23608 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the closing date. We must receive (TDD), may call the Federal Relay requests for public hearings, in writing, Service at 800-877-8339. Fish and Wildlife Service at the address shown in FOR FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: INFORMATION CONTACT by June 12, 2020. Executive Summary 50 CFR Part 17 ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-001 1; by one of the following methods: Why we need to publish a rule. FF09E21000 FXES1 1110900000 201] (1) Electronically:Go to the Federal Critical habitat shall be designated, to the maximum extent prudent and eRulemaking Portal: RIN 1018-BD96 determinable, for any species http://www.regulations.gov.In the determined to be an endangered or Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Search box, enter FWS-R2-ES-2020- threatened species under the Act. Both and Plants; Designation of Critical 0011, which is the docket number for gartersnakes are listed as threatened Habitat for the Northern Mexican this rulemaking. Then, click on the under the Act (79 FR 38678; July 8, Gartersnake and Narrow-Headed Search button. On the resulting page, in 2014). Designations and revisions of Gartersnake the Search panel on the left side of the critical habitat can only be completed screen, under the Document Type by issuing a rule. AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, heading, check the Proposed Rule box to Interior. What this document does. This is a locate this document. You may submit revised proposed rule to designate ACTION: Revised proposed rule; request a comment by clicking on "Comment critical habitat for northern Mexican for public comments. Now!" gartersnake and narrow-headed SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail gartersnake under the Act. Wildlife Service (Service), are revising to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: For reasons described later in this our proposed designation of critical FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011, U.S. Fish and document, this revised proposed rule habitat for the northern Mexican Wildlife Service, MS: JAO/1N, 5275 reduces the proposed critical habitat gartersnake (Thamnophis eques Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041- designation from what we proposed on megalops) and narrow-headed 3803. July 10, 2013, as follows: gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus) We request that you send comments * For the northern Mexican under the Endangered Species Act, as only by the methods described above. gartersnake, the proposed designation is amended (Act). In total, approximately We will post all comments on http:// reduced from approximately 421,423 27,784 acres (11,244 hectares) in La Paz, www.regulations.gov.This generally acres (170,544 hectares) to Mohave, Yavapai, Gila, Cochise, Santa means that we will post any personal approximately 27,784 acres (11,244 Cruz, and Pima Counties in Arizona, information you provide us (see the hectares); and * For the narrow-headed gartersnake, and in Grant County in New Mexico, Information Requested, below, for more the proposed designation is reduced fall within the boundaries of the revised information). from approximately 210,189 acres proposed critical habitat designation for Availability of supportingmaterials: (85,060 hectares) to approximately the northern Mexican gartersnake; and The draft economic analysis is available 18,701 acres (7,568 hectares). 18,701 acres (7,568 hectares) in at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/esl arizonal,at http://www.regulations.gov The basis for our action. Section Greenlee, Graham, Apache, Yavapai, 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the Secretary Gila, and Coconino Counties in Arizona, at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011, and at the Arizona Ecological Services of the Interior (Secretary) to designate as well as in Grant, Hidalgo, and Catron critical habitat concurrent with listing to Field Office (see FOR FURTHER Counties in New Mexico, fall within the the maximum extent prudent and boundaries of the revised proposed INFORMATION CONTACT). For the critical habitat designation, determinable. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act critical habitat designation for the states that the Secretary must make the narrow-headed gartersnake. We also the coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are generated are designation on the basis of the best announce the availability of a draft scientific data available and after taking included in the administrative record economic analysis of the revised into consideration the economic impact, proposed designation of critical habitat and are available at http://www.fws.gov! southwest/es/arizona, at http:// the impact on national security, and any for northern Mexican and narrow- other relevant impacts of specifying any www.regulations.gov under Docket No. headed gartersnakes. We request particular area as critical habitat. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011 and at the comments from all interested parties on Section 3(5)(A) of Arizona Ecological Services Field Office the Act defines this revised proposed rule and the critical habitat as (i) the specific areas (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). associated draft economic analysis. within the geographical Any additional tools or supporting area occupied Comments submitted on our July 10, by the species, at the time it is listed, information that we may develop for 2013, proposed rule need not be on which are found those physical or resubmitted as they will be fully this critical habitat designation will also biological features (I) essential to the considered in the preparation of the be available at the Fish and Wildlife Service website and Field Office set out conservation of the species and (II) final rule. If we finalize this rule as which may require special management proposed, it would extend the Act's above, and may also be included in the preamble and/or at http:// considerations or protections; and (ii) protections to these species' critical specific areas outside the geographical habitat. www.regulations.gov. area occupied by the species at the time DATES: We will accept comments on this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff it is listed, upon a determination by the revised proposed rule or the draft Humphry, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish Secretary that such areas are essential economic analysis that are received or and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological for the conservation of the species. postmarked on or before June 29, 2020. Services Field Office, Fish and Wildlife Peer review. In accordance with our Comments submitted electronically Office, 9828 North 31st Ave #C3, joint policy on peer review published in using the Federal eRulemaking Portal Phoenix, AZ 85051-2517; telephone the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 (see ADDRESSES, below) must be 602-242-0210. Persons who use a FR 34270), and our August 22, 2016, received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on telecommunications device for the deaf memorandum updating and clarifying Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23609 the role of peer review of listing actions (c) Areas within the jurisdiction of the impacts in the draft economic analysis under the Act, we sought the expert United States provide no more than is a reasonable estimate of the likely opinions of eight independent negligible conservation value, if any, for economic impacts. specialists on the July 10, 2013, a species occurring primarily outside (7) Whether any specific areas we are proposed rule to ensure that our critical the jurisdiction of the United States; or proposing for critical habitat habitat proposal was based on (d) No areas meet the definition of designation should be considered for scientifically sound data, assumptions, critical habitat. exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the and analyses. We received responses (2) Specific information on: Act, and whether the benefits of from three of the peer reviewers. We (a) The amount and distribution of potentially excluding any specific area reviewed all comments we received northern Mexican or narrow-headed outweigh the benefits of including that from the peer reviewers for substantive gartersnake habitat; area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, in issues and new information regarding (b) Which areas, that were occupied at particular for those lands discussed in critical habitat for the two gartersnakes. the time of listing (2013) and that each critical habitat unit and in tables Peer reviewers substantive comments contain the physical or biological 3a and 3b, below. features essential to the conservation of have been addressed or incorporated (8) Whether we could improve or into this revised proposed rule. Because these species, should be included in the designation and why; modify our approach to designating we will consider all comments and critical habitat in any way to provide for information we receive during the (c) What period of time should be used to ascertain occupancy at time of greater public participation and comment period, our final understanding, or to better determinations may differ from this listing (2013) and why, and whether or not data from 1998 to the present should accommodate public concerns and proposal. Such final decisions would be comments. a logical outgrowth of this proposal, as be used in this determination; Please include sufficient information long as we: (1) Base the decisions on the (d) Whether it is appropriate to use best scientific and commercial data information from a long-term dispersal with your submission (such as scientific journal articles or other publications) to available after considering all of the study on neonate, juvenile, and adult allow us to verify any scientific or relevant factors; (2) do not rely on age classes of the Oregon gartersnake commercial information you include. factors Congress has not intended us to (Thamnophis atratus hydrophilus) in a consider; and (3) articulate a rational free-flowing stream environment in Please note that submissions merely connection between the facts found and northern California (Welsh et a]. 