity due to lands. legislation/endang_act.html, accessed very restricted range and very few February 7, 2012). The Poweshiek populations. North Dakota does not Federal Regulations skipperling was recently listed as have a mechanism for conferring The U.S. Forest Service (Forest endangered in Manitoba (http:// protection to threatened or endangered Service or USFS) has designated the www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/wildlife/ species at the State level. Poweshiek skipperling and the Dakota sar/sarlist.html, accessed December 28, State endangered species statutes skipper as sensitive species (a species 2012). There is no legal basis for provide State natural resource or identified by a Regional Forester for protecting threatened or endangered conservation agencies with the authority which population viability is a concern) invertebrates in Saskatchewan, but since to regulate collection of individuals and in North Dakota (Forest Service 2011). both species are listed under SARA, the related activities (for Poweshiek The Forest Service’s objectives for national government could step in to skipperling in Iowa, Michigan, and sensitive species benefit Dakota skipper protect the species in the province if the Wisconsin and Dakota skipper in and Poweshiek skipperling where they province does not act to protect the Minnesota and Iowa), but we have no occur (or could occur) on USFS lands; species (Environment Canada. 2012. information to suggest that collection is however, the majority of populations of Species at Risk Act: A Guide. http:// a stressor that impacts populations of both species do not occur within USFS www.sararegistry.gc.ca/approach/act/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63734 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Guide_e.cfm, accessed February 7, (genes with undesirable effects on 1 km (0.6 mi) between patches of prairie 2012). individuals or populations) (Nieminen habitat separated by structurally similar To summarize, some of the regulatory et al. 2001, pp. 242–243). habitats (Cochrane and Delphey 2002, mechanisms discussed above are Preliminary results of genetic studies pp. 6, 32). Therefore, Dakota skipper beneficial to populations of Dakota on the Poweshiek skipperling show that and Poweshiek skipperling habitat skipper and Poweshiek skipperling at a there appears to be limited levels of patches separated by more than 1 km local scale; however, most do not genetic diversity in the 32 tissue (0.6 mi) are effectively isolated from one ameliorate stressors except for harm to samples that were collected from the another (McCabe 1981, p. 190; Swengel individuals in certain States. With the Scuppernong Prairie site in Wisconsin, 1998). Extirpation of small, isolated exception of the regulation of some 7 samples from Manitoba, and 93 from populations may occur over many years incidental take in Wisconsin, 6 Michigan populations in 2012 in some cases, but may be inevitable Minnesota, and Canada, the statutory (Saarinen 2013, pers. comm.). Of greater where immigration from nearby protections afforded by these statutes concern than loss of genetic diversity, populations is not possible (Hanski et may do little to protect Poweshiek however, may be demographics, al. 1996, p. 535). skipperling or Dakota skipper from non- specifically the limited number of Because Dakota skipper and collection stressors. populations and population sizes that Poweshiek skipperling habitat is highly may be too small to persist (Saarinen fragmented and because the species are Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade 2013, pers. comm.) compounded by subject to local extinction, their ability Factors Affecting Its Continued other stressors. to disperse to reoccupy vacant habitat Existence Poweshiek skipperlings are not wide patches may be crucial for their long- Habitat Fragmentation and Population dispersers (Burke et al. 2011, p. 2279; term persistence. Patch isolation and Isolation Fitzsimmons 2012, pers. comm.); decreased permeability of surrounding species experts have estimated habitat acts as a dispersal barrier As habitat specialists, habitat maximum dispersal distance to be less between patches, ultimately decreasing fragmentation has a strong negative than 1.6 km (1.0 mi) (Westwood 2012b, genetic diversity within the patch effect on the distribution and abundance pers. comm; Dana 2012b, pers. comm.). through genetic drift and inbreeding. If of the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek Its mobility, however, has been ranked we assume isolation occurs when a skipperling because both are dependent as less than that of Dakota skipper patch is more than 1.6 km (1.0 mi) from on remnant native tallgrass prairie or (Burke et al. 2011, p. 2279; Fitzsimmons another patch, then about 45 percent of native mixed-grass prairie, and, in 2012, pers. comm.); therefore, a more Poweshiek skipperling locations with Michigan, Poweshiek skipperling conservative maximum dispersal present or unknown status are depends on native prairie fens. Habitat distance may be more similar to that of effectively isolated, and would not be fragmentation reduced once-extensive the Dakota skipper (less than 1 km (0.6 recolonized if extirpated (Service 2012 areas of these habitats to a collection of mi)). Most individuals may remain unpubl. data; Service 2014, unpubl. patches of varying quality and isolation. within a single habitat patch during data). Using a more conservative The probability of extinction within their 5–7 day adult life span; therefore, maximum dispersal of 1.0 km (0.6 mi), patches can be determined primarily by local extinctions of the Poweshiek approximately 55 percent of Poweshiek degradation of habitat quality, skipperling on isolated habitat skipperling locations with present or management techniques (e.g., haying, fragments are likely permanent unless unknown status are effectively isolated. prescribed burns), and likelihood of one or more populations located within Isolation was a factor in loss of a site at stochastic events, such as wildfire or 1.0–1.6 km (0.6–1.0 mi) are large enough Hartford Beach State Park, South floods. to produce immigrants to reestablish Dakota, where the Poweshiek Fragmentation of tallgrass prairie has populations. Furthermore, skipperling was extirpated due to degraded the genetic diversity of fragmentation of tallgrass prairie began habitat succession and exotic plant remaining Dakota skipper populations in about 1830, and at least 85 to 99 invasion (Skadsen 2009, p. 4; Skadsen (Britten and Glasford 2002, pp. 371– percent of the original prairie is now 2010, pers. comm.), but was located too 372). What may have once been a single gone across the species’ ranges (Samson far from a source population for natural population of Dakota skippers spread and Knopf 1994, p. 419). As a result, recolonization to occur. Improved across formerly extensive tallgrass and Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota prairie management has since markedly mixed-grass prairie (McCabe 1981, p. skipper populations are now scattered improved habitat quality, but the 184) is now fragmented into about 171 in fragments of this once-vast species has not been detected since separate sites where the species is ecosystem. The Poweshiek skipperling 2006 at Hartford Beach State Park known to be or may still be present may not move across barriers; for (Skadsen 2009, p. 4; Skadsen 2012, p. 4; (sites with present (83) or unknown (88) instance, in Manitoba, Poweshiek Service 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). For status). The small genetic differences skipperlings have been observed Dakota skipper, if we use a maximum among seven Dakota skipper avoiding dispersal over short distances, dispersal distance of 1 km (0.6 miles), populations in the southern portion of even to suitable habitat, if a barrier such approximately 63 percent of Dakota the species’ range suggest that they were as a road exists between suitable prairie skipper sites with present or unknown formerly connected (Britten and habitat or nectar sources (Westwood et status are effectively isolated (Service Glasford 2002, pp. 371–372). Each al. 2012, p.18). Repopulation of 2014, unpubl. geodatabase). Dakota skipper population is now Poweshiek skipperling sites after This simple analysis, however, subject to genetic drift that may erode extirpation has been observed (e.g., after probably underestimates the impacts of its genetic variability over time and a flood) (Saunders 1995, p. 15), but habitat fragmentation on the species. possesses genetic qualities indicative of source populations need to be adjacent Populations of both species may only be inbreeding (Britten and Glasford 2002, or very close. near others that are too small to produce pp. 371–372). Inbreeding lowers the Similarly, adult Dakota skippers have sufficient numbers of immigrants. This capacity of local populations to adapt to a short (5- to 7-day) life span (Dana is true for the Poweshiek skipperling in environmental changes and may 1991, p. 32) and an estimated maximum Scuppernong Prairie in Wisconsin, for magnify the effect of deleterious alleles dispersal distance to be no greater than example, which is about 0.3 km (0.2 mi)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63735