2010, stating support for, or opposition to, the the conclusions made, including why entire) as a surrogate for juvenile action under consideration without we changed our conclusion. northern Mexican gartersnake and providing supporting information, narrow-headed gartersnake dispersal; although noted, will not be considered Information Requested (e) Special management in making a determination, as section We intend that any final action considerations or protection that may be 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that resulting from this revised proposed needed in critical habitat areas we are determinations as to whether any rule will be based on the best scientific proposing, including managing for the species is an endangered or a threatened and commercial data available and be as potential effects of climate change; and species must be made "solely on the (f) What areas not occupied at the accurate and as effective as possible. basis of the best scientific and time of listing are essential for the Therefore, we request comments or commercial data available." information from other concerned conservation of these species and why. You may submit your comments and We particularly seek comments government agencies, Native American materials concerning this proposed rule tribes, the scientific community, regarding: by one of the methods listed in (i) Whether occupied areas are industry, or any other interested party ADDRESSES. We request that you send inadequate for the conservation of the concerning this revised proposed rule. comments only by the methods species; and We particularly seek comments described in ADDRESSES. (ii) Specific information that informs concerning: the determination of whether If you submit information via http:// (1) The reasons why we should or unoccupied areas will, with reasonable www.regulations.gov,your entire should not designate habitat as "critical certainty, contribute to the conservation submission-including any personal habitat" under section 4 of the Act (16 of the species and contain at least one identifying information-will be posted U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including physical or biological feature essential on the website. If your submission is information to inform the following to the conservation of the species. made via a hardcopy that includes factors that the regulations identify as (3) Land use designations and current personal identifying information, you reasons why designation of critical or planned activities in the subject areas may request at the top of your document habitat may be not prudent: and their possible impacts on proposed that we withhold this information from (a) The species is threatened by critical habitat. public review. However, we cannot taking, collecting, or other human (4) Information on the projected and guarantee that we will be able to do so. activity and identification of critical reasonably likely impacts of climate We will post all hardcopy submissions habitat can be expected to increase the change on the northern Mexican or on http://www.regulations.gov. degree of such threat to the species; narrow-headed gartersnake and Comments and materials we receive, (b) The present or threatened proposed critical habitat. as well as supporting documentation we destruction, modification, or (5) Any probable economic, national used in preparing this proposed rule, curtailment of a species' habitat or range security, or other relevant impacts of will be available for public inspection is not a threat to the species, or threats designating any area that may be on http://www.regulations.gov, or by to the species' habitat stem solely from included in the final designation, and appointment, during normal business causes that cannot be addressed through the benefits of including or excluding hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife management actions resulting from areas that may be impacted. Service, Arizona Ecological Services consultations under section 7(a)(2) of (6) Information on the extent to which Field Office (see FOR FURTHER the Act; the description of probable economic INFORMATION CONTACT). 23610 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Public Hearing species, at the time it is listed in Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for accordance with the Act, on which are However, even if the Service were to a public hearing on this proposal, if found those physical or biological conclude that the proposed activity features requested. Requests must be received would result in destruction or adverse (a) Essential to the conservation of the within 45 days after the date of modification of the critical habitat, the species, and Federal action agency and the publication of this proposed rule in the (b) Which may require special Federal Register (see DATES, above). landowner are not required to abandon management considerations or the Such requests must be sent to the proposed activity, or to restore or protection; and recover the species; instead, they must address shown in FOR FURTHER (2) Specific areas outside the implement "reasonable and prudent INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule geographical area occupied by the alternatives" to avoid destruction or a public hearing on this proposal, if species at the time it is listed, upon a adverse modification of critical habitat. requested, and announce the date, time, determination that such areas are Under the first prong of the Act's and place of the hearing, as well as how essential for the conservation of the definition of critical habitat, areas to obtain reasonable accommodations, species. within the geographical area occupied in the Federal Register and local Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 by the species at the time it was listed newspapers at least 15 days before the define the geographical area occupied are included in a critical habitat hearing. For the immediate future, we by the species as an area that may designation if they contain physical or will provide these public hearings using generally be delineated around species' biological features (1) which are webinars that will be announced on the occurrences, as determined by the essential to the conservation of the Service's website, in addition to the Secretary of the Interior (i.e., range). species and (2) which may require Federal Register. The use of these Such areas may include those areas special management considerations or virtual public hearings is consistent used throughout all or part of the protection. For these areas, critical with our regulation at 50 CFR species' life cycle, even if not used on habitat designations identify, to the 424.16(c)(3). a regular basis (e.g., migratory corridors, extent known using the best scientific Previous Federal Actions seasonal habitats, and habitats used and commercial data available, those periodically, but not solely by vagrant physical or biological features that are On July 10, 2013, we published in the individuals). essential to the conservation of the Federal Register (78 FR 41550) a Conservation, as defined under species (such as space, food, cover, and proposed rule to designate critical section 3 of the Act, means to use and protected habitat). In identifying those habitat for northern Mexican the use of all methods and procedures physical or biological features that occur gartersnake and narrow-headed that are necessary to bring an in specific occupied areas, we focus on gartersnake. In that proposed rule, we endangered or threatened species to the the specific features that are essential to proposed to designate approximately point at which the measures provided support the life-history needs of the 421,423 acres (ac) (170,544 hectares pursuant to the Act are no longer species, including, but not limited to, (ha)) as critical habitat in 14 units for necessary. Such methods and water characteristics, soil type, the northern Mexican gartersnake and procedures include, but are not limited geological features, prey, vegetation, 210,189 ac (85,060 ha) as critical habitat to, all activities associated with symbiotic species, or other features. A in 6 units for the narrow-headed scientific resources management such as feature may be a single habitat gartersnake. That proposal had a 60-day research, census, law enforcement, characteristic, or a more complex comment period, ending September 9, habitat acquisition and maintenance, combination of habitat characteristics. 2013. We received substantive propagation, live trapping, and Features may include habitat comments during the comment period transplantation, and, in the characteristics that support ephemeral that have contributed to the current extraordinary case where population or dynamic habitat conditions. Features revised proposed rule. pressures within a given ecosystem may also be expressed in terms relating cannot be otherwise relieved, may Background to principles of conservation biology, include regulated taking. such as patch size, distribution It is our intent to discuss in this Critical habitat receives protection distances, and connectivity. document only those topics directly under section 7 of the Act through the Under the second prong of the Act's relevant to the designation of critical requirement that Federal agencies definition of critical habitat, we can habitat for northern Mexican ensure, in consultation with the Service, designate critical habitat in areas gartersnake and narrow-headed that any action they authorize, fund, or outside the geographical area occupied gartersnake. For more information on carry out is not likely to result in the by the species at the time it is listed, the two species, their corresponding destruction or adverse modification of upon a determination that such areas habitats, and previous Federal actions critical habitat. The designation of are essential for the conservation of the concerning the two species, refer to the critical habitat does not affect land species. When designating critical proposed designation of critical habitat ownership or establish a refuge, habitat, the Secretary will first evaluate published in the Federal Register on wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other areas occupied by the species. The July 10, 2013 (78 FR 41550). The conservation area. Designation also does Secretary will only consider unoccupied proposed rule is available online at not allow the government or public to areas to be essential where a critical http://www.regulations.gov (at Docket access private lands, nor does habitat designation limited to No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011) or from designation require implementation of geographical areas occupied by the the Arizona Ecological Services Field restoration, recovery, or enhancement species would be inadequate to ensure Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION measures by non-Federal landowners. the conservation of the species. In CONTACT). Where a landowner requests Federal addition, for an unoccupied area to be Critical habitat is defined in section 3 agency funding or authorization for an considered essential, the Secretary must of the Act as: action that may affect a listed species or determine that there is a reasonable (1) The specific areas within the critical habitat, the Federal agency certainty both that the area will geographical area occupied by the would be required to consult with the contribute to the conservation of the Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23611 species and that the area contains one the species, including taking caused by narrow-headed gartersnake (78 FR or more of those physical or biological actions that affect habitat. Federally 41500; July 10, 2013), we determined features essential to the conservation of funded or permitted projects affecting that the present or threatened the species. listed species outside their designated destruction, modification, or Section 4 of the Act requires that we critical habitat areas may still result in curtailment of habitat or range is a designate critical habitat on the basis of jeopardy findings in some cases. These threat to these species and that those the best scientific data available. protections and conservation tools will threats in some way can be addressed by Further, our Policy on Information continue to contribute to recovery of section 7(a)(2) consultation measures. Standards Under the Endangered this species. Similarly, critical habitat The species occurs wholly in the Species Act (published in the Federal designations made on the basis of the jurisdiction of the United States, and we Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), best available information at the time of are able to identify areas that meet the the Information Quality Act (section 515 designation will not control the definition of critical habitat. Therefore, of the Treasury and General direction and substance of future because none of the circumstances Government Appropriations Act for recovery plans, habitat conservation enumerated in our regulations at 50 CFR Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. plans (HCPs), or other species 424.12(a)(1) has been met and because 5658)), and our associated Information conservation planning efforts, if new there are no other circumstances the Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, information available at the time of Secretary has identified for which this establish procedures, and provide these planning efforts calls for a designation of critical habitat would be guidance to ensure that our decisions different outcome. not prudent, we have determined that are based on the best scientific data Prudency Determination the designation of critical habitat is available. They require our biologists, to prudent for these species. the extent consistent with the Act and Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as with the use of the best scientific data amended, and implementing regulations CriticalHabitat Determinability available, to use primary and original (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the Having determined that designation is sources of information as the basis for maximum extent prudent and prudent, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act recommendations to designate critical determinable, the Secretary shall we must find whether critical habitat for habitat. designate critical habitat at the time the the Mexican gartersnake and narrow- When we are determining which areas species is determined to be an headed gartersnake is determinable. Our should be designated as critical habitat, endangered or threatened species. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state our primary source of information is regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that critical habitat is not determinable generally the information developed that the Secretary may, but is not when one or both of the following during the listing process for the required to, determine that a situations exist: species. Additional information sources designation would not be prudent in the (i) Data sufficient to perform required may include any generalized following circumstances: analyses are lacking, or conservation strategy, criteria, or outline (i) The species is threatened by taking (ii) The biological needs of the species that may have been developed for the or other human activity and are not sufficiently well known to species; the recovery plan for the identification of critical habitat can be identify any area that meets the species; articles in peer-reviewed expected to increase the degree of such definition of "critical habitat." journals; conservation plans developed threat to the species; When critical habitat is not by States and counties; scientific status (ii) The present or threatened determinable, the Act allows the Service surveys and studies; biological destruction, modification, or an additional year to publish a critical assessments; other unpublished curtailment of a species' habitat or range habitat designation (16 U.S.C. materials; or experts' opinions or is not a threat to the species, or threats 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). personal knowledge. to the species' habitat stem solely from We reviewed the available Habitat is dynamic, and species may causes that cannot be addressed through information pertaining to the biological move from one area to another over management actions resulting from needs of these species and habitat time. We recognize that critical habitat consultations under section 7(a)(2) of characteristics where these species are designated at a particular point in time the Act; located. This and other information may not include all of the habitat areas (iii) Areas within the jurisdiction of represent the best scientific and that we may later determine are the United States provide no more than commercial data available and led us to necessary for the recovery of the negligible conservation value, if any, for conclude that the designation of critical species. For these reasons, a critical a species occurring primarily outside habitat is determinable for the Mexican habitat designation does not signal that the jurisdiction of the United States; gartersnake and narrow-headed habitat outside the designated area is (iv) No areas meet the definition of gartersnake. unimportant or may not be needed for critical habitat; or recovery of the species. Areas that are (v) The Secretary otherwise Changes From Previously Proposed important to the conservation of the determines that designation of critical Critical Habitat species, both inside and outside the habitat would not be prudent based on In this document, we are revising our critical habitat designation, will the best scientific data available. proposed critical habitat designations continue to be subject to: (1) As discussed in the final listing rule for the northern Mexican gartersnake Conservation actions implemented published on July 8, 2014 (79 FR and narrow-headed gartersnake (78 FR under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) 38678), there is currently no imminent 41550; July 10, 2013). We based these regulatory protections afforded by the threat of take attributed to collection or revisions on information we received requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act vandalism identified under Factor B for during the comment period on the July for Federal agencies to ensure their these species, and identification and 10, 2013, proposed rule, as well as on actions are not likely to jeopardize the mapping of critical habitat is not relevant scientific research conducted continued existence of any endangered expected to initiate any such threat. In after the publication of that proposed or threatened species; and (3) the Act's our proposed listing rule for the rule. After the publication of the prohibitions on taking any individual of northern Mexican gartersnake and proposed rule, we found that there was 23612 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules substantial scientific disagreement in or dynamic habitat conditions. Features such as flows capable of processing the criteria we used to define what areas may also be expressed in terms relating sediment loads; or were occupied at the time of listing for to principles of conservation biology, b. Lentic wetlands such as livestock each species, and the criteria we used to such as patch size, distribution tanks, springs, and cienegas; and identify the lateral extent of critical distances, and connectivity. For c. Shoreline habitat with adequate habitat boundaries. We also received example, physical features essential to organic and natural inorganic structural additional information including the conservation of the species might complexity to allow for locations of each species at the time of include gravel of a particular size thermoregulation, gestation, shelter, listing, and the biological needs and required for spawning, alkali soil for protection from predators, and foraging corresponding habitat characteristics of seed germination, protective cover for opportunities (e.g., boulders, rocks, each species. We also note that we no migration, or susceptibility to flooding organic debris such as downed trees or longer use primary constituent elements or fire that maintains necessary early- logs, debris jams, small mammal (PCEs) to identify areas as critical successional habitat characteristics. burrows, or leaf litter); and habitat. The Service eliminated primary Biological features might include prey d. Aquatic habitat with characteristics constituent elements due to redundancy species, forage grasses, specific kinds or that support a native amphibian prey with the physical or biological features ages of trees for roosting or nesting, base, such as salinities less than 5 parts (PBFs). This change in terminology is in symbiotic fungi, or a particular level of per thousand, pH greater than or equal accordance with a February 11, 2016 (81 nonnative species consistent with to 5.6, and pollutants absent or FR 7414), rule to implement changes to conservation needs of the listed species. minimally present at levels that do not the regulations for designating critical The features may also be combinations affect survival of any age class of the habitat. We used the comments and of habitat characteristics and may northern Mexican gartersnake or the additional information to revise: (1) The encompass the relationship between maintenance of prey populations. PBFs that are essential to the characteristics or the necessary amount (2) Adequate terrestrial space (600 feet conservation of the species and which of a characteristic essential to support (ft) (182.9 meter (in)) lateral extent to may require special management the life history of the species. either side of bankfull stage) adjacent to considerations or protection under the In considering whether features are designated stream systems with Act, (2) the criteria used to define the essential to the conservation of the sufficient natural structural areas occupied at the time of listing for species, the Service may consider an characteristics to support life-history each species, and (3) the criteria used to appropriate quality, quantity, and functions such as gestation, identify critical habitat boundaries. We spatial and temporal arrangement of immigration, emigration, and brumation then apply the revised PBFs and habitat characteristics in the context of (extended inactivity). identification criteria for each the life-history needs, condition, and (3) A prey base consisting of viable gartersnake species along with status of the species. These populations of native amphibian and additional information we received characteristics include, but are not native fish species. regarding where these PBFs exist on the limited to, space for individual and (4) An absence of nonnative fish landscape to determine the geographic population growth and for normal species of the families Centrarchidae extent of each critical habitat unit. behavior; food, water, air, light, and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs (Lithobates Finally, we provide clarification of some minerals, or other nutritional or catesbeianus), and/or crayfish of the terms we used to define critical physiological requirements; cover or (Orconectes virilis, Procambar s clarki, habitat for each species. shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, etc.), or occurrence of these nonnative or rearing (or development) of offspring; species at low enough levels such that Primary Constituent Elements and habitats that are protected from recruitment of northern Mexican Background disturbance. gartersnakes and maintenance of viable native fish or soft-rayed, nonnative fish In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) Previous Proposed Rule's Primary populations (prey) is still occurring. of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR Constituent Elements The narrow-headed gartersnake's 424.12(b), in determining which areas As stated above, we now use only previous PCEs were: we will designate as critical habitat from PBFs that are essential to the (1) Stream habitat, which includes: within the geographical area occupied conservation of the species to describe a. Perennial or spatially intermittent by the species at the time of listing, we critical habitat. We have modified the streams with sand, cobble, and boulder consider the physical or biological PCEs from the previous critical habitat