from the Wilton Road population; fewer numbers may decline due to the are generally greater than 158 ac (64 ha), than 100 individuals have been counted extirpation of isolated local populations but all of the sites are separated by more at this site each year, and the species where recolonization is no longer than 1 km (0.6 mi), and many sites are was not observed in 2013 (See possible, even without further habitat separated by many kilometers Population Distribution and Status). destruction (Schweitzer 1989, (Westwood 2013 pers. comm.). Numbers at Wilton Road are currently unpaginated). The likelihood of Therefore, about 25 of the sites too small (fewer than 12 individuals population extirpation may be directly evaluated in Canada were thought to counted each year) to produce sufficient related to the size of habitat fragments. have at least a moderate level of stressor numbers of emigrants to Scuppernong For example, in systematic surveys on from size and isolation. The Canada Prairie to reestablish a viable population Minnesota prairies, Swengel and sites where Dakota skippers are in the event of the latter’s extirpation. Swengel (1997, pp. 134–137; 1999, p. considered to be present are There is no population of Poweshiek 284) found no Dakota skippers on the approximately 200 km (125 mi) from the skipperlings near the Puchyan Prairie smallest remnants (less than 20 ha (49 nearest North Dakota site, and the site (which is about 115 km (71 mi) from ac)), and significantly lower abundance Manitoba site is 166 km (103 mi) from the nearest site in Wisconsin); on intermediate size (30–130 ha (74–321 the nearest Poweshiek skipperling site additionally, only a few individuals ac)) than on larger tracts (greater than in Minnesota. have been observed at this site each 140 ha (346 ac)). These differences were Dakota skipper populations on about year. In North Dakota, Orwig (1997, p. unrelated to vegetation characteristics; 31 percent of the evaluated sites (50 of 3) found that a 6-ha (15-ac) patch of habitat area did not correlate 163 sites) face a high level of impact due Poweshiek skipperling habitat at significantly with vegetation type, to a combination of size and isolation Hartleben Prairie was connected by quality, or topographic diversity (Service 2012 unpubl. data, 2014 grassland to another Poweshiek (Swengel and Swengel 1999, p. 284). unpubl. data). Approximately 31 skipperling population, but neither was We assessed the stressor of small size percent of evaluated sites (50 sites) face considered a robust population at the and isolation of habitat for 163 Dakota a moderate level of impact to time and the species was not observed skipper sites and 54 Poweshiek populations due to small size and at either location in 2013. Only 2 of the skipperling sites with present or isolation. About 39 percent of Dakota 9 Poweshiek skipperling sites with unknown status (Service 2012 unpubl. skipper sites (63 of the 163 evaluated present status in Michigan are located data; Service 2014, unpubl. data). We sites) in the United States are either within 1.6 km (1 mi) of another site; the considered small size and isolation of sufficiently large (greater than 130 ha rest are completely isolated from other habitat to be a stressor with a low-level (346 ac)) or are close enough to other populations. Furthermore, most of these impact on populations at sites that Dakota skipper populations that small populations consist of few individuals contain more than 140 ha (346 ac) of size and isolation is not a stressor. (see Population Distribution and native prairie or the species’ habitat Similarly, the stressor of small size and Status). Poweshiek skipperlings at Little onsite is located less than 1 km (0.6 mi) isolation has a high level of impact on Goose Lake Fen, for example, are from habitat occupied by the species on Poweshiek skipperling populations on separated from other populations by at another site. If the sum of native prairie about 39 percent of rated sites (25 of 54 least 8 km (5 mi)—too far for immigrants on the site under review plus that on the sites), on 22 sites (41 percent) the to repopulate the site. Furthermore, nearby site(s) is less than 140 ha (346 stressor is considered to have a ac), then this stressor was considered to moderate level of impact to populations, Little Goose Lake Fen may contain too have a moderate or high impact on and on 20 percent (11 of the 54 few Poweshiek skipperlings (Michigan populations. We considered small size evaluated sites) of the sites, we do not Natural Features Inventory 2011, and isolation of habitat to be a stressor consider a small size and isolation to be unpubl. data; Cuthrell 2013, pers. with moderate impacts on populations a stressor. In a separate analysis strictly comm.) to generate sufficient numbers at sites where the species’ habitat is looking at distances between Poweshiek of immigrants. In addition, poor habitat greater than 1 km (0.6 mi) from any skipperling sites where the species is quality negatively influences the other area where the species is present, present, we found that only 4 sites are number and quality of emigrants but contains more than 30 ha (74 ac) of within 1 km (0.6 mi) of another site (Thomas et al. 2001, p. 1795; Matter et habitat for the species; or where the where the species is present (Service al. 2009, p. 1467). Isolation is not likely species’ habitat is less than 1 km (0.6 2014, unpubl geodatabase). alleviated by connections to low-quality mi) from occupied Dakota skipper and In summary, small, isolated habitats that are not capable of Poweshiek skipperling habitat on populations face a current and ongoing producing emigrants at the numbers or another site, but the sum of native stressor of moderate to high severity to frequency sufficient to reliably prairie on the site under review plus both the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek repopulate nearby patches. that on the nearby site(s) is less than 140 skipperling. The stressor has a high Even with proper prairie management ha (346 ac) and greater than 30 ha (74 impact to populations when isolation is at individual sites, extreme weather ac). Sites that contain a small area of combined with small habitat fragments patterns or severe weather events may Dakota skipper and Poweshiek or small populations; for example, significantly impact Poweshiek skipperling habitat—no more than 30 ha where the population is too small to skipperling and Dakota skipper (74 ac)—and that are not within the 1- supplement nearby populations without populations, because they can occur km (0.6-mi) estimated maximum adverse genetic consequences to the across a large geographic area. These dispersal distance of occupied Dakota source population. Isolated populations events include extremely harsh winters, skipper habitat are considered to have a occur throughout both species’ entire late hard frosts following a spring thaw, stressor of high magnitude to those ranges; only 4 of the 12 Poweshiek sites severe storms, flooding, fire, or cool populations due to a combination of with present status are within the damp conditions. Habitats isolated as a their small size and isolation. estimated maximum dispersal distance result of fragmentation will not be Although we were unsure of the size from one another as are about 40 recolonized naturally after local of many sites in Canada, most sites were percent (64–69 of 171 sites) of Dakota extirpations, as described above. Dakota separated by more than 1 km (0.6 mi). skipper sites with present or unknown skipper and Poweshiek skipperling Dakota skipper sites in central Manitoba occupancy. The small populations are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63736 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

subject to erosion of genetic variability prairie fen habitats and may be a both species, makes it unlikely that leading to inbreeding, which lowers the stressor that has significant impacts on populations may expand to new areas, ability of the species to adapt to prairie butterflies such as Dakota for example, in a northward direction, environmental change. Small skippers and Poweshiek skipperling to adapt to changing climate. Climate populations occur rangewide for both (Royer and Marrone 1992b, p. 12; Royer change is a stressor that has the species; for example, surveyors have and Marrone 1992a, pp. 22–23; Swengel potential to have severe impacts on the counted fewer than 100 individuals in et al. 2011, p. 336; Landis et al. 2012, species; however, at this time our all but 4 Poweshiek skipperling sites in p. 140). For example, climatic factors, knowledge of how these impacts may 2011, all but one site surveyed in 2012, particularly precipitation and play out is limited. All of the sites and all sites surveyed in 2013. evaporation, play an important role in within the range of both species are in an area that will experience the effects Climate Change defining suitable Dakota skipper habitat (McCabe 1981, pp. 189–192). Larval of climate change, but how those effects Our analyses under the Act include Dakota skipper have ‘‘hydrofuge glands’’ will be manifested is uncertain. consideration of the likely effects of that suggest an historical or present Prairie Plant Harvesting ongoing and projected changes in need of the species for protection from climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ and flooding (McCabe 1981, p. 181). Royer et A potential, future stressor to the ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the al. (2008, p. 2) hypothesize that Dakota skipper and Poweshiek Intergovernmental Panel on Climate temperature and relative humidity at or skipperling is collection of purple Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the near the soil surface may be important coneflower (also known as black samson mean and variability of different types factors dictating larval survival, echinacea), a predominate nectar source of weather conditions over time, with 30 particularly since early stages live in a for both species, for the commercial years being a typical period for such silken nest within a few centimeters (2– herbal remedy market (Skadsen 1997, p. measurements, although shorter or 3) (0.8–1.2 in) of the soil surface during 30). Biologists surveying skipper longer periods also may be used (IPCC most of the summer (McCabe 1981, pp. habitats have not reported signs of plant 2013, p. 1450). The term ‘‘climate 180–181, 189; Dana 1991, p. 16). collecting, but illegal or unregulated change’’ thus refers to a change in the Furthermore, both species and their harvest could become a problem in mean or variability of one or more habitats may experience the effects of Dakota skipper and Poweshiek measures of climate (e.g., temperature or gradual shifts in plant communities and skipperling habitats due to economic demand (Skadsen 1997, p. 30). precipitation) that persists for an an increase in catastrophic events (such extended period, typically decades or Currently, prairie plant harvesting is not as severe storms, flooding, and fire) due longer, whether the change is due to considered a threat that impacts the to climate change, which are natural variability, human activity, or species; however, this situation may exacerbated by habitat fragmentation. both (IPCC 2013, p. 1450). Various types change if the demand for echinacea Isolated populations, specifically, of changes in climate can have direct or increases. Dakota skipper populations and indirect effects on species. These effects Poweshiek skipperling populations that Management for Invasive Species and may be positive, neutral, or negative and are separated by more than about 1 km Succession they may change over time, depending (0.6 miles), are unlikely to recover from on the species and other relevant Native prairie and native prairie fens local catastrophes unless sufficient considerations, such as the effects of must be managed to prevent the indirect interactions of climate with other numbers are successfully reintroduced, effects of invasive species and variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) for instance, through artificial succession (processes of change in (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). We use propagation efforts. species structure to an ecological our expert judgment and appropriate Documentation of climate-related community over time; secondary analytical approaches to weigh relevant changes that have already occurred succession is a disruption to succession information, including uncertainty, in throughout the range of the Dakota that occurs due to an event such as fire) our consideration of various aspects of skipper and Poweshiek skipperling to Dakota skippers and Poweshiek climate change. (Johnson et al. 2005, pp. 863–871) and skipperlings. If succession progresses As is the case with all stressors that predictions of changes in annual too far, established shrubs or trees must we assess, even if we conclude that a temperature and precipitation in the be removed in a way that avoids or species is currently affected or is likely Midwest region of the United States, minimizes damage to the native prairie. to be affected in a negative way by one such as Minnesota prairies When succession is well advanced, or more climate-related impacts, it does (Galatowitsch et al. 2009, pp. 2017), managers must use intensive methods, not necessarily follow that the species Michigan fens (Landis et al. 2012, p. such as fire management, to restore meets the definition of an ‘‘endangered 140), South Dakota (Cochrane and prairie plant communities. If not done species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ Moran 2011, entire), and throughout carefully, these actions may themselves under the Act. If a species is listed as North America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) harm local populations of the butterflies endangered or threatened, knowledge indicate that increased severity and (for example, see Factor A. The Present regarding the vulnerability of the frequency of droughts, floods, fires, and or Threatened Destruction, species to, and known or anticipated other climate-related changes will Modification, or Curtailment of Its impacts from, climate-associated continue in the future. Recent studies Habitat or Range). For example, once changes in environmental conditions have linked climate change to observed smooth brome has invaded Poweshiek can be used to help devise appropriate or predicted changes in distribution or skipperling or Dakota skipper habitat, it strategies for its recovery. population size of insects, particularly is challenging to eradicate it while Global climate change, with Lepidoptera (Wilson and Maclean 2011, minimizing harm to the butterflies. projections of increased variability in p. 262). Native remnant prairies have Willson and Stubbendiecks (2000, p. 36) weather patterns and greater frequency been reduced by 85 to 99.9 percent recommended burning prairie habitats, of severe weather events, as well as across the range of both species (Samson annually in some cases, to control warmer average temperatures, would and Knof 1994, p. 419)—this fact, smooth brome at the stage when the affect remnant prairie habitats and coupled with the low dispersal ability of lateral shoots are elongating.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63737