substrate and low or moderate amounts features that are essential to the rule, which are now PBFs in this rule. of fine sediment and substrate conservation of the species and that may For your convenience, we are providing embeddedness, and that possess require special management the PCEs from the previous proposed appropriate amounts of pool, riffle, and considerations or protection. The critical habitat rule for you to compare run habitat to sustain native fish regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the changes. populations; "physical or biological features essential The northern Mexican gartersnake's b. A natural, unregulated flow regime to the conservation of the species" as previous PCEs were: that allows for periodic flooding or, if the features that occur in specific areas (1) Aquatic or riparian habitat that flows are modified or regulated, a flow and that are essential to support the life- includes: regime that allows for adequate river history needs of the species, including, a. Perennial or spatially intermittent functions, such as flows capable of but not limited to, water characteristics, streams of low to moderate gradient that processing sediment loads; soil type, geological features, sites, prey, possess appropriate amounts of in- c. Shoreline habitat with adequate vegetation, symbiotic species, or other channel pools, off-channel pools, or organic and natural inorganic structural features. A feature may be a single backwater habitat, and that possess a complexity (e.g., boulders, cobble bars, habitat characteristic or a more complex natural, unregulated flow regime that vegetation, and organic debris such as combination of habitat characteristics. allows for periodic flooding or, if flows downed trees or logs, debris jams), with Features may include habitat are modified or regulated, a flow regime appropriate amounts of shrub- and characteristics that support ephemeral that allows for adequate river functions, sapling-sized plants to allow for Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23613 thermoregulation, gestation, shelter, usually dry except for brief periods kilometers (km)) in length (Cotten et a]. protection from predators, and foraging immediately following precipitation, 2017, p. 687). The wetted areas where opportunities; and and its channel is at all times above the gartersnakes were detected also had d. Aquatic habitat with no pollutants groundwater table (Levick et a]. 2008, p. abundant native prey of the narrow- or, if pollutants are present, levels that 6). In the range of each gartersnake headed gartersnake, indicating that do not affect survival of any age class of species, many streams have reaches these areas may provide greater foraging the narrow-headed gartersnake or the with year-round water that are separated opportunities during low flow periods maintenance of prey populations. by intermittent or ephemeral reaches of (Cotten eta]. 2017, p. 687). However, (2) Adequate terrestrial space (600 ft flow, as a result of differences in ephemeral reaches of streams do not (182.9 m) lateral extent to either side of geology along the stream. This variation provide habitat for narrow-headed bankfull stage) adjacent to designated of flow along a stream is common gartersnakes. Within the range of the stream systems with sufficient natural enough in the Southwest that narrow-headed gartersnake, perennial structural characteristics to support life- hydrologists use the terms streams become ephemeral as they history functions such as gestation, "interrupted," "perennial interrupted," approach their headwaters. However, immigration, emigration, and or "spatially intermittent" to describe narrow-headed gartersnakes have not brumation. the spatial segmentation of a dryland been found in these ephemeral reaches (3) A prey base consisting of viable stream into reaches that are perennial, because their fish prey base is likely populations of native fish species or intermittent, or ephemeral (Levick et a]. absent and there is no upstream soft-rayed, nonnative fish species. 2008, p. 6; Stromberg et a]. 2009, p. 330; perennial habitat, so the ephemeral (4) An absence of nonnative fish Stromberg et a]. 2013, p. 413). A stream reaches do not provide connectivity. species of the families Centrarchidae that is interrupted, perennially and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs (Lithobates interrupted, or spatially intermittent has Hydrologic Processes catesbeianus), and/or crayfish perennial flow occurring in areas with In the previous proposed critical (Orconectes virilis, Procambarusclarki, shallow bedrock or high hydraulic habitat rule, hydrologic processes of a etc.), or occurrence of these nonnative connectivity to regional aquifers, and stream were captured in PCE 1 as part species at low enough levels such that ephemeral to intermittent flow of a component of aquatic habitat: recruitment of narrow-headed occurring in areas with deeper alluvial "[aquatic habitat that possesses] a gartersnakes and maintenance of viable basins or greater distance from the natural, unregulated flow regime that native fish or soft-rayed, nonnative fish headwaters (Stromberg et a]. 2009, p. allows for periodic flooding or, if flows populations (prey) is still occurring. 330). The spatial patterning of wet and are modified or regulated, a flow regime Stream Flow dry reaches on spatially intermittent that allows for adequate river functions, streams changes through time in such as flows capable of processing In the July 10, 2013, proposed rule (78 response to climatic fluctuations and to sediment loads." These processes are FR 41550) under PCE 1 for each species human modifications of the landscape not the aquatic habitat or terrestrial we use the terms "perennial" and (Stromberg eta]. 2009, p. 331). In the habitat components themselves, but the "spatially intermittent," but we did not remainder of this document, we use the flow regime and physical hydrologic include a definition of perennial or terms "perennial," "spatially and geomorphic connection that create spatially intermittent flow. intermittent," and "ephemeral" in and maintain a stream channel and In this revised proposed rule, we are accordance with the above definitions. continuously redefine the boundary defining the terms perennial, spatially For northern Mexican gartersnake, between aquatic and riparian habitat intermittent, and ephemeral as related streams that have perennial or spatially used by both gartersnake species. to stream flow in PBF 1 for each intermittent flow can provide stream Both gartersnake species are gartersnake species. We are clarifying habitat for the species. Ephemeral dependent on terrestrial and aquatic the spectrum of stream flow regimes reaches of streams can serve as habitat habitat for all of their life-history that provide stream habitat for each for northern Mexican gartersnakes, and functions, so it is important that gartersnake species based on stream are included in critical habitat as a hydrologic processes are present to flow definitions in Levick et a]. (2008, separate PBF (#7) if such reaches are maintain both the terrestrial and aquatic p. 6) and Stromberg et a]. (2009, p. 330). between perennial sections of a stream components of habitat for both A perennial stream or portion of a that were occupied at the time of listing. gartersnake species. Therefore, we stream is defined as having surface flow Streams that have ephemeral flow over established a PBF (#2) for hydrological continuously year round, except for their entire length do not usually processes that is separate from the infrequent periods of severe drought provide habitat for the northern aquatic and terrestrial habitat PBF (#1). (Levick et a]. 2008, p. 6). An Mexican gartersnake, but are considered intermittent stream is a stream where critical habitat when they may serve as Lentic Wetlands portions flow continuously only at corridors between perennial streams For northern Mexican gartersnake, we certain time of the year (Levick et a]. and lentic aquatic habitats including removed lentic wetlands included in 2008, p. 6). An intermittent stream flows springs, cienegas, and natural or PCE 1 of the previous proposed rule and when it receives water from a spring, a constructed ponds (livestock tanks) that created a separate PBF (#6) that includes ground-water source, or a surface source were occupied at the time of listing. the aquatic and terrestrial components (such as melting snow [i.e., seasonal]). For narrow-headed gartersnake, of these habitats. During the dry seasons, frequently streams that have perennial flow or compounded by high limited spatially intermittent flow that Shoreline Habitat evapotranspiration of watershed is primarily perennial provide stream In the previous proposed rule, vegetation, the ground water table may habitat for the species. Narrow-headed shoreline habitat is included in PCE 1. drop below the elevation of the gartersnakes have been documented in For northern Mexican gartersnake, PCE streambed, causing surface flow to cease pools and shallow portions of an 1 was "aquatic or riparian habitat" and or reduce to a series of separate pools intermittent flow reach of the Blue River for the narrow-headed gartersnake it or short areas of flow (Gordon et a]. with wet areas separated by dry was "stream habitat." For both 2004, p. 51). An ephemeral stream is segments of 0.6 to 1.2 miles (1 to 2 gartersnakes, we defined shoreline 23614 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules habitat as areas having "adequate of amphibians and fish for the northern characteristics to support life-history organic and inorganic structural Mexican gartersnake in PCE 3, but in functions such as gestation, complexity" with examples such as PCE 4, we state that nonnative fish are immigration, emigration, and brumation boulders, rocks, and organic debris for also prey for the species. In the [extended inactivity]" (78 FR 41550, thermoregulation, gestation, shelter, discussion of PBFs, we noted that July 10, 2013, pp. 78 FR 41584 and 78 protection from predators, and foraging northern Mexican gartersnakes consume FR 41601). In the discussion of the PBFs opportunities. primarily amphibians and fishes, but and PCEs, we stated that the northern In this revised proposed rule, we are that occasional invertebrates and other Mexican gartersnake has been found up no longer including the term "shoreline vertebrate taxa may be eaten to 330 ft (100 m) away from permanent habitat," because shorelines fluctuate opportunistically (78 FR 41550, July 10, water (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 27), and can include both terrestrial and 2013, p. 78 FR 41554) and that the and the narrow-headed gartersnake has aquatic habitat features used by either success of northern Mexican gartersnake been found up to 650 ft (200 m) from gartersnake species. Instead, a populations is, in some cases, tied to water (Nowak 2006, pp. 19-21; 78 FR component of PBF 1 focuses on the nonnative prey species consisting of 41550, July 10, 2013, p. 78 FR 41557). organic and natural inorganic structural larval and juvenile bullfrogs. We did not We then state that "[b]ased on the features important to each gartersnake include these other taxa and bullfrogs in literature, we expect the majority of species that fall within the stream the PCEs because they are either terrestrial activity for both species channel that encompasses a fluctuating relatively rare in the diet (in the case of occurs within 600 ft (182.9 m) of shoreline. invertebrates and other vertebrates) or in permanent water in lotic habitat" and Water Quality the case of bullfrogs, the adult frogs prey that "we believe a 600-ft (182.9-m) voraciously on gartersnake, and so lateral extent to either side of bankfull In the July 10, 2013, proposed rule, despite the fact that the snakes eat the stage will sufficiently protect the for the northern Mexican gartersnake juveniles, the presence of bullfrogs majority of important terrestrial habitat; under PCE 1, we state: "Aquatic habitat indicates that the habitat is degraded. provide brumation, gestation, and with characteristics that support a We received additional information dispersal opportunities; and reduce the native amphibian prey base, such as regarding the prey base of northern impacts of high flow events, thereby salinities less than 5 parts per thousand, Mexican gartersnake. Additional providing adequate protection to pH greater than or equal to 5.6, and research confirms that in some areas proposed critical habitat areas" (78 FR pollutants absent or minimally present where native aquatic prey species are 41550, July 10, 2013, p. 78 FR 41557). at levels that do not affect survival of not available, viable populations of We go on to say that we determined any age class of the northern Mexican northern Mexican gartersnakes likely 600-ft (182.9-m) lateral extent from gartersnake or the maintenance of prey rely on bullfrogs and nonnative, soft- bankfull width for four biological populations" (78 FR 41550, July 10, rayed and potentially spiny-rayed fish reasons, including maintaining the 2013, p. 78 FR 41584). In that proposed as a primary food source (Emmons et a]. biological integrity and natural rule, for the narrow-headed gartersnake 2016, pp. 556-557; Emmons and Nowak dynamics of the river system and under PCE 1, we state: "Aquatic habitat 2016a, p. 44; Emmons and Nowak 2013, associated riparian habitat, nutrient with no pollutants or, if pollutants are pp. 6, 15; Lashway 2012, p. 7). In other recharge, general aquatic habitat values, present, levels that do not affect survival areas where native ranid frogs are no and providing adequate space for of any age class of the narrow-headed longer present, we have additional normal gartersnake behaviors. gartersnake or the maintenance of prey information to support that northern We received numerous comments and populations" (78 FR 41550, July 10, Mexican gartersnakes consume other additional scientific information 2013, p. 78 FR 41601). anurans (frogs and toads), small regarding our definition of adequate In this revised proposed rule, we are terrestrial mammals, lizards, and invertebrate space for the two gartersnakes removing the specific salinity and pH in two general categories. First, using a requirement for habitat characteristics species (Caldwell 2014, p. 1; d'Orgeix et a]. 2013, p. 214; Emmons and Nowak single distance of 600 ft (182.9 m) lateral that support a native amphibian prey 2016b, p. 9; Manjarriez et a]. 2017, table extent from bankfull stage for both base for the northern Mexican gartersnake species includes areas 1). gartersnake. As mentioned in the July In this revised proposed rule, for outside the area typically used by each 10, 2013, proposed rule, while native northern Mexican gartersnake, we are gartersnake species and can include leopard frogs can be the primary prey removing the requirement for a wholly areas that do not have any of the PBFs base for adult northern Mexican native prey base and including the essential to the conservation of each gartersnakes in some areas, these additional prey species described above species, especially in higher order gartersnakes feed on a variety of in PBF 3. We also used "anurans" (frogs streams (Nowak 2006, pp. 19-20; organisms that do not necessarily and toads) instead of "amphibians" to Jennings and Christman 2012, pp. 8-12; Emmons and Nowak 2016a, p. 30; require the salinity and pH specified in more accurately describe the Myrand et a]. 2017 p. 36). Second, using the PCE (78 FR 41550, July 10, 2013, pp. gartersnake's primary prey. We do not 78 FR 41553-41554). Because we do not "bankfull width" as a measurement make substantive changes to PBF 3 for point for the lateral extent of critical have salinity and pH values needed for narrow-headed gartersnake. the variety of aquatic organisms that the habitat is difficult to determine on the different age classes of northern Primary Constituent Elements/Critical ground as evidenced by our lack of Mexican gartersnakes eat, we are Habitat Boundaries mapping it as such in the July 10, 2013, making this PBF more general. We did proposed rule. Instead, we mapped Terrestrial Space Along Streams not make substantive changes to the critical habitat as a 1,200-ft (366-m) relevant PBF component for narrow- In the previous proposed rule, PCE 2 polygon surrounding the centerline of a headed gartersnake. for both gartersnakes included stream (78 FR 41550, July 10, 2013, pp. "[a]dequate terrestrial space (600 ft 78 FR 41585, 78 FR 41601). We discuss Prey Base (182.9 m) lateral extent to either side of both issues below. In the July 10, 2013, proposed rule, bankfull stage) adjacent to designated At the time of the publication of the we described a wholly native prey base stream systems with sufficient structural July 10, 2013, proposed rule, most of the Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23615 information we had on locations of both longitudinal length within these home likely that 600 ft (182.9 m) does not gartersnake species was from studies ranges varied from approximately 148 ft accurately capture the lateral extent of where traps were set within water to (45 m) at the lentic site to 2,736 ft (834 terrestrial habitat used by either species. capture gartersnakes and then m) along the spatially intermittent Consequently, we have modified the gartersnakes were subsequently stream (Boyarski et al. 2015, p. 12; lateral extent boundary of critical released. This survey method does not Emmons and Nowak 2016a, pp. 27-28; habitat for both species. For northern provide information on how these Nowak et al. 2019, p. 31). Mean distance Mexican gartersnake, we are defining species use terrestrial habitat. Nowak et to water of northern Mexican the lateral extent to include the wetland al. (2006, entire), the study we gartersnake locations ranged from 3.87 or riparian zone adjacent to a stream or referenced in our July 10, 2013, to 312.5 ft (1.18 to 95.25 m) along Tonto lentic water body, whichever is greater. proposed rule, was the first study that Creek in north-central Arizona (Nowak Delineating based on riparian zone used radio-telemetered narrow-headed et al. 2019, p. 40). These studies of rather than delineating a set distance gartersnakes to look at habitat use. This northern Mexican gartersnake indicate more accurately captures the foraging study only reported an individual that this species overwinters in rodent habitat used by the northern Mexican narrow-headed gartersnake moving in a burrows, cavities below boulders and gartersnake. As described above in this straight-line distance of 650 ft (200 m) rock fields, and below debris piles section and under "Hydrologic from water location, which we used to located 1.6 ft (0.5 m) to approximately Processes," most northern Mexican inform lateral extent of critical habitat 558 ft (170 m) from the water's edge gartersnake detections ranged from in for both gartersnake species because this (Boyarski et al. 2015, p. 8; Emmons and water in the stream channel up to was the best available information. Nowak 2016a, p. 30; Myrand eta]. 2017, meadows or woodlands within the However, since the publication of the p. 21). Brumation sites were located an floodplain at the limit of the riparian 2013 proposed rule, E. Nowak (2015) average of 129 ft (39.27 m) from the zone. We are defining the riparian zone provided the Service a correct water's edge in two different areas along as the strip of vegetation along a stream interpretation of her telemetry data for the Verde River in Arizona (Emmons that is of distinct composition and this individual and for the other narrow- and Nowak 2016a, p. 30). Nowak et al. density from the surrounding uplands, headed gartersnakes recorded in this (2019, p. 36) reported brumation sites or the area between the stream channel study. Nowak clarified that the narrow- for 14 northern Mexican gartersnakes and the upland terrestrial ecosystem headed gartersnake was found on a that ranged from 2 to 1,257 ft (0.7 to 383 (Levick et al. 2008, pp. 6, 47). Although steep slope approximately 390 ft (150 m) from the water's edge along the northern Mexican gartersnakes have m) above a stream in a narrow canyon Tonto River in Arizona. Overwintering been found in a variety of vegetation in a brumation site (Nowak 2006, p. 17). of seven gartersnakes at brumation sites types within this riparian zone (i.e., Nowak further clarified that other was also recorded within 230 ft (70 m) grasses, shrubs, and wetland plants), the narrow-headed gartersnakes were of ponds, and one gartersnake underlying characteristic of this habitat recorded using brumation sites on the overwintered at a site approximately needed by the gartersnake appears to be steep slope, reporting horizontal 1,115 ft (350 m) from a pond (Boyarski dense vegetation or other natural distances from brumation sites to stream et al. 2015, pp. 8, 11). structural components that provide centerline between 276 and 328 ft (84 For narrow-headed gartersnake, cover for the species. Size of the and 100 m). Nowak (2006, pp. 19-20) telemetry studies in New Mexico on the riparian zone and composition of plants also reported at least five other Tularosa River, Gila River, and within the riparian zone varies widely individual narrow-headed gartersnakes Whitewater Creek found individuals an across the range of northern Mexican average of 58.7 ft (17.9 m) from water, overwintering at brumation sites not on gartersnake. The width of critical habitat steep slopes at 66 to 98 ft (20 to 30 m) with a maximum distance of 285 ft (87 for northern Mexican gartersnake along m) across four different sites on the from water. The important difference in streams varies from approximately 50 to three streams with a sample size of 69 the distance from the stream is 7,000 ft (15 to 2,134 m). Because the individuals (Jennings and Chirstman dependent on the adjacent terrestrial width of wetland and riparian zone 2012, pp. 9-10). Researchers found most topography. If the topography is steep varies along and among streams, and snakes within 3.28 ft (1 m) of the water's slopes, then the gartersnake is found some streams have little to no riparian edge (Jennings and Christman 2012, pp. habitat farther from the stream, but this but have wetland habitat that 9-10). Narrow-headed gartersnakes were includes some terrestrial components, additional distance is vertical, not found with lowest average distance of delineating these areas rather than horizontal, from the stream bank. 22.7 ft (6.9 m) during the dry season of delineating a set distance from the Since we published the 2013 2010, and highest average distance of stream channel better captures the proposed rule, researchers have 88.3 ft (26.9 m) during the wet season needed habitat for the northern Mexican completed additional telemetry studies in 2010 (Jennings and Chirstman 2012, gartersnake. for each gartersnake species that provide pp. 9-10). Although, Nowak (2006, p. For narrow-headed gartersnake, we information on how each gartersnake 19) reported that the maximum distance have modified the lateral extent species uses terrestrial habitat (Jennings moved by one individual was 650 ft boundary of critical habitat to include and Christman 2012; Boyarski et al. (200 m) from water on a steep hillside aquatic and terrestrial features within 89 2015; Emmons and Nowak 2016a; in a narrow canyon, she also reported ft (27 m) of the active channel of a Myrand eta]. 