In southwestern Minnesota and in species, primarily leafy spurge and Neonicotinoids persist in the other parts of Dakota skipper’s range, Kentucky bluegrass, as well as chemical environment (Goulson 2013, p. 1) and the optimum time to burn to control control of exotic species, are are thought to accumulate in the soil smooth brome may occur during the documented stressors to Dakota from repeated applications over time time that the adult butterflies are active. skippers at about 12 sites in North (Hopwood et al. 2013, p. 4). Insects can Cutting or grazing to remove smooth Dakota (Royer and Royer 2012b, pp. 15– be exposed through multiple routes— brome may have less intensive effects 16, 22–23). In repeated surveys, Royer neonicotinoids are used in seed on Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota and Marrone (1992a, p. 33) observed a dressings, foliar spray, soil irrigation skipper larvae and could be used as an correlation between the disappearance water, soil drench, granular in pastures, alternative to fire, although these of the Dakota skipper and the advent of tree injections, and topical applications techniques also pose a risk to both chemical weed control methods in to pets. species if carried out annually at North Dakota, including the Sheyenne In the United States, six isolated sites. Puchyan Prairie is another National Grasslands. Royer and Marrone neonicotinoids are approved for use— example of a small and isolated (1992b, p. 17) cited the combination of imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, population that is susceptible to drought and grasshopper control clothianidin, dinotefuran, thiacloprid, invasive species control efforts, if they programs along the Red River Valley as and acetamiprid (EPA 2014 Web site)— are not conducted properly (Swengel having serious impacts on the and it is estimated that more than 3.5 and Swengel 2012, p. 6), although the Poweshiek skipperling. Dana (1997, p. million pounds (56 million ounces) of Wisconsin DNR proposed control efforts 5) concluded that herbicide use for neonicotinoids were applied to nearly that may improve habitat by removing weed and brush control on private lands 127 million acres (51 million hectares) reed canary grass, Canada thistle, and is the principal stressor to the Hole-in- of agricultural crops each year from glossy buckthorn (Wisconsin DNR 2012 the-Mountain complex in Minnesota, 2009 to 2011. The presence and in litt.; Carnes 2012, in litt.). where both butterfly species have been concentrations of neonicotinoids at If not appropriately managed with documented. Dakota skipper and Poweshiek fire, grazing, or haying, Poweshiek Furthermore, herbicide or pesticide skipperling sites or nearby agricultural skipperling and Dakota skipper habitat use in concert with other management fields that use neonicotinoid seed is degraded due to reduced diversity of types may amplify other stressors to the treatments or other such treatments has native-prairie plants and eventually butterflies. Skadsen (2006b, p. 11), for not been assessed, however, in general, succeeds to shrubby or forested habitats example, documented the likely nearly 100 percent of corn is known to that are not suitable for either species. extirpation of the Poweshiek skipperling be treated, and about 75 percent of At Hartford Beach State Park in South at Knapp Ranch in South Dakota after a soybean seeds are known to be treated Dakota, for example, the Poweshiek July 2006 application of broadleaf with neonicotinoids, for example. skipperling was extirpated (Skadsen herbicide associated with heavy grazing. Similarly, soybean aphid spraying 2009, p. 4) after lack of management led The degree and immediacy of the occurs during the adult flight period, is to invasion by smooth sumac (Rhus impact posed by broadcast application widespread, and applied aerially—this glabra) and quaking aspen (Populus of herbicides or pesticides is not spray can drift to nearby Dakota skipper tremuloides) (Skadsen 2006a, p. 5). Lack precisely understood, but may be mostly or Poweshiek skipperling habitat. The of management may also increase the tied to the use of herbicides to control presence and concentrations of likelihood of invasion of exotic cool- invasive species on rangelands. If broad insecticides at Dakota skipper and season grasses, such as Kentucky applications of herbicides are used in Poweshiek skipperling sites or nearby bluegrass and smooth brome (Mueller ways that remove plants from agricultural fields that utilize soybean 2013, pers. comm.), which do not grow rangelands that are important for aphid spraying has not been assessed. when Dakota skipper and Poweshiek Poweshiek skipperling or Dakota The Minnesota Zoo has proposed a skipperling larvae are feeding; thus a skipper, then this is a potential stressor study to investigate the levels of prevalence of these grasses reduces food on all privately owned sites where neonicotinoids, aphid pesticides, and availability for the larvae. broadcast applications may occur. other insecticides that may be present at As with invasive species, actions Indiscriminant use of insecticides for several skipper sites in Minnesota and intended to reverse secondary pest control on rangeland, adjacent South Dakota. succession may be intensive and can cropland, or forests is a stressor to The spread of nonnative gypsy moths themselves affect Poweshiek skipperling populations of Poweshiek skipperling (Lymantria dispar dispar) has increased and Dakota skipper populations. For and Dakota skipper. Insecticides used in efforts to control this damaging species example, Poweshiek skipperling agriculture, urban gardens, and forests and may also be a stressor, especially in populations failed to recover after are a suspected cause of Colony the range of Poweshiek skipperling. prescribed burns were carried out at Collapse Disorder in bees by reducing Insecticides used in the gypsy moth Kettle Moraine Low Prairie SNA after it resistance to parasites and pathogens suppression programs typically include had become overgrown (Borkin 2011, in and may have similar effects on other Foray, a formulation of the bacterial litt.). insects (Beyers 2012, p. 1). Neonicotinyl insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis Although carefully targeted herbicide pesticides, such as the imidacloprid kurstakii (Btk), or Gypchek, a viral treatments result in beneficial control of compound, for example, are a insecticide specific to gypsy moth undesired plants, broadcast chemical commonly used seed dressing that caterpillars. Btk is known to be lethal to control of exotic plants such as aerial spreads to nectar and pollen of butterfly larvae (e.g., Karner blue spraying of leafy spurge and application flowering crops (Whitehorn 2012, p. 1). butterfly) (Carnes 2011, p. 1). In of broad-spectrum herbicides to control The use of neonicotinoids on Wisconsin, the gypsy moth suppression weeds in pastures also eliminates native agricultural crops has dramatically program is managed under State Statute forbs that are important nectar sources increased in the last ten years and they 26.30 and Natural Resources Board Rule for both species (Royer and Marrone are now the most widely used group of number 47, and Gypchek is used when 1992a, pp. 10, 16, 28, 29, 33, 1992b, p. insecticides in the world (Jeschke et al. endangered or threatened moths or 17, Orwig 1997, p. 7). For example, 2011, pp. 2897–2898; Main et al. 2014, butterflies are present (Wisconsin DNR, invasion of native prairie by exotic p. 2; Goulson 2013, pp. 1–2). http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ForestHealth/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63738 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

GypsyMothPesticides.html, accessed individuals killed by pesticides. Unknown Stressors Causing Population May 24, 2012). Herbicide and pesticide use may have Declines Herbicide and pesticide use was direct or indirect effects on Dakota The sharp and broad declines of assessed at 15 present and unknown skipper and Poweshiek skipperling. Poweshiek skipperling documented in Dakota skipper sites and 9 Poweshiek Although such activities occur, there is Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, and skipperling sites occupied with present no evidence that these activities alone South Dakota are indicative of a or unknown occupancy where we had have significant impacts on either response to one or more stressors that sufficient information to evaluate the species, since their effects are often have yet to be ascertained. These stressor (Service 2012 unpubl.; 2014, localized. However, these factors may unknown factors may consist of a unpubl. data). We considered the level have a cumulative effect on the Dakota combination of one or more of the of impact to populations posed by skipper and Poweshiek skipperling stressors described throughout Factors herbicide and pesticide use to be low if when added to habitat curtailment and A, C, and E of this final rule, or may be the site is only spot sprayed with destruction because dramatic something that has not yet been herbicides or pesticides when and population declines have occurred in identified. These declines are where necessary (Smart et al. 2011, p. both species (discussed in Factor A). reminiscent of the widely publicized 182) and their use is not expected to Invasive species and woody vegetation decline of honey bees (Apis mellifera) in change in the future. The level of management helps to maintain prairie stressor was considered to be moderate that they seem sudden and mysterious habitats and can also be beneficial to (Spivak et al. 2011, p. 34). One if the use of herbicides is likely to populations of both species, for increase at a site (e.g., in response to hypothesis to explain the rapid decline example, when concentrated on affected of the Poweshiek skipperling, and new or expanding invasive species), but areas through spot spraying. Dakota skipper and Poweshiek possibly the Dakota skipper, is that a skipperling habitat is unlikely to be Pharmaceuticals newly virulent pathogen or a new parasitoid has increased mortality above exposed to broadcast applications. The The effect of pharmaceutical residues level of impact to populations posed by normal levels (Dana 2013, pers. comm.). in the environment on nontarget One or more unidentified stressors herbicide and pesticide use was animals is an emerging concern (Lange considered to be high at sites where have strongly impacted Poweshiek et al. 2009). Ivermectin, a widely used skipperling populations in the western herbicides are likely to be broadcast and persistent veterinary over the entire site at least once every portion of its range, which contains pharmaceutical used to treat cattle, is a more than 80 percent of the species’ site 4 years, or herbicide use has chemical of emerging concern to the significantly reduced forb or nectar records. Unknown stressors may be the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek current factor with the most significant plant density and diversity or is likely skipperling. Ivermectin is an to in the future. The level of impact to impacts to Poweshiek skipperling in anthelmintic (drugs that are used to Minnesota, North Dakota, and South populations posed by herbicide and treat infections with parasitic worms) pesticide use was high at 5 of the 16 Dakota, where populations experienced that is spread to prairie environments assessed Dakota skipper sites (2 in a sudden decline to undetectable via the dung of grazing cattle (Lange et North Dakota and 3 in South Dakota) numbers after about 2003. Until about al. 2009, p. 2238). Lange et al. (2009, pp. and moderate at 2 sites—1 in North 2003, Poweshiek skipperling was 2234, 2238) found that skipper Dakota and 1 in South Dakota. The level regarded as the most frequently and butterflies are particularly vulnerable to of impact to populations posed by reliably encountered prairie-obligate ivermectin, due to their low dispersive herbicide and pesticide use was skipper in Minnesota, which contains capacities and habitat preferences for considered to be high at 3 of the 9 nearly 50 percent of all known soil. The extirpation of the Dakota assessed Poweshiek skipperling sites Poweshiek skipperling locations. skipper in at least one South Dakota site (all 3 in South Dakota), and 1 site in Numbers and distribution dropped North Dakota had a moderate level of (Sica Hollow West) is possibly due to dramatically in subsequent years, impact to populations. ivermectin that has leached into the however, and the species has not been In summary, some efforts to manage environment (Skadsen 2010, pers. seen in Minnesota since 2007, with the woody encroachment and invasive comm.). exception of 2 individuals observed at species, such as herbicide use, can be a Pharmaceutical use is a stressor that one location in 2013 (Weber 2014, in stressor to both Dakota skipper and has the potential to have high-level litt.; Dana 2014, pers. comm.). Similar Poweshiek skipperling populations. impacts on populations of the Dakota recent dramatic declines were observed Invasive species management is a skipper and Poweshiek skipperling; in North Dakota, South Dakota, and current and ongoing stressor of low to however, at this time our knowledge of Iowa (See Background of this rule). high impact to populations, depending these impacts is limited. Sites within Recent declines of Dakota skippers on the intensity and extent of the use, the range of both species could indicate that this species may also be types of techniques, and the experience the effects of impacted by unknown stressors. The compounding effects that may occur pharmaceuticals. Sites that experience Dakota skipper was last detected at one from varying management. Medium- to grazing, however, are particularly site in Iowa in 1992. Only one high-level impacts of herbicide or vulnerable to ivermectin use; these sites individual was detected in Minnesota pesticide use to Dakota skipper and are primarily in South Dakota, North during 2012 surveys, which included 18 Poweshiek skipperling populations have Dakota, and Minnesota. The use of sites with previous records; surveys for been documented in North and South pharmaceuticals such as ivermectin may undiscovered populations were also Dakota. This stressor has a high impact have a cumulative effect on the Dakota carried out on 23 prairie remnants to populations when it is combined skipper and Poweshiek skipperling without previous records for the with other stressors, such as when added to habitat curtailment or species. Only six individual Dakota management, that reduces or eliminates destruction, because habitat destruction skippers were detected at one site in nectar food sources, or small habitat leads to population declines in Minnesota during 2013 surveys, which fragments that are isolated from other populations of both species (discussed included 15 sites with previous records source populations that may replenish in Factor A). and 12 prairie remnants without