2017; Sprague 2017; that during the active season, she most stream. This distance captures the Nowak et al. 2019). For northern often found individuals outside of water greatest average distance moved from Mexican gartersnake, telemetry studies under boulders, small rocks, and broken the water during the wet season on the indicate home ranges of individuals concrete slabs located less than 328 ft Tularosa River in New Mexico from a 3- ranging from 1.7 acres (0.7 ha) at a (100 m) from the water's edge within the year study with a sample size of 69 highly modified lentic site to 47.0 acres floodplain of Oak Creek and West Fork individuals at two different sites (19.04 ha) along a spatially intermittent Oak Creek, Arizona. (Jennings and Christman 2012, p. 12). stream (Boyarski et al. 2015, p. 12; Based on a review of this new This is the largest study to date. Emmons and Nowak 2016a, pp. 27-28; information, clarification of Nowak's In addition, we have modified the Nowak et al. 2019, p. 31). Maximum data, and comments we received, it is delineation of where terrestrial habitat 23616 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules begins. We chose to use the active from water, as well as Rosen and (47,441 ha) in the previous proposed channel instead of bankfull width Schwalbe (1988, p. 27) observing a rule, but only 12,745 acres (5,158 ha) because the active channel effectively northern Mexican gartersnake 330 ft had water bodies within them that defines a river or stream as a feature on (100 m) away from permanent water. contained PCE 1 and PCE 2, and were the landscape (Mersel and Lichvar 2014, We described these areas as overland considered occupied at the time of pp. 11-12). The active channel is areas or terrestrial space between listing. In other words, 96 percent of established and maintained by flows springs, seeps, streams, and stock tanks. these lands included in critical habitat that occur with some regularity (several We did not include these areas in a PCE, did not have PCEs for northern Mexican times per year to several times per but we included them in the proposed gartersnake as defined in the July 10, decade), but not by very rare and designation of critical habitat. Upland 2013, proposed rule. extremely high flood events. The outer areas that are distant from riparian Upon further inspection of all known limits of the active channel can habitat that the snakes use for foraging locations of the species, no northern generally be defined by three primary may be used while moving between Mexican gartersnakes have been indicators that together form a habitats, but specific habitat attributes detected in the aforementioned overland discernable mark on the landscape: A in these areas that are essential to the areas in southern Arizona outside of topographic break in slope, change in snakes have not been identified. In stream floodplains. These eight lentic vegetation characteristics, and change in determining which areas we will sites occupied at the time of listing, sediment characteristics (Mersel and designate as critical habitat from within including natural and constructed Lichvar 2014, pp. 13-14). The active the geographical area occupied by the ponds, all fall within a stream channel is often a fairly obvious and species at the time of listing, the Act floodplain, although some of these easy feature to identify in the field, directs us to consider the physical or streams are ephemeral. Data are still allowing for rapid and consistent biological features (or PCEs under our lacking to explain how the species identification (Mersel and Lichvar 2014, previous regulations) that are essential moves through the overland areas p. 14). Further, the active channel can to the conservation of the species and between perennial or intermittent be consistently recognized by the that may require special management aquatic features, but we used our re- public. considerations or protection. A common assessment of gartersnake locations in These changes in determining lateral relation to stream floodplains, along extent from streams have reduced the characteristic of these overland areas was the presence of natural or with additional information obtained proposed critical habitat designation by 3,458 ac (1,399 ha), or less than 1 constructed livestock ponds within a since the publication of the July 10, percent, of the area included in the July grassland landscape in southern 2013, proposed rule, to refine the 10, 2013, proposed rule for critical Arizona, although we did not define or definition of terrestrial space used by habitat for northern Mexican discuss the scope of this grassland the species. There is new information gartersnake, and 41,927 ac (16,967 ha), landscape in the July 10, 2013, proposed about how northern Mexican or 20 percent, of the area included in rule. We did not know how northern gartersnakes exploit seasonal amphibian that proposed rule for critical habitat for Mexican gartersnakes used the grassland prey species in ephemeral waters during narrow-headed gartersnake (see tables landscape in between water features, so the rainy season when prey is abundant la and 1b, below). we used property and watershed within these grassland landscapes in In addition, we are no longer boundaries to delineate large landscapes southern Arizona (d'Orgeix et a]. 2013, including terrestrial space as a separate that encompassed the features that the entire; Caldwell 2014, entire). After the PBF, but are including both terrestrial species may use. We used a U.S. first heavy rains of the monsoon season and aquatic features that make up a Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrological in 2012, northern Mexican gartersnakes stream in a single PBF (PBF 1) that more Unit Code (HUC) level 10 watershed were found foraging on seasonal accurately captures the habitat boundary to delineate the Upper Santa amphibian prey (spadefood (Spea requirements essential to each Cruz River Subbasin Unit. We used multiplicata)) and basking at the bases gartersnake species. property ownership boundaries to of Sacaton grass (Sporobolus wrightii) in delineate the following units and and around a ponded area within an Overland Areas for Northern Mexican subunits: Buenos Aires National ephemeral section of the floodplain in Gartersnake Wildlife Refuge Unit, Las Cienegas O'Donnell Canyon. These northern In the July 10, 2013, proposed rule, National Conservation Area Subunit and Mexican gartersnakes were 0.75 miles for northern Mexican gartersnake, 5 of Cienega Creek Natural Preserve Subunit (1.2 kin) overland and 1.49 miles (2.3 the 14 critical habitat units included in the Cienega Creek Subbasin Unit, kin) along O'Donnell Canyon upstream additional terrestrial space beyond the Appleton-Whittell Research Ranch of the closest known population of 600-ft (182.9-m) lateral extent from Subunit and Canelo Hills Cienega northern Mexican gartersnakes at Finley bankfull stage of streams (overland areas Preserve Subunit in the Babocomari Tank (d'Orgeix 2013, p. 214). Caldwell or terrestrial space). In the discussion of River Subbasin Unit, and San (2014, p. 1) also found northern space for individual and population Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge Mexican gartersnakes in wetted growth for normal behavior under PBFs, Unit. While property boundaries can ephemeral habitat within the Cienega we state that "records for northern delineate individual land management Creek floodplain: One in an off-channel Mexican gartersnakes from semi-remote prescriptions and affect the likelihood marsh, and one in pool of water on a livestock tanks and spring sources for species persistence, property road that also contained spadefoot larva suggest the species moves across the boundaries themselves are not linked to and metamorphs. We also have updated local landscape as part of its foraging the PBFs that are essential to the information on telemetered snakes ecology," (78 FR 41550, July 10, 2013, conservation of northern Mexican moving in other terrestrial habitats p. 78 FR 41554), and we cite gartersnake, where more accurate along stream channels in northern observations by Drummond and mapping methods are available, they Arizona (Emmons and Nowak 2013, Marcias-Garcia (1983, pp. 24, 35) of should be used as an alternative to entire; Emmons and Nowak 2016a, northern Mexican gartersnakes property boundaries. These overland entire; Myrand et a]. 2017, entire), as wandering hundreds of meters away areas encompassed 290,620 acres described earlier. This research has also Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23617 shown that when northern Mexican Changes to Criteria Used To Identify as areas where the species is expected gartersnakes were surface active in Critical Habitat to reliably occur in appropriate habitat as supported by museum records or habitats with perennial stream flow in OccupancyRecords northern Arizona, they were observed recent, reliable observations. Based on outside of water concealed under dense On July 10, 2013, we published this definition, only 42 percent of the vegetative most of the time. While we proposed rules to list both gartersnake total area considered occupied at the species (78 FR 41500) and to designate do not have similar information for time of listing by the species in the July critical habitat for both gartersnake gartersnakes in grassland habitats, 10, 2013, proposed critical habitat species (78 FR 41550). On July 8, 2014, ephemeral channels in southern designation was considered extant from we published a final rule (79 FR 38678) 2006 to 2011. From 2006-2011, the Arizona usually have more vegetative listing both species. cover than the surrounding uplands, so Service defined "extirpated" as that In the proposed rule to designate there have been no individuals reported we can deduce that it is more likely that critical habitat (78 FR 41550; July 10, gartersnakes are using these more for a decade or longer at a site within 2013), we considered an entire stream as the historical distribution of the species, densely vegetated areas that provide occupied at the time of listing for each despite survey efforts, and there is no more cover to successfully move corresponding gartersnake if it was expectation of natural recovery at the between aquatic sites in these within the historical range of the site due to the presence of known or grasslands. Based on this information, species, contained aquatic and strongly suspected causes of extirpation. we are not including the overland terrestrial components of habitat Furthermore, the Service defined terrestrial space between springs, seeps, defined by PCE 1 and PCE 2, had at least "unknown" as the species occurred streams, and stock tanks. In this revised one record of the species dated 1980 or based on museum records (mostly proposed rule, we are including the later, and had at least one native prey historically) but access is restricted, or (78 41550, 10, springs, seeps, streams, and stock tanks species present FR July survey data unavailable or insufficient, 2013, 78 41556). and the ephemeral drainages that p. FR For the northern or where threats could preclude Mexican gartersnake, we also connect these wetlands to perennial occupancy. Of the total area considered considered large overland areas streams. The resulting proposed critical occupied by the species in the July 10, (grasslands) within specific land habitat better represents our current 2013, proposed critical habitat ownership or watershed as occupied if designation, 16 percent would have understanding of the life history of the they met the above criteria. We have been considered extirpated, 23 percent northern Mexican gartersnake and the reconsidered the use the criteria of one habitat characteristics that facilitate its record of the species dated 1980 or later would have been considered unknown, and 19 percent would life-history functions. Consequently, no as a proxy for what was occupied at the have had no 2006-2011 units or subunits include overland time of listing. We received comments status based on the grassland areas, and all areas considered that using records dated 1980 or later to definitions of status for northern occupied under this revised proposed determine which streams are occupied Mexican gartersnake. In the July 10, rule are adjusted in size to appropriately at the time of listing is inconsistent with 2013, proposed listing rule (78 FR reflect the PBFs (see table la, below). definitions we used to define the status 41500), we changed how we defined of the northern Mexican gartersnake in status to correspond with our definition The removal of overland terrestrial of "occupied" in the July 10, 2013, space in these large grasslands has prior Service status assessment documents, that our approach is not proposed critical habitat rule (78 FR reduced the proposed critical habitat 41550). The most significant change in designation for northern Mexican supported by the scientific literature, and that low gartersnake detection those 2013 publications was that we gartersnake by 285,837 ac (115,674 ha), probabilities do not justify a broad considered a gartersnake species extant 68 or percent, of the area included in historical approach to designate critical in an area if it had been reported in an the July 10, 2013, proposed rule. habitat. Thus, in this revised proposed area in the past 33 years regardless of negative survey efforts or threats Elevation rule, we take a more accurate approach (described below) to conclude what precluding occupancy. We justified In the July 10, 2013, proposed rule, areas were likely occupied at the time using records of each species from the we erroneously included some areas of listing in 2014. 1980s to determine that an area was that are not within the elevation range For northern Mexican gartersnake, the occupied at the time of listing by stating of narrow-headed gartersnake, including definition of occupancy we used to that "both species of gartersnake are portions of the West Fork Gila River, determine critical habitat in the July 10, cryptic, secretive, difficult to detect, Black Canyon, Iron Creek, Diamond 2013, proposed rule is significantly quick to escape underwater, and capable of persisting in low or very low Creek, and Whitewater Creek. different from the criteria that we used to define what areas we considered the population densities that make positive In this revised proposed rule, we add northern Mexican gartersnake extant or detections nearly impossible in the elevation range of each extirpated in other previous Service structurally complex habitat" (78 FR corresponding gartersnake species as a documents. In the 2006 and 2008 12- 41550, July 10, 2013, p. 78 FR 41556). PBF to capture the range of where each month findings (71 FR 56228, For narrow-headed gartersnake, we had species has been documented and September 26, 2006; and 73 FR 71788, no previous Service documents that exclude the areas that are outside the November 25, 2008, respectively), as addressed occupancy of the species. elevation ranges where the species well as in updates to the "Species For this revised proposed rule, we occur. This reduces the proposed Assessment and Listing Priority Form" reassessed occupancy at the time of critical habitat designation by 2,320 ac described in our annual candidate listing for each gartersnake by reviewing (939 ha), or 1 percent, of the area notices of review (see 73 FR 75176, all records for each gartersnake that we included in the July 10, 2013, proposed December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, used in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule for critical habitat for narrow- November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, critical habitat rule in conjunction with headed gartersnake (see table 1b, November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, expected survivorship of each species, below). October 26, 2011), "extant" was defined subsequent surveys in areas that had no 23618 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules detection of the corresponding Upper Santa Cruz River Unit for 2006, p. 64), Verde River downstream of gartersnake species, and changes in northern Mexican gartersnake in the Beasley Flat (Holycross et a]. 2006, p. threats that may have prevented July 10, 2013, proposed rule, but the last 26; Emmons and Nowak 2012, pp. 11- occupancy at time of listing. detection of the species in this area was 13), Agua Fria River (Holycross et a]. Understanding longevity of a species in 1979 (Holycross et a]. 2006, appendix 2006, pp. 15-18; Burger 2016, p. 3), can inform how long we can reasonably A). Redrock Canyon does not have a Little Ash Creek (Holycross et a]. 2006, expect a species is still extant in an area, record of the northern Mexican p. 19; Emmons and Nowak 2012, p. 32; regardless of detection probability. The gartersnake, and was also erroneously Burger 2016, p. 3), and Black Draw and oldest estimated northern Mexican included in the July 10, 2013, proposed lentic habitats on San Bernardino gartersnake is between 14 and 16 years rule. Instead, the species was found in National Wildlife Refuge (Radke 2006). old, although growth rate calculations nearby Cott Tank Drainage and is Resurveyed areas with no confirmed are still preliminary (M. Ryan 2020). included in this revised proposed rule detection of narrow-headed gartersnakes The longest years between recaptures (Jones 2009). For narrow-headed since the 1980s include the Gila River from these mark-recapture studies is 9 gartersnake, we note that the Gila River Subunit downstream of the Middle Box years (M. Ryan 2020, pers. comm.). Subunit in the Middle Gila River (Christman and Jennings 2017, pp. 4-12; Narrow-headed gartersnakes may live Subbasin Unit had no records of the Jennings et a]. 2017, pp. 13-14; Jennings up to 10 years or longer in the wild species and was erroneously included et a]. 2018, pp. 10-13; Jennings and (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 38). An in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule. In Christman 2019, p. 5); San Francisco individual narrow-headed gartersnake addition, East Fork Gila River had no River downstream of confluence with captured in the wild as an adult was confirmed post-1980 records of the Whitewater Creek (Holycross et a]. kept in captivity for 11 years; and species and was erroneously included 2006, p. 66; Hellekson 2012), and Salt estimated to be 16 years old (M. Ryan in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule River (Holycross et a]. 2006, pp. 38-39). 2020). Based on this information, we (Propst 2015). It is reasonable to conclude that areas estimate maximum longevity for each surveyed within 15 years of listing with Based on our analyses in the rule gartersnake species is 15 years, so that no detection of the corresponding listing the two garternakes (79 FR it is reasonable to conclude that a gartersnake species were not occupied 38678; July 8, 2014), we conclude that gartersnake detected in 1998 or later at the time of listing. Survey efforts in there has been a significant decline in represents a population that could still these areas were comparable to or both species over the past 50 years. This be present at the time of proposed greater than surveys conducted in the listing in 2013, depending on the extent decline appeared to accelerate during 1980s that detected the species. of threats in the area. Although it is the two decades immediately before Additionally, comparable surveys did possible that gartersnakes are still extant listing occurred. From this observation, detect gartersnakes in other areas where in areas where they were detected only we conclude that many areas that were the species was present in the 1980s. during the 1980s, we have determined occupied by the species in surveys Finally, we would expect that some that the best available information during the 1980s are likely no longer populations would be lost during the reflecting occupancy at the time of occupied because those populations decades preceding listing when listing supports a more recent date of have disappeared. To determine where numbers of both gartersnakes were records since 1998. loss of populations was likely, we declining. These declines are what In the July 10, 2013, proposed critical reviewed survey efforts after 1989 that eventually led to the need to list both habitat rule, 8 percent of the critical did not detect gartersnakes in some of species. habitat designation for northern the areas mentioned above, and portions As explained extensively in the final Mexican gartersnake and 17 percent of of other units and subunits included in listing rule for both gartersnake species the designation for narrow-headed the July 10, 2013, proposed critical (79 FR 38678, July 8, 2014, pp. 79 FR gartersnake was considered occupied at habitat rule. We analyzed this to 38688-79 FR 38702), aquatic vertebrate the time of listing, based solely on determine whether the cryptic nature of survey efforts throughout the range of records of the corresponding species the species was a valid argument for both species indicate that native prey dated before 1998. For northern considering areas that only have species of both gartersnakes have Mexican gartersnake, these areas gartersnake records from the 1980s as decreased or are absent, while included Mule Creek Unit, Upper Salt still occupied at the time of listing in nonnative predators, including River Subbasin Unit, and Agua Fria 2013. All of the surveys conducted since bullfrogs, crayfish, and spiny-rayed fish, River Subbasin Unit in their entirety, the 1980s included at least the same continue to increase in many of the and Bear Canyon Creek Subunit in San amount or more search effort than those areas where both gartersnakes were Pedro River Subbasin Unit and Turkey surveys that detected each species in the present in the 1980s (Emmons and Creek Subunit in Babocomari River 1980s. Since 1998, researchers have Nowak 2012, pp. 11-14; Gibson et a]. Subbasin Unit. For narrow-headed detected each gartersnake species in 2015, pp. 360-364; Burger 2016, pp. 21- gartersnake, areas included Turkey many areas where they were found in 32; Emmons and Nowak 2016a, pp. 43- Creek Subunit in Upper Gila River the 1980s. Areas where each gartersnake 44; Christman and Jennings 2017, p. 14; Subbasin Unit; and Salt River, White was found after 1997 are included in Hall 2017, pp. 12-13; Jennings et a]. River, Carrizo Creek, Cibecue Creek, and this revised proposed rule. This 2018, p. 19). We acknowledge that both Diamond Creek subunits in Upper Salt includes portions of 9 of the 13 units for gartersnake species are extant in some River Subbasin Unit. We note that the northern Mexican gartersnake, and areas that have abundant nonnative, San Bernardino National Wildlife portions of 6 of the 7 units for narrow- aquatic predators, some of which also Refuge Unit did not have a verified headed gartersnake from the July 10, are prey for gartersnakes, so presence of northern Mexican gartersnake record 2013, proposed rule. Resurveyed areas nonnative aquatic predators is not dated 1998 or later. This unit was not with no confirmed detection of northern always indicative of absence of these included in the revised proposed rule. Mexican gartersnakes since the 1980s gartersnakes (Emmons and Nowak 2012, In addition, Parker Canyon and Parker include Mule Creek (Hotle et a]. 