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63739

previous records for the species (Service from climatic change, including efforts, which may help alleviate 2014, unpubl. geodatabase.). Based on increased flooding and drought, are stressors associated with small and similar conditions in other parts of the expected to become severe in the future isolated populations. species’ range, similar trends are and result in additional habitat losses; In 2011, researchers collected 32 adult anticipated outside of Minnesota. however, we have limited information Dakota skippers from a combination of Indications of recent declining trends on how this stressor may affect either 4 sites in South Dakota and translocated have been observed in South Dakota and species. Possibly the stressor with the them to Pickerel Lake State Park, where North Dakota. In South Dakota, for most significant impacts to the the species was last detected in 2008 example, the proportion of positive Poweshiek skipperling are one or more (Skadsen 2011, pp. 7–9). The phenology surveys at known sites has fluctuated unknown factors that have led to of the adult flight period and purple over time; however, the 2012 and 2013 widespread and sharp population coneflower blooms did not coincide, surveys had the lowest positive declines in the western portion of the and no Dakota skippers were observed detection rate (38 percent and 32 species’ range. These unknown stressors at the release site during subsequent percent, respectively) for the last 15 may also be the cause of the recent visits in 2011 or 2012 (Skadsen 2011, years (since 1996)—much less than declines observed in Dakota skipper pp. 8–9, Skadsen 2012, p. 4). comparable survey years in South populations over much of its range. Researchers and managers continue to Dakota (for years with more than 20 Anthropogenic factors such as develop prairie restoration and surveys). The Dakota skipper was insecticide, herbicide, and pesticide use management goals for this and the detected at 12 of the 23 sites surveyed are also stressors to both species, and Hartford Beach State Park site in South during 2012 in North Dakota (and 2 unregulated prairie plant harvest has the Dakota (Skadsen 2011, p. 9; Skadsen additional sites with no previous Dakota potential to become a stressor in the 2012b, p. 7). skipper records); average encounter future (See Factor E). Collectively, these The Minnesota Zoo has also begun a frequencies observed across the State in stressors have operated in the past, are study to investigate the levels of 2012 (9.4 encounters per hour), impacting both species now, and will neonicotinoids, aphid pesticides, and however, were about half of those continue to impact the Dakota skipper other insecticides present at several observed during the 1996–1997 State- and Poweshiek skipperling in the skipper sites in Minnesota and at least wide surveys (ND State average = 17.4 future. one site in South Dakota. encounters per hour). The Dakota We are unaware of any conservation skipper was not detected at the three Conservation Efforts To Reduce Other efforts that directly address the impacts sites that were surveyed in 2013 in Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting of climate change to Dakota skippers or North Dakota with previous records of Its Continued Existence Poweshiek skipperlings. We are the species. Recent survey results and Several of the conservation activities unaware of any conservation efforts that similar life histories suggest that the discussed under Factor A. in this rule address the possible effects of Dakota skipper can be reasonably may address some factors discussed pharmaceuticals on the Poweshiek compared to the Poweshiek skipperling under Factor E, for example, life-history skipperling and Dakota skipper. in their potential rate of decline—that studies of both species, studies to Cumulative Effects From Factors A is, it is reasonable to assume that Dakota examine the effects of various Through E skipper may be vulnerable to the same management strategies on the species unidentified factors that have caused and its habitat, and habitat restoration Many of the stressors described in this dramatic declines in the Poweshiek techniques such as controlled burns on final rule may cumulatively or skipperling, with a slight delay in sites divided into several management synergistically impact the Dakota timing. units. skipper and Poweshiek skipperling In summary, the results of extensive The Minnesota Zoo has initiated a beyond the scope of each individual surveys in the western portion of the new program to research Poweshiek stressor. For example, improper grazing Poweshiek skipperling’s range have skipperling and Dakota skipper management alone may only affect documented the species’ response to propagation. If this program is portions of Dakota skipper or Poweshiek unknown factors and indicate that they successful, it could facilitate skipperling habitat; however, improper are a current stressor of high severity. reintroduction and augmentation into grazing combined with invasive plants, Although to date the Dakota skipper has areas where the species has declined or herbicide use, and drought may not experienced such dramatic declines disappeared, to bolster the small genetic collectively result in substantial habitat as the Poweshiek skipperling, similar pool and small numbers. In 2012, loss, degradation, or fragmentation unknown stressors on Dakota skipper researchers at the Minnesota Zoo and across large portions of the species’ populations likely have affected the the University of Michigan initiated a ranges. In turn, climate change may species in Minnesota and Iowa, where genetics study of Dakota skipper and exacerbate those effects, further recent surveys indicate that the species Poweshiek skipperling using specimens diminishing habitat and increasing the may be largely absent or at undetectable at some of the few sites where either isolation of already declining and levels. species was observed in 2012, isolated populations, making them more specifically a few sites in Michigan, susceptible to genetic drift or Summary of Factor E Wisconsin, and Manitoba for the catastrophic events such as fire, Based on our analysis of the best Poweshiek skipperling and sites in flooding, and drought. Further, available information, we have North Dakota, South Dakota, and nonagricultural development such as identified several natural and manmade Manitoba for Dakota skipper. Too few gravel mining or housing development factors affecting the continued existence (one adult male) Dakota skipper were not only can directly destroy habitat, of the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek observed in Minnesota to obtain but also can increase fragmentation of skipperling. Effects of small population samples from that State in 2012. habitat by increasing associated road size, population isolation, and loss of Similarly, only six individuals were development. Additionally, draining genetic diversity are likely stressors that observed at one Minnesota site in 2013. prairie fens will increase invasive plant have significant impacts on both The genetics studies will help inform and woody vegetation encroachment. species. Environmental effects resulting captive propagation and reintroduction Numerous stressors are likely acting

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63740 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

cumulatively to further increase impacts one or more stressors that have a the species (see Factor A). Extensive on the already vulnerable, small, and moderate to high impact on those historical conversion of prairie and isolated populations of Poweshiek populations—these sites are distributed associated habitats, nearly complete in skipperling and Dakota skipper. across Minnesota, North Dakota, and some areas, has isolated many Dakota South Dakota. Three sites with skipper populations. These small and Determination unknown occupancy were not evaluated isolated populations are subject to loss Dakota Skipper for stressors, due to lack of information. of genetic diversity through genetic drift We carefully assessed the best The 7 sites with unknown occupancy (see Factor E) and are susceptible to a scientific and commercial information without moderate- to high-level variety of stochastic (e.g., wildfires, available regarding the past, present, stressors are scattered in various droughts, and floods) and deterministic and future threats to the Dakota skipper. counties in Minnesota and South (e.g., overgrazing, invasive species) Dakota skippers are obligate residents of Dakota, and the skipper is thought to factors (see Factor A) that may kill all still be present at approximately 83 (31 or a substantial proportion of a undisturbed (remnant, untilled) high- percent) of the 264 historical locations, population. quality prairie, ranging from wet-mesic although 22 of these sites have not been Although much of the habitat tallgrass prairie to dry-mesic mixed- surveyed since 2002. Of those 83 sites, conversion occurred in the past, the grass prairie. Native tallgrass prairies at least 73 sites are subject to one or effects of the dramatic reduction and have been reduced by 85 to 99.9 percent more stressors that have a moderate to fragmentation of habitat have persistent of their former area, and native mixed- high impact on those populations, such and ongoing effects on the viability of grass prairies have been reduced by 71.9 as conversion to agriculture, lack of populations; furthermore, conversion of to 99 percent of their former area in management, and small size and native prairies to agriculture or other North Dakota, Manitoba, and isolation. Four sites were not evaluated uses is still occurring today. The life Saskatchewan. The Dakota skipper was due to lack of information, and the history of the species exacerbates the once a common prairie butterfly widely remaining six sites that do not have threats caused by the fragmentation and dispersed in five States, extending from stressors with moderate- to high-level degradation of the species’ habitat (see Illinois to North Dakota, and portions of impacts to populations occur in Factors A and E) as the Dakota skipper two Canadian provinces. However, its scattered counties in Minnesota and is not likely to recolonize distant sites range is now substantially reduced such South Dakota. due to its short adult life span, single that the Dakota skipper is restricted to Approximately half (40 of 83) of the annual flight, and limited dispersal small patches of fragmented native- locations where the species is ability. Therefore, the species’ prairie remnants in portions of three considered to be present are primarily extirpation from a site is likely States and two Canadian provinces. located on privately owned fall-hayed permanent unless it is near another site Recent survey data indicate that the prairies in Canada, mostly within 2 from which it can emigrate. Dakota skipper has declined to zero or isolated complexes, and have not been Furthermore, because the larvae are to undetectable levels in approximately surveyed since 2007. All 40 of those located at or near the soil surface, they 77 percent of sites where it had been Canadian sites have one or more are more vulnerable to fire (Factor A); recorded rangewide. It is presumed stressors of moderate to high level of herbicides, pesticides, and other extirpated from Illinois and Iowa and no impact to populations. Approximately chemicals (see Factor E); desiccation longer occurs in eastern Minnesota. 15 populations in Canada are on lands due to changing climate (see Factor E); Much of the rangewide decline in the that are being used in ways that are or flooding (see Factor A). species has been observed in the last favorable to the Dakota skipper (i.e., Within the remaining native-prairie few years. Since 1988, researchers have late-season haying conducted at least patches, degradation of habitat quality is surveyed 10 or more sites in 25 years; every other year and there is no now the primary threat to the Dakota the average positive detection rate for indication that native plant species skipper (see Factor A). Of the various those years is 63 percent rangewide. diversity is declining due to timing or threats to Dakota skipper habitat, Since 2009, the percent of surveyed frequency of mowing), and the stressors conversion, invasive species, secondary sites with positive detections of the at those sites are not immediate. succession, and reduction in the species has dropped from 63 percent in However, we are aware of only one of diversity of native-prairie plant 2009, to 41 percent in 2010, 36 percent these Canadian populations that is communities have moderate- to high- in 2011, 37 percent in 2012, and 22 protected (on Federal land). The level impacts to populations throughout percent in 2013. While these types of remaining sites where the species is the range of the Dakota skipper. An lows in detections have been observed considered to be present are about array of other factors including in past years, for example, in the early equally distributed among Minnesota nonagricultural development, chemical 1990s, the numbers of individuals (11 sites), North Dakota (16 sites), and contaminants, pesticides, and intensive observed in 2013 were the lowest ever South Dakota (14 sites). Sites with grazing are also current and ongoing recorded, despite extensive survey stressors with moderate to high level of threats to the Dakota skipper and its effort. Dakota skippers currently occupy impacts to populations occur in all three habitat (see Factors A and E). Current sites in northeastern South Dakota, States. and ongoing prairie management North Dakota, western Minnesota, Many factors likely contributed to the practices, such as indiscriminate use of southern Manitoba, and southeastern Dakota skipper’s decline, and numerous herbicides or intensive grazing that Saskatchewan. factors, acting individually or reduces or eliminates food sources, Of the 264 historical locations, the synergistically, continue today (see contribute to the species’ imperilment at species is presumed extirpated or Summary of Factors Affecting the sites throughout the range of the species possibly extirpated from at least 93 (35 Species). We identified many stressors (see Factors A and E). percent) of those sites, and the to the species, some of which rise to the Unknown factors may be the current occupancy of the species is unknown at level of threats that contribute to the threat that has the most significant approximately 88 (33 percent) sites. Of listing status for each species. Habitat impacts to the Dakota skipper in Iowa the 88 sites where the occupancy is loss and degradation have impacted the and Minnesota, where populations unknown, at least 78 sites are subject to Dakota skipper, curtailing the ranges of experienced a sudden decline to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63741

undetectable numbers in the most seems to be occurring at a faster rate their former area in North Dakota, recent years (see Factor E). Based on than new discoveries. The decreasing Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. The recent data, similar conditions in other numbers of sites with positive Poweshiek skipperling was once a parts of the Dakota skipper’s range, and detections and the decreasing numbers common prairie butterfly widely the similarities in life histories between of individuals observed at each site dispersed in eight States, extended from Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota throughout its range, including known Michigan to North Dakota, and portions skipper, similar declining trends are sites in Minnesota, North Dakota, and of Manitoba, Canada. However, its range anticipated in other parts of the Dakota South Dakota, is likely to continue. is now substantially reduced such that skipper’s range due to unknown factors, Therefore, on the basis of the best the Poweshiek skipperling is restricted and may only be a few years behind available scientific and commercial to small patches of fragmented native- those declines experienced by other information, we are listing the Dakota prairie remnants in portions of two species, such as the Poweshiek skipper as a threatened species in States and one Canadian province. The skipperling (see Factor E). Existing accordance with sections 3(20) and species is presumed extirpated from regulatory mechanisms vary across the 4(a)(1) of the Act. Illinois and Indiana, and the status of species’ ranges, and although We find that an endangered species the species is unknown in four of the six mechanisms do exist that protect the status is not appropriate for the Dakota States with relatively recent records species from direct take in Iowa and skipper because some Dakota skipper (within the last 20 years). Recent survey Minnesota, these mechanisms do not populations still appear to be doing data indicate that the Poweshiek sufficiently mitigate threats to the relatively well (populations detected skipperling has declined to zero or to species (see Factor D). Climate change during the last survey year, numbers undetectable levels in approximately 96 may affect Dakota skipper, especially appear stable, lower levels of threats percent of sites where it has ever been increased frequency of extreme climatic and stressors)—primarily in North recorded. conditions such as flooding and Dakota, South Dakota, Manitoba, and A drastic decline in this species has drought, but there is limited information Saskatchewan. About 14 to 15 sites in been observed rangewide very recently. on the exact nature of impacts that these Manitoba are used in a manner Between 1985 and 2003, researchers species may experience. Recent conducive to the conservation of Dakota surveyed 10 or more sites in 7 different temperature and precipitation trends skipper (haying after the adult flight years (excluding new sites in the first indicate that certain aspects of climate period), and the threats at those sites are year); the average positive detection rate change may be occurring in Dakota not imminent. Furthermore, we believe for those years is 71 percent rangewide. skipper range now (see Factor E). the species to be present in at least 6 Since 2003, the percent of surveyed The Act defines an endangered sites that do not have documented sites with positive detections of the species as any species that is ‘‘in danger stressors of a moderate- to high-level species has dropped to an average of 31 of extinction throughout all or a impact to populations, primarily in percent each year (2004–2013), with a significant portion of its range’’ and a scattered counties in Minnesota and low of 12 percent at sites surveyed in threatened species as any species ‘‘that South Dakota. Additionally, a few new 2012 and 2013. Despite recent is likely to become endangered Dakota skipper sites continue to be substantial survey efforts in those throughout all or a significant portion of discovered in suitable prairie habitat in States, the Poweshiek skipperling has its range within the foreseeable future.’’ North Dakota and South Dakota. not been recorded in Iowa since 2007, We find that the Dakota skipper is likely Under the Act and our implementing when it was observed at 1 site; in North to become endangered throughout all of regulations, a species may warrant Dakota since 2001, when it was its range within the foreseeable future, listing if it is endangered or threatened observed at 1 site, nor in South Dakota based on the immediacy, severity, and throughout all or a significant portion of since 2008, when it was observed at 3 scope of the threats described above. its range. Because we have determined sites. The species was not observed in These threats are exacerbated by small that the Dakota skipper is a threatened North Dakota, South Dakota, or population sizes, the loss of redundancy species throughout all of its range, no Minnesota during 2012 surveys, for and resiliency of these species, and the portion of its range can be ‘‘significant’’ example. The Poweshiek skipperling continued inadequacy of existing for purposes of the definitions of was observed at one site in Minnesota protective regulations. A few scattered ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened in 2007 and there was a sighting of a populations of Dakota skipper are doing species.’’ See the Final Policy on Poweshiek skipperling at one site in relatively well, however, and are in Interpretation of the Phrase ‘‘Significant 2013, although no photographs or habitats that have low or non-immediate Portion of Its Range’’ in the Endangered specimens were taken to confirm the threats. Species Act’s Definitions of sighting. Iowa sites were not surveyed Canada has approximately 15 ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened in 2012, and the species was not populations on lands that are being Species’’ (79 FR 37577). detected in 2013. Poweshiek skipperling utilized in a manner conducive to the have historically been documented at Poweshiek Skipperling conservation of Dakota skipper, and the approximately 296 sites; now we threats at those sites are not imminent. We carefully assessed the best consider the species to be present at However, few of these populations are scientific and commercial information only 12 of those sites—one of these is protected, many are vulnerable to available regarding the past, present, considered a sub-site of a larger site. changes in land use, landowners may and future threats to the Poweshiek The only confirmed extant (present) not be aware of the species presence and skipperling. Poweshiek skipperling are populations of Poweshiek skipperling may change land use, and the sites have obligate residents of undisturbed are currently restricted to 1 small and not been surveyed in the last 5 years. (remnant, untilled) high-quality prairie, isolated native-prairie remnant in While a few new locations of Dakota ranging from wet-mesic tallgrass prairie Wisconsin, 9 small and isolated prairie skipper populations continue to be to dry-mesic mixed-grass prairie. Native fen remnants in Michigan, and a prairie discovered in North and South Dakota, tallgrass prairies have been reduced by complex in Manitoba. The species may the numbers of individuals observed at 85 to 99.9 percent of their former area, also be present at one site in Minnesota. those sites is generally low, and and native mixed-grass prairies have These sites represent less than 5 percent extirpation at previously known sites been reduced by 72 to 99 percent of of the total number of sites ever

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63742 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

documented for the species. The populations; furthermore, conversion of experience. Recent temperature and numbers observed at these sites are native prairies to agriculture or other precipitation trends indicate that certain relatively small (fewer than 100 uses is still occurring today. The life aspects of climate change may be individuals at all sites surveyed in history of the species exacerbates the occurring in Poweshiek skipperling 2013), and all of these sites have at least threats caused by the fragmentation and range now (see Factor E). one documented threat that has degradation of its habitat (see Factors A The Act defines an endangered moderate to high impacts on those and E) as Poweshiek skipperlings are species as any species that is ‘‘in danger populations. The strongest population not likely to recolonize distant sites due of extinction throughout all or a in the United States, a prairie fen in to their short adult life span, single significant portion of its range’’ and a Michigan with relatively high and fairly annual flight, and limited dispersal threatened species as any species ‘‘that consistent numbers observed each year ability. Therefore, the Poweshiek is likely to become endangered (numbers observed per minute ranged skipperling’s extirpation from a site is throughout all or a significant portion of from 0.2 to 2.2 during the last 6 survey likely permanent unless it is near its range within the foreseeable future.’’ years), for instance, is under threat from another site from which it can emigrate. We find that the Poweshiek skipperling intense development pressure. The Furthermore, because the larvae are is presently in danger of extinction Tallgrass Prairie Preserve site in located at or near the soil surface, they throughout its entire range, based on the Manitoba also has relatively high are more vulnerable to fire (Factor A), immediacy, severity, and scope of the numbers observed each year; however, herbicides, pesticides, and other threats described above. These threats this site is impacted by several chemicals (see Factor E); desiccation are exacerbated by small population immediate, moderate- to high-level due to changing climate (see Factor E); sizes, the loss of redundancy and threats, including the encroachment of or changes in hydrology (see Factor A). resiliency of these species, and the continued inadequacy of existing invasive plants and woody vegetation, Within the remaining native-prairie protective regulations. There are only 12 flooding, and isolation from the nearest patches, degradation of habitat quality is locations where we believe the species site by hundreds of kilometers. In now the primary threat to the to be present, and all of those sites are addition, recent unplanned fires in 2009 Poweshiek skipperling (see Factor A). subject to at least one or more ongoing and 2011 affected large portions of the Of the various threats to Poweshiek and immediate threats that have site. Poweshiek skipperling is skipperling habitat, conversion, invasive considered to have unknown occupancy moderate- to high-level effects on those species, secondary succession, and populations. Therefore, on the basis of at 75 sites—throughout the range of the reduction in the diversity of native- species (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, the best available scientific and prairie plant communities have commercial information, we are listing North Dakota, and South Dakota), 49 of moderate- to high-level impacts to these sites were included in the threats the Poweshiek skipperling as populations throughout the range of the endangered in accordance with sections assessment. Of the 49 sites where the Poweshiek skipperling. An array of occupancy is unknown that had 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. other factors including nonagricultural We find that a threatened species sufficient information to assess, at least development, chemical contaminants, status is not appropriate for the 42 sites are subject to one or more pesticides, and intensive grazing are Poweshiek skipperling because the threats that have a moderate to high also current and ongoing threats to the unknown factors have significant impact on those populations. These Poweshiek skipperling and its habitat impacts to the species throughout most sites are throughout the range of the (see Factors A and E). Current and of its range and have occurred in a short species in Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, ongoing prairie management practices, timeframe. Sharp population declines North Dakota, and South Dakota. such as indiscriminate use of herbicides have not been detected at the few Many factors likely contributed to the or intensive grazing that reduces or remaining sites where the species is still Poweshiek skipperling’s decline, and eliminates food sources, contribute to present, but all of these sites are numerous major threats, acting the species’ imperilment, particularly in currently experiencing one or more individually or synergistically, continue North Dakota, South Dakota, and threats that have moderate- to high-level today (see Summary of Factors Affecting Minnesota (see Factors A and E). impacts to populations. Based on recent the Species). Habitat loss and Unknown factors may be the current data and similar conditions in other degradation have impacted the threat that has the most significant parts of Poweshiek skipperling range, Poweshiek skipperling, curtailing the impacts to the Poweshiek skipperling similar declining trends are anticipated ranges of both species (see Factor A). species in Iowa, Minnesota, North in other parts of the range of the species, Extensive historical conversion of Dakota, and South Dakota, where and may only be a few years behind prairie and associated habitats, nearly populations experienced a sudden those declines experienced by the complete in some areas, has isolated decline to undetectable numbers in the species in Iowa, Minnesota, North many Poweshiek skipperling most recent years (see Factor E). Dakota, and South Dakota (see Factor E). populations. These small and isolated Existing regulatory mechanisms vary The impacts of the unknown factors on populations are subject to loss of genetic across the species’ ranges, and although populations are exacerbated by habitat diversity through genetic drift (see mechanisms do exist in Iowa, Michigan, curtailment and destruction and other Factor E) and are susceptible to a variety Minnesota, and Wisconsin that protect factors such as the effects of small and of stochastic (e.g., wildfires, droughts, the species from direct take, these isolated populations due to habitat and floods) and deterministic (e.g., mechanisms do not sufficiently mitigate fragmentation. overgrazing, invasive species) factors threats to the Poweshiek skipperling Under the Act and our implementing (see Factor A) that may kill all or a (see Factor D). Climate change may regulations, a species may warrant substantial proportion of a population. affect the Poweshiek skipperling, listing if it is endangered or threatened Although much of the habitat especially increased frequency of throughout all or a significant portion of conversion occurred in the past, the extreme climatic conditions such as its range. Because we have determined effects of the dramatic reduction and flooding and drought, but there is that the Poweshiek skipperling is an fragmentation of habitat have persistent limited information on the exact nature endangered species throughout all of its and ongoing effects on the viability of of impacts that the species may range, no portion of its range can be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63743