2012, p. 31; Emmons and Nowak 2016a, p. 13; Canyon Lake were specifically p. 1), Black River (Holycross et a]. 2006, Emmons et a]. 2016, entire; Nowak et a]. mentioned as part of the occupied p. 30), Big Bonito Creek (Holycross et a]. 2016, pp. 5-6; Lashway 2015, p. 5). We Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23619 also acknowledge that we do not have were released for recovery purposes and downstream boundaries of each a good understanding of why after the species was listed that had not unit and subunit of critical habitat. As gartersnake populations are able to been historically occupied by the explained earlier, the maximum survive in some areas with aquatic species. This added one new unit and longitudinal distance measured across predators and not in other areas (Burger five subunits in four existing units of home range areas of northern Mexican 2016, pp. 13-15). However, we think it critical habitat for northern Mexican gartersnake tracked for at least one year is reasonable to conclude that streams, gartersnake (7,040 ac (2,848 ha)) and was 4,852 ft (1,478.89 m) for one stream reaches, and lentic water bodies five subunits in two units of critical individual, and ranged from 587.9 to were not occupied at the time of listing habitat for narrow-headed gartersnake 2,580 ft (179.2 to 481.58 m) for eight if they have only gartersnake records (1,181 ac (478 ha)) in this revised other northern Mexican gartersnakes older than 1998 and have experienced a proposed rule (see tables la and 1b, (Nowak et a]. 2019, pp. 24-25). rapid decline in native prey species below). Maximum longitudinal distance coupled with an increase in nonnative Stream Length measured across home range areas of aquatic predators since gartersnakes narrow-headed gartersnakes ranged were detected in these areas in the In the July 10, 2013, proposed critical from 82 to 285 feet (25 to 87 m) 1980s. habitat rule, if a stream had at least one (Jennings and Christman 2012, pp. 9- In summary, through this review of known record for the each gartersnake 10). These longitudinal home range gartersnake occupancy, we determined species and at least one record of a distances were all determined from that a stream, stream reach, or lentic native prey species currently present, adult gartersnakes, and did not inform water body was occupied at the time of the entire stream length was included in how juvenile gartersnakes are dispersing listing for each gartersnake species if it proposed critical habitat. In the along a stream. Juvenile dispersal is is within the historical range of the discussion, we stated, "With respect to important because snakes of different species, contains all PBFs for the length (in proposed designations based age classes behave differently, and species, (although the PBFs concerning on flowing streams), the proposed areas juvenile gartersnakes may move farther prey availability and presence of were designed to provide sufficient along a stream as they search for and nonnative predators are often in aquatic and terrestrial habitat for normal establish suitable home ranges than do degraded condition), and a last known behaviors of northern Mexican and adults with established home ranges. record of occupancy in 1998 or later. As narrow-headed gartersnakes of all age Because we have no information on how a result, six subunits in five units of classes" (78 FR 41550, p. 78 FR 41556). juvenile northern Mexican gartersnakes critical habitat for northern Mexican We received numerous general and narrow-headed gartersnakes gartersnake and nine subunits in four comments and comments on specific disperse, we used information from a units of critical habitat for narrow- stream reaches that are not habitat for long-term dispersal study on neonate, headed gartersnake included in the July the corresponding gartersnake. 10, 2013, proposed rule are no longer In this revised proposed rule, for each juvenile, and adult age classes of the included in this revised proposed gartersnake species, we used comments Oregon gartersnake (Thamnophis critical habitat designation their we received and reports on water atratus hydrophilus)in a free-flowing entirety. This change reduced the availability, prey availability, and stream environment in northern proposed critical habitat designation by gartersnake surveys to re-evaluate all California (Welsh et a]. 2010, entire). 35,426 ac (14,336 ha), or 9 percent, of streams and determine which stream This is the only dispersal study the area included in the July 10, 2013, reaches contain PBFs and where PBFs available for another aquatic proposed rule for northern Mexican are lacking. Stream reaches that lack Thamnophis species in the United gartersnake, and 47,535 ac (19,237 ha), PBFs include areas where water flow States, so we used it as a surrogate for or 23 percent, of the area included in became completely ephemeral along an determining upstream and downstream that proposed rule for narrow-headed otherwise perennial or spatially movements of both northern Mexican gartersnake (see tables la and 1b, intermittent stream, hydrologic and narrow-headed gartersnakes, which below). Other units and subunits are processes needed to maintain streams are also aquatic Thamnophis species. shortened in length due to our could not be recovered, nonnative The greatest movement was made by a definition of occupancy as described aquatic predators outnumbered native juvenile recaptured as an adult 2.2 mi below under Stream Length. prey species, or streams were outside (3.6 kin) upstream from the initial We included gartersnake detections of the elevation range. In addition, reaches capture location (Welsh et a]. 2010, p. each gartersnake that occurred after the with multiple negative surveys without 79). Therefore, in this revised proposed species was listed because these areas a subsequent positive survey or reaches rule, we delineate upstream and were likely occupied at the time of that have no records of the downstream critical habitat boundaries listing in 2014. Both of these species are corresponding gartersnake species are of a stream reach at 2.2 mi (3.6 kin) from cryptic in nature and may not be not included, as described above under a known gartersnake observation record. detected without intensive surveys. OccupancyRecords. We do include These changes in determining stream Because populations for these species stream reaches that lack survey data for length reduced the proposed critical are generally small, isolated, and in the corresponding gartersnake, if they habitat designation by 72,955 ac (29,524 decline it is not likely that the species have positive observation records of the ha), or 17 percent, of the area included have colonized new areas since 2014; species dated 1998 or later both in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule for these areas were most likely occupied at upstream and downstream of the stream critical habitat for northern Mexican the time of listing, but either had not reach and have all of the PBFs. gartersnake, and 101,597 ac (41,115 ha), been surveyed or the species were We also reviewed the best available or 48 percent, of the area included in present but not detected during surveys. information we have on home range size that proposed rule for critical habitat for However, we did not include streams or and potential dispersal distance for each narrow-headed gartersnake (see tables lentic water bodies where gartersnakes gartersnake species to inform upstream la and ib, below). 23620 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

TABLE la-CHANGES TO NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS

Length Area Previous unit Previous New unit New subunit miles (kilometers) acres (hectares) subunit Previous New Previous New

Upper Gila Upper Gila 148 (239) 13 (21) 21,135 (8,553) 1,132 (458) River. River Subbasin. Gila River ...... 148 (239) 9 (14) 21,135 (8,553) 1,028 (416) Duck Creek .... 0 4 (6) 0 104 (42) Mule Creek ...... Removed* ..... 19 (30) 0 2,579 (1,044) 0 Upper Salt Removed* ..... 156 (251) 0 22,218 (8,991) 0 River. Black River .... Removed* ..... 114 (184) 0 16,392 (6,634) 0 Big Bonito Removed* ..... 42 (67) 0 5,826 (2,358) 0 Creek. Tonto Creek .... Tonto Creek ... 65(105) 32 (52) 8,936 (3,616) 4,302 (1,741) Verde River ..... Verde River 201 (323) 61 (99) 29,191 (11,813) 5,246 (2,123) Subbasin. Upper Verde Verde River .... 140 (225) 35 (56) 20,526 (8,307) 4,133 (1,672) River. Oak Creek ..... Oak Creek ..... 39 (62) 23 (37) 5,533 (2,239) 1,014 (410) Spring Creek .. Spring Creek .. 23 (36) 4 (6) 3,131 (1,267) 99 (40) Agua Fria River Removed* ..... 56 (91) 0 7,946 (3,215) 0 Agua Fria Removed* ..... 49 (80) 0 6,989 (2,828) 0 River Mainstem. Little Ash Removed* ..... 10 (11) 0 957 (387) 0 Creek. Bill Williams Bill Williams 36 (58) 29 (46) 5,412 (2,190) 4,049 (1,639) River. River Subbasin. Bill Williams 36 (58) 15 (24) 5,412 (2,190) 1,805 (730) River. Big Sandy 0 8 (13) 0 932 (377) River. Santa Maria 0 5 (9) 0 1,312 (531) River. Lower Colo- 0 n/a 0 4,467 (1,808) rado River. Buenos Aires Arivaca n/a 3 (5) 117,313 (47,475) 211 (86) NWR. Cienega. Cienega Creek Cienega Creek n/a 46 (73) 50,393 (20,393) 2,030 (821) Subbasin. Cienega Creek Subbasin. Cienega 7+ (11+) 30 (48) 1,113 (450) 1,613 (653) Cienega Creek Creek 1 Removed* ..... n/a n/a 4,260 (1,724) 0 Natural Pre- serve. Las Cienegas Removed* ..... n/a n/a 45,020 (18,219) 0 NCA 2 . Empire Gulch n/a 7 (11) n/a 326 (132) and Empire Wildlife Pond. Gardner Can- n/a 7 (11) n/a 74 (30) yon and Ma- ternity Wild- life Pond. Unnamed n/a 2 (3) n/a 15 (6) Drainage and Gaucho Tank. Redrock Can- Removed* 3 ... 14 (23) 0 1,972 (798) 0 yon. Upper Santa Upper Santa n/a 23 (36) 113,895 (46,092) 496 (201) Cruz River Cruz River Subbasin 4. Subbasin. 3 (5) Sonoita Creek 0 0 224 (91) Cott Tank n/a 2 (3) 0 13 (5) Drainage. Santa Cruz 14 (22) 7 (11) n/a 161 (65) River. Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23621

TABLE la-CHANGES TO NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS-Continued

Length Area Previous unit Previous New unit New subunit miles (kilometers) acres (hectares) subunit Previous New Previous New

Unnamed n/a 5 (7) n/a 42(17) Drainage and Pasture 9 Tank. Unnamed n/a 2 (3) n/a 25(10) Drainage and Sheehy Spring...... Scotia Canyon n/a 4 (7) n/a 31 (13) ...... FS799 Tank ... n/a n/a n/a 0.7 (0.3) ...... Unnamed n/a n/a n/a 0.1 (<0.1) Wildlife Pond. Removed* 6 (9) 0 n/a 0 (Parker Can- yon). San Pedro Upper San 165 (266) 35 (57) 23,690 (9,587) 5,850 (2,367) River Pedro River Subbasin. Subbasin. San Pedro San Pedro 158 (255) 22 (35) 22,669 (9,174) 5,126 (2,074) River. River. Bear Canyon Removed* ..... 7 (11) 0 1,022 (414) 0 Creek. House Pond ... 0 n/a 0 0.6 (0.2) Babocomari Incorporated 5 45 (72) n/a 14,334 (5,801) n/a River Subbasin. Babocomari Babocomari 24 (24) 6 (10) 3,454 (1,398) 404 (164) River. River. Turkey Creek Removed* ..... 12 (19) 0 1,678 (679) 0 Appleton- Removed* 6 ... n/a n/a 7,798 (3,156) 0 Whittell Re- search Ranch. Canelo Hills Removed* 6 ... n/a n/a 213 (86) 0 Cienega Preserve. Post Canyon Post Canyon 6+ (9+) 3 (5) 795 (322) 77 (31) O'Donnell O'Donnell 3+ (5+) 4 (7) 398 (161) 239 (97) Canyon. Canyon. Unnamed n/a 0.5 (0.7) n/a 3 (1) Drainage and Finley Tank. San Bernardino Removed* ..... n/a n/a 2,387 (966) 0 NWR.

Totals ...... 932 (1,500) 241 (388) 1 421,423 (170,544) 27,784 (11,244) Note: Numbers may not sum due to rounding. *"Removed