‘‘significant’’ for purposes of the (comprising species experts, Federal 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal definitions of ‘‘endangered species’’ and and State agencies, nongovernmental agencies to ensure that activities they ‘‘threatened species.’’ See the Final organizations, and stakeholders) are authorize, fund, or carry out are not Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase often established to develop recovery likely to jeopardize the continued ‘‘Significant Portion of Its Range’’ in the plans. When completed, the recovery existence of the species or destroy or Endangered Species Act’s Definitions of outlines, draft recovery plans, and the adversely modify its critical habitat. If a ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened final recovery plans will be available on Federal action may adversely affect a Species’’ (79 FR 37577). our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ listed species or its critical habitat, the endangered), or from our Twin Cities Available Conservation Measures responsible Federal agency must enter Ecological Services Fish and Wildlife into formal consultation with the Conservation measures provided to Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Service. species listed as endangered or CONTACT). threatened under the Act include Implementation of recovery actions Federal agency actions within the recognition, recovery actions, generally requires the participation of a species habitat that may require requirements for Federal protection, and broad range of partners, including other conference or consultation or both as prohibitions against certain practices. Federal agencies, States, Tribes, described in the preceding paragraph Recognition through listing results in nongovernmental organizations, include, but are not limited to, public awareness and conservation by businesses, and private landowners. management and any other landscape- Federal, State, Tribal, and local Examples of recovery actions include altering activities on Federal lands such agencies, private organizations, and habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of as actions within the jurisdiction of the individuals. The Act encourages native vegetation), research, captive NRCS; land management by the U.S. cooperation with the States and requires propagation and reintroduction, and Forest Service; issuance of section 404 that recovery actions be carried out for outreach and education. The recovery of Clean Water Act permits by the U.S. all listed species. The protection many listed species cannot be Army Corps of Engineers; land required by Federal agencies and the accomplished solely on Federal lands management by the U.S. Fish and prohibitions against certain activities because their range may occur primarily Wildlife Service; construction and are discussed, in part, below. or solely on non-Federal lands. To The primary purpose of the Act is the management of gas pipeline, wind achieve recovery of these species facilities and associated infrastructure, conservation of endangered and requires cooperative conservation efforts and power line rights-of-way by the threatened species and the ecosystems on private, State, and Tribal lands. upon which they depend. The ultimate When species are listed, funding for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery actions will be available from construction and maintenance of roads recovery of these listed species, so that a variety of sources, including Federal or highways by the Federal Highway they no longer need the protective budgets, State programs, and cost-share Administration; and land management measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of grants for non-Federal landowners, the within branches of the Department of the Act requires the Service to develop academic community, and Defense (DOD). Examples of these types and implement recovery plans for the nongovernmental organizations. In of actions include activities funded or conservation of endangered and addition, pursuant to section 6 of the authorized under the Farm Bill Program, threatened species. The recovery Act, the States of Iowa, Michigan, Environmental Quality Incentives planning process involves the Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Program, Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. identification of actions that are and Wisconsin would be eligible for 1251 et seq.), Partners for Fish and necessary to halt or reverse the species’ Federal funds to implement Wildlife Program, and DOD decline by addressing the threats to its management actions that promote the construction activities related to survival and recovery. The goal of this protection and recovery of the training or other military missions. process is to restore listed species to a Poweshiek skipperling and Dakota point where they are secure, self- skipper. Information on our grant Poweshiek Skipperling sustaining, and functioning components programs that are available to aid The Act and its implementing of their ecosystems. species recovery can be found at: Recovery planning includes the regulations set forth a series of general http://www.fws.gov/grants. prohibitions and exceptions that apply development of a recovery outline Please let us know if you are shortly after a species is listed, interested in participating in recovery to all endangered wildlife. The preparation of a draft and final recovery efforts for the Dakota skipper or prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, plan, and revisions to the plan as Poweshiek skipperling. Additionally, codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for endangered significant new information becomes we invite you to submit any new wildlife, in part, make it illegal for any available. The recovery outline guides information on these species whenever person subject to the jurisdiction of the the immediate implementation of urgent it becomes available and any United States to take (includes harass, recovery actions and describes the information you may have for recovery harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, process to be used to develop a recovery planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt plan. The recovery plan identifies site- INFORMATION CONTACT). any of these), import, export, ship in specific management actions that will Section 7(a) of the Act requires interstate commerce in the course of achieve recovery of the species, Federal agencies to evaluate their commercial activity, or sell or offer for measurable criteria that determine when actions with respect to any species that sale in interstate or foreign commerce a species may be downlisted or delisted, is proposed or listed as endangered or any listed species. Under the Lacey Act and methods for monitoring recovery threatened and with respect to its (18 U.S.C. 42–43; 16 U.S.C. 3371–3378), progress. Recovery plans also establish critical habitat, if any is designated. it is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, a framework for agencies to coordinate Regulations implementing this carry, transport, or ship any such their recovery efforts and provide interagency cooperation provision of the wildlife that has been taken illegally. estimates of the cost of implementing Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. If Certain exceptions apply to agents of the recovery tasks. Recovery teams a species is listed subsequently, section Service and State conservation agencies.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63744 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dakota Skipper prohibitions (50 CFR 17.31) and cropland—between 2006 and 2012 Under section 4(d) of the Act, the exceptions to those prohibitions (50 (Reitsma et al. 2014, p. 3). Service has discretion to issue CFR 17.32) under the Act that apply to As with agricultural policies (Doherty regulations that we find necessary and most threatened species. Alternately, for et al. 2013, p. 15), prohibitions against advisable to provide for the other threatened species, the Service take of Dakota skippers could interact with other factors to affect the rates at conservation of threatened wildlife. We develops specific prohibitions and which native grassland is converted in may also prohibit by regulation with exceptions that are tailored to the the range of the species. Less than 20 respect to threatened wildlife any act specific conservation needs of the percent of the grassland in the Prairie prohibited by section 9(a)(1) of the Act species. In such cases, some of the Pothole Region of the United States is for endangered wildlife. Exercising this prohibitions and authorizations under permanently protected (Doherty et al. discretion, the Service has developed a 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 may be 2013, p. 7), and the vast majority of 4(d) rule containing all the general appropriate for the species and incorporated into a rule under section remaining grassland is privately owned. prohibitions and exceptions to those 4(d) of the Act, but the section 4(d) rule The conservation of ‘‘working prohibitions; these are found at 50 CFR will also include provisions that are landscapes’’ based on ranching and 17.31 and 50 CFR 17.32. For the Dakota tailored to the specific conservation livestock operations (‘grass-based skipper, the Service has developed a needs of the threatened species and may farming’) is frequently a priority of 4(d) rule that is tailored to the specific be more or less restrictive than the programs to conserve native grassland threats and conservation needs of this general provisions at 50 CFR 17.31. ecosystems in the northern Great Plains species. As a means to promote In recognition of efforts that provide (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conservation efforts on behalf of the for conservation and management of the 2011, p. 5). Exempting incidental take of Dakota skipper, we are finalizing a 4(d) Dakota skipper and its habitat in a Dakota skippers that may result from rule for this species that modifies the manner consistent with the purposes of grazing and other routine livestock standard protections for threatened the Act, this 4(d) rule outlines the ranching activities will afford us more wildlife found at 50 CFR 17.31. In the prohibitions, and exceptions to those time to protect the species’ habitats in case of a 4(d) rule, the general prohibitions, necessary and advisable these areas and will facilitate the regulations (50 CFR 17.31 and 17.71) for the conservation of the Dakota cooperation and partnerships with applying most prohibitions under skipper. livestock producers necessary to recover section 9 of the Act to threatened Conversion of grasslands for the the species. species do not apply to that species, and production of agricultural crops poses a Three primary factors have led us to the 4(d) rule contains the prohibitions threat to the Dakota skipper because it determine that it is necessary and necessary and advisable to conserve that may directly destroy the species’ advisable to exempt take of Dakota species. habitat, increase isolation of skippers caused by certain ranching As discussed above, the primary populations by impeding dispersal, and activities, including grazing. First, a factors supporting the determination of increase the risk posed by drift of variety of socioeconomic and policy threatened species status for the Dakota herbicides and pesticides. A wide factors are leading to the conversion of skipper are habitat loss and degradation variety of peer-reviewed publications native grasslands for the production of of native prairies, including conversion and government reports have agricultural crops, as summarized of native prairie for agriculture or other documented recent conversion of native above. Whereas conversion of native development; ecological succession and grassland. In addition, economic and grassland for crop production would encroachment of invasive species and policy incentives are likely to continue result in a permanent loss of Dakota woody vegetation; certain fire, haying, to place pressure on landowners to skipper habitat and may also exacerbate and grazing management that reduces convert native grassland from ranching other threats (e.g., pesticide drift) to the the availability of certain native-prairie to agricultural cropland (Doherty et al. species, grasslands can remain suitable grasses and flowering herbaceous plants 2013, p. 14); Sylvester et al. 2013, p. 13; for Dakota skippers when grazed (see to the Dakota skipper; some fire Rashford et al. 2011, p. 282; Stephens et below and Dana 1991, p. 54; Schlicht management; flooding; existing al. 2008, p. 6; (Congressional Research 1997, p. 5; Skadsen 1997, pp. 24–29). By regulatory mechanisms that are Service (CRS) 2007, p. 5, United States exempting take of Dakota skippers inadequate to mitigate threats to the Government Accountability Office caused by grazing, we acknowledge the species; loss of genetic diversity; small (USGAO) 2007, p. 15, Stephens et al. positive role that some ranchers have size and isolation of remnant patches of 2008, p. 6, Rashford et al. 2011, p. 282, already played in conserving Dakota native prairie; indiscriminate use of Sylvester et al. 2013, p. 13). Grassland skippers and the importance of herbicides that reduces or eliminates loss in the western corn belt may be preventing any additional loss and nectar sources; climate conditions such occurring at the fastest rate observed fragmentation of native grasslands as the as drought; and other unknown factors. since the 1920s and 1930s and at a rate result of activities in areas that could The Act does not specify particular comparable to that of deforestation in support the species. prohibitions, or exceptions to those Brazil, Malaysia, and Indonesia (Wright Second, although some grazing prohibitions, for threatened species. and Wimberly 2013, p. 5). Between 2006 practices pose a threat to Dakota Instead, under section 4(d) of the Act, and 2011, destruction of native skipper, grazing may also be an effective the Secretary of the Interior has the grassland was mostly concentrated in tool to improve Dakota skipper habitat discretion to issue such regulations as North Dakota and South Dakota, east of when carefully applied in cooperation she deems necessary and advisable to the Missouri River, an area and consultation with private provide for the conservation of such corresponding closely to the range of the landowners, public land managers, and species. The Secretary also has the Dakota skipper (Wright and Wimberly grazing experts. In eastern South discretion to prohibit by regulation with 2013, p. 2). In northeastern South Dakota, Dakota skipper populations respect to any threatened species, any Dakota, one of the few remaining were deemed secure at some sites act prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of strongholds for the Dakota skipper, managed with rotational grazing that the Act. Exercising this discretion, the about 269,000 acres (108,907 ha) of was sufficiently light to maintain native Service has developed general grassland was lost—primarily to plant species diversity (Skadsen 1997,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63745

pp. 24–29), and grazing may also benefit Dakota skipper habitats by relatively flat of building fences and developing Dakota skippers by increasing coverage topography and certain plant livestock watering facilities, are more of mid-height grasses, such as little community and soil characteristics important factors that will influence this bluestem, relative to tallgrasses, such as (Lenz 1999, pp. 5–7; Royer et al. 2008, land management decision. big bluestem and Indiangrass (Dana pp. 14–15). Dakota skippers appear to be Provisions of the 4(d) Rule for the 1991, p. 54). Intensive early-season generally absent from this type of Dakota Skipper grazing can reduce the extent of habitat in North Dakota where it is Kentucky bluegrass, a nonnative species grazed, due to a shift away from a plant Section 4(d) of the Act states that ‘‘the that invades prairie habitats and community that is suitable for the Secretary shall issue such regulations as competes with native plant species species (McCabe 1979, p. 17; 1981, p. [s]he deems necessary and advisable to (DeKeyser et al. 2013, p. 86). In 179). The shift in plant community provide for the conservation’’ of species addition, grazing may also inhibit the composition and adverse effects to listed as a threatened species. establishment of smooth brome and Dakota skipper populations may occur Conservation is defined in the Act to help to enhance coverage and diversity rapidly (McCabe 1981, p. 179; Royer mean ‘‘to use and the use of all methods of native plants in prairies that have and Royer 1998, p. 23). The conversion and procedures which are necessary to been invaded by nonnative cool-season of similar habitats in Manitoba from bring any endangered species or grasses (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service haying to grazing may be a major threat threatened species to the point at which 2006, p. 2; DeKeyser et al. 2009, p. 18; to the Dakota skipper there as well the measures provided pursuant to [the Smart et al. 2013, p. 686). Because (Webster 2007, pp. i–ii, 6). In contrast, Act] are no longer necessary.’’ grazing can lead to adverse conditions limited or ‘‘light rotational grazing’’ of Additionally, section 4(d) states that the for the Dakota skipper, however, the habitats on steep dry-mesic slopes in Secretary ‘‘may by regulation prohibit Service encourages collaboration with Saskatchewan may not conflict with with respect to any threatened species private landowners, public land Dakota skipper conservation (Webster any act prohibited under section managers (e.g., Skadsen 2006, p. 5), 2007, p. ii). 9(a)(1).’’ State and Federal conservation agencies, The reduced vulnerability of habitats The courts have recognized the extent and nongovernmental organizations to on dry-mesic slopes to the effects of of the Secretary’s discretion under this identify, implement, monitor, and refine grazing may be due, in part, to the standard to develop rules that are grazing practices that are conducive to tendency for grazing pressure to be appropriate for the conservation of a the species’ conservation. lighter in sloped areas. The steepness of species. For example, the Secretary may Third, recovery of the Dakota skipper habitats occupied by Dakota skippers in find that it is necessary and advisable will depend on the protection and Saskatchewan, for example, limits their not to include a taking prohibition, or to restoration of high-quality habitats for use for grazing (Webster 2007, p. ii). include a limited taking prohibition. See the species on private lands and on Steep slopes may also play a role in Alsea Valley Alliance v. Lautenbacher, public lands that are grazed or hayed by reducing the adverse effects of grazing at 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. private individuals under lease or other some sites in South Dakota—at one 2007); Washington Environmental agreements. Conservation of Dakota grazed site inhabited by the Dakota Council v. National Marine Fisheries skippers on these lands will require the skipper, for example, habitat on steep Service, and 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 development and implementation of slopes was ‘‘in good condition,’’ (W.D. Wash. 2002). In addition, as complex, individualized, and long-term whereas ‘‘lesser slopes’’ were affirmed in State of Louisiana v. Verity, management agreements that rely on ‘‘moderately grazed’’ and some areas 853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988), the rule robust monitoring of Dakota skipper were ‘‘overgrazed’’ (Skadsen 1999a, p. need not address all the threats to the populations and habitat features. All of 29). species. As noted by Congress when the these agreements will require a In the proposed rule, we cited the lack Act was initially enacted, ‘‘once an willingness on the part of the private of any examples of strong populations of animal is on the threatened list, the ranchers to collaborate with the Service Dakota skippers where the relatively Secretary has an almost infinite number and our partners to implement, monitor, moist and flat (‘Type A’) habitats are of options available to him with regard and adapt conservation grazing grazed as evidence that it would not be to the permitted activities for those practices in a manner that allows for necessary and advisable to exempt take species. [S]he may, for example, permit stable or growing Dakota skipper caused by grazing in certain counties taking, but not importation of such populations. This type of cooperative where ‘Type A’ habitats are found. As species,’’ or [s]he may choose to forbid approach is more likely to take place stated above, we still do not recommend both taking and importation but allow and to be successful if we exempt take a change to grazing on ‘Type A’ habitats the transportation of such species, as caused by grazing and the other occupied by the Dakota skipper unless long as the measures will ‘‘serve to activities that we specify in the 4(d) a cooperative plan is developed to conserve, protect, or restore the species rule. ensure that it will be done in a manner concerned in accordance with the In some geographic areas, such as that conserves the species in the purposes of the Act’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412, McHenry County, North Dakota, the affected habitats. Nevertheless, in light 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973). Dakota skipper almost exclusively of the great importance that cooperative Section 9 prohibitions make it illegal inhabits relatively flat and moist prairie relationships with certain public land for any person subject to the jurisdiction habitats that are mowed for hay. In these management agencies and private of the United States to take (including areas we do not encourage a switch to livestock producers will play in harass, harm, pursue, shoot, wound, grazing without careful consideration of conserving the Dakota skipper, we find kill, trap, capture, or collect; or attempt the potential consequences to the that it is necessary and advisable to any of these), import or export, ship in Dakota skipper. These habitats, referred exempt take that may be caused by interstate commerce in the course of to as calcareous or ‘‘alkaline prairies’’ by grazing on non-Federal lands regardless commercial activity, or sell or offer for McCabe (1979, p. 17; 1981, p. 179); ‘‘wet of geographic area. We do not expect sale in interstate or foreign commerce mesic’’ by Royer and Marrone (1992, p. this to result in a significant change in any wildlife species listed as an 21); and ‘‘Type A’’ by Royer et al. (2008, management from haying to grazing endangered species, without written p. 14), are distinguished from other because other factors, such as the costs authorization. It also is illegal under

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63746 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

section 9(a)(1) of the Act to possess, sell, habitat and to provide a conservation prohibitions under section 9 of the Act deliver, carry, transport, or ship any benefit to the species on grazed sites. by issuance of this 4(d) rule. Dakota such wildlife that is taken illegally. This activity includes both the initial skippers are unlikely to occur in Prohibited actions consistent with development of water sources and their replanted grasslands (grasslands section 9 of the Act are outlined for maintenance. Dugout ponds, for replanted on formerly plowed or threatened species in 50 CFR 17.31(a) example, typically require a cleanout cultivated lands) or in tame hayland or and (b). Through this 4(d) rule, all after 15 to 20 years. grassland (hayland or grassland planted prohibitions in 50 CFR 17.31(a) and (b) (4) Noxious Weed Control: State and to and comprising primarily nonnative apply to the Dakota skipper except in county laws require landowners to grass species, such as smooth brome the specific instances as outlined below. control noxious weeds on their (Bromus inermis inermis)). Therefore, The 4(d) rule will not remove or alter in property, and the timing of control mowing replanted and tame grasslands any way the consultation requirements actions is usually dependent on the before July 16 would not result in take under section 7 of the Act. growth stage of the weed species. of Dakota skippers and would thus not Control of noxious weeds may also be result in a violation of section 9 of the Routine Livestock Operations and important to protect Dakota skipper Act. Maintenance of Recreational Trails and habitat because native plant diversity (6) Mowing Section Line Rights-of- Rights-of-Way declines when nonnative plant species Way and Recreational Trails: Section Incidental take that is caused by the invade and become established in line rights-of-way and some recreational routine livestock ranching and other prairies (Boettcher et al. 1993, p. 35). trails need to be mowed several times specified trail and rights-of-way Broadcast application of herbicides, during the growing season to ensure that maintenance activities described below however, may result in significant snow will not catch and block vehicle and that are implemented on private, deterioration of native plant diversity in access and that they are suitable for State, and tribal lands and on other prairies (Smart et al. 2011, p. 184). hiking and other intended recreational lands not under Federal jurisdiction Therefore, incidental take of Dakota activities, respectively. Section line (e.g. lands owned by county skipper that may result from spraying of rights-of-way typically comprise governments or local governments) will herbicides would be exempt except as a disturbed soil that has been contoured not be prohibited, as long as those result of broadcast spraying, which we for a roadway and are likely to contain activities are otherwise legal and define as the application of herbicides only small proportions of Dakota conducted in accordance with evenly across the entire application skipper habitat at any affected site. applicable State, Federal, tribal, and area. Note that herbicide applications Therefore, impacts to Dakota skipper local laws and regulations. For the would not affect the Dakota skipper if populations are likely to be minimal, purposes of this 4(d) rule, routine they do not affect the limited areas and any incidental take that is a result livestock ranching and recreational trail where the species is present. Broadcast of mowing of section line rights-of-way and rights-of-way maintenance activities applications of herbicides that do not and recreational trails will be exempt include the items listed below. Except affect habitats occupied by the Dakota from the take prohibitions of section 9 as explicitly stated below, these skipper would not result in take of the of the Act. Recreational trails are travel activities must be associated with species, and thus would not result in ways established either through livestock ranching for this 4(d) rule to violation of section 9 of the Act. Take construction or use that are intended for apply. that may occur as a result of mowing and passable by at least one or more of (1) Fence Construction and that is carried out for the purpose of the following: foot traffic, bicycles, in- Maintenance: Fences are an essential controlling one or more noxious weed line skates, wheelchairs, or cross- tool for livestock and ranch species is also exempted from the take country skis. Incidental take that may be management. In addition, the strategic prohibitions under section 9 of the Act caused by mowing recreational trails distribution of fencing is also necessary by issuance of this 4(d) rule. does not need to be associated with to implement multi-cell rotational (5) Haying: Stock cows need to be livestock ranching for the 4(d) rule to grazing systems, which may be maintained through the non-growing apply. necessary to improve grazing season though supplemental feeding (7) Livestock (Cattle, Bison, or Horse) management and provide a conservation with hay; thus, haying (cutting grass and Grazing: Incidental take of Dakota benefit to Dakota skipper habitat. other vegetation for drying and use as skippers that may result from grazing on (2) Livestock Gathering and livestock feed) is a critical component of private, State, or tribal land is exempt Management: The installation and ranch activity. Dakota skippers occur on from the take prohibitions of section 9 maintenance of corrals, loading chutes, several native hayland sites—sites of the Act. and other livestock working facilities where the native-prairie vegetation is We may issue permits to carry out are critical to ranch operations. These mowed for hay. For the purposes of this otherwise prohibited activities activities may be carried out with only rule, native hayland does not include involving endangered and threatened minimal impacts to Dakota skipper if lands that had previously been plowed wildlife species under certain carefully sited with respect to the and were then replanted to native or circumstances. Regulations governing location and distribution of important nonnative vegetation. Native hayland permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for Dakota skipper habitat. may include, however, areas within endangered species, and at 17.32 for (3) Development and Maintenance of transportation (e.g., road, highway, threatened species. With regard to Livestock Watering Facilities: Without a railroad) rights-of-ways and corridors endangered wildlife, a permit must be suitable water source in a pasture, where native grassland is mowed for issued for the following purposes: For livestock ranching is impossible. The hay. Native haylands are typically cut in scientific purposes, to enhance the proper distribution of livestock watering August, after the needlegrass propagation or survival of the species, sources is also a prerequisite to (Hesperostipa spp. or Nassella viridula, and for incidental take in connection implementing improved grazing or both) awns drop. Incidental take of with otherwise lawful activities. management via the use of multi-cell Dakota skippers that occurs as a result It is our policy, as published in the rotational grazing systems that may be of haying no earlier than July 16 (after Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR necessary to conserve Dakota skipper July 15) is exempted from the take 34272), to identify to the maximum

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63747

extent practicable at the time a species Required Determinations rules to the extent possible. We have is listed, those activities that would or maintained contact with Flandreau National Environmental Policy Act (42 Santee Sioux Tribe, Turtle Mountain would not constitute a violation of U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) section 9 of the Act. The intent of this Chippewa, Three Affiliated Tribes, policy is to increase public awareness of We have determined that Spirit Lake Sioux Tribe, and Standing the effect of a final listing on proposed environmental assessments and Rock Sioux Tribe through letters, phone and ongoing activities within the range environmental impact statements, as calls, and emails, and we notified each of a listed species. Based on the best defined under the authority of the tribe when documents pertaining to the available information, the following National Environmental Policy Act listing and critical habitat rules were actions are unlikely to result in a (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not made available. violation of section 9, if these activities be prepared in connection with listing We have coordinated several survey are carried out in accordance with a species as an endangered or efforts with Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate existing regulations and permit threatened species under the since 1995 and held an informational requirements; this list is not Endangered Species Act. We published meeting for the Tribe in April 2014, to comprehensive: a notice outlining our reasons for this better explain the proposed listing and determination in the Federal Register designation of critical habitat. We met (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, with representatives from the Turtle Mountain Chippewa in May 2014, and or transporting of the species, including Government-to-Government conducted a site visit at that time to import or export across State lines and Relationship With Tribes evaluate areas proposed for designation international boundaries, except for In accordance with the President’s as critical habitat. We did not receive properly documented antique memorandum of April 29, 1994 comments from the Sisseton-Wahpeton specimens of these taxa at least 100 (Government-to-Government Relations Oyate, Three Affiliated Tribes, Standing years old, as defined by section 10(h)(1) with Native American Tribal Rock Sioux Tribe, Flandreau Santee of the Act; Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Sioux Tribe, Turtle Mountain (2) Unauthorized modification, Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Chippewa, or the Spirit Lake Nation. removal, or destruction of the prairie Governments), and the Department of However, notification of the available vegetation, soils, or hydrology in which the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we economic analysis screening the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek readily acknowledge our responsibility memorandum for the critical habitat skipperling are known to occur; to communicate meaningfully with proposal was provided to all Tribes in (3) The unauthorized release of recognized Federal Tribes on a the species’ ranges at the time it was biological control agents that attack any government-to-government basis. In made available to the public. life stage of these species, including the accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 References Cited unauthorized use of herbicides, of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal pesticides, or other chemicals in Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust A complete list of references cited in habitats in which the Poweshiek Responsibilities, and the Endangered this rulemaking is available on the skipperling or Dakota skipper is known Species Act), we readily acknowledge Internet at http://www.regulations.gov to occur; our responsibilities to work directly and upon request from the Twin Cities with tribes in developing programs for Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR (4) Introduction of nonnative species FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). that compete with or prey upon the healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that Dakota skipper and Poweshiek tribal lands are not subject to the same Authors controls as Federal public lands, to skipperling or their food sources, such The primary authors of this final rule remain sensitive to Indian culture, and as the introduction of nonnative leafy are the staff members of the Twin Cities to make information available to tribes. spurge, reed canary grass, or glossy Ecological Services Field Office. buckthorn, to the State of Iowa, The Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe, Turtle List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Mountain Band of Chippewa, Three South Dakota, and Wisconsin; and Endangered and threatened species, Affiliated Tribes, Spirit Lake Sioux Exports, Imports, Reporting and (5) Unauthorized discharge of Tribe, and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe recordkeeping requirements, chemicals or fill material into any are the main Tribes affected by this final Transportation. wetlands in which the Poweshiek rule. We began government-to- skipperling or Dakota skipper are government consultation with these Regulation Promulgation known to occur. tribes prior to the publication of the Accordingly, we amend part 17, Questions regarding whether specific proposed rule, through the public subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the activities would constitute a violation of comment period, and during the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: section 9 of the Act should be directed development of the final listing to the Twin Cities Ecological Services determination. PART 17—[AMENDED] Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR We sent letters in September 2012 to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). each Tribe seeking early input regarding ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 Requests for copies of the regulations the species status review and to offer continues to read as follows: concerning listed animals and general government-to-government Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– inquiries regarding prohibitions and consultation. We sent notification letters 1544; 4201–4245; unless otherwise noted. permits may be addressed to the U.S. in October and November of 2013 to Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered each Tribe describing the critical habitat ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding entries Species Permits, 5600 American Blvd., exclusion process under section 4(b)(2) for ‘‘Skipper, Dakota’’ and ‘‘Skipperling, West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN of the Act, and we engaged in Poweshiek’’ to the List of Endangered (telephone 612–713–5350; facsimile conversation with the Tribes about the and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical 612–713–5292). proposed listing and critical habitat order under ‘‘Insects’’ to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 63748 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened (h) * * * wildlife. * * * * *

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

******* INSECTS

******* Skipper, Dakota ... Hesperia dacotae U.S.A. (IA, IL, NA T 851 NA 17.47(b) MN, ND, SD); Canada (Mani- toba, Saskatch- ewan).

******* Skipperling, Oarisma U.S.A. (IA, IL, IN, NA E 851 NA NA Poweshiek. poweshiek. MI, MN, ND, SD, WI,); Can- ada (Manitoba).

*******

* * * * * the location and distribution of haylands or grasslands (planted hayland ■ 3. Amend § 17.47 by adding paragraph important Dakota skipper habitat. or grassland comprising primarily (b) to read as follows: (iii) Development and maintenance of nonnative grass species, such as smooth livestock watering facilities. brome (Bromus inermis inermis)) would § 17.47 Special rules—insects. (iv) Noxious weed control. Incidental also not be a violation of section 9 of the * * * * * take of Dakota skipper that results from Act at any time of the year. (b) Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae). spraying of herbicides is not a violation (vi) Mowing section line rights-of-way (1) Which populations of the Dakota of section 9 of the Act, except such take and recreational trails. Mowing of skipper are covered by this special rule? that results from broadcast spraying, section line rights-of-way (typically This rule covers the distribution of which is the application of herbicides disturbed soil that has been contoured Dakota skipper in the United States. evenly across the entire application for a roadway) would not be a violation (2) Prohibitions. Except as noted in area. Incidental take that results from of section 9 of the Act. Mowing of paragraph (b)(3) of this section, all mowing to control one or more noxious recreational trails (travelways prohibitions and provisions of §§ 17.31 weed species would also not be a established either through construction and 17.32 apply to the Dakota skipper. violation of section 9 of the Act. or use that are intended for and passable (3) Exemptions from prohibitions. (v) Haying. For the purposes of this by foot traffic, bicycles, in-line skates, Incidental take of Dakota skipper will rule, native haylands do not include wheelchairs, or cross-country skis) not be a violation of section 9 of the Act lands that had previously been plowed would not be a violation of section 9 of if it occurs as a result of the following and were then replanted to native or the Act, regardless of whether the trails activities (except where explicitly stated nonnative vegetation, but native are associated with livestock ranching. haylands do include areas within otherwise, these activities must be (vii) Livestock (cattle, bison, or horse) transportation (e.g., road, highway, associated with livestock ranching): grazing on private, State, or tribal land. (i) Fence construction and railroad) rights-of-ways and corridors maintenance. where native grasses are mowed for hay. Dated: October 15, 2014. (ii) Livestock gathering and Haying of native haylands no earlier Stephen Guertin, management. The installation and than July 16 (after July 15) would not be Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife maintenance of corrals, loading chutes, a violation of section 9 of the Act. Service. and other livestock working facilities Mowing of replanted grasslands [FR Doc. 2014–25190 Filed 10–23–14; 8:45 am] must be carefully sited with respect to (grasslands replanted on formerly BILLING CODE 4310–55–P plowed or cultivated lands) or tame

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Oct 23, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24OCR2.SGM 24OCR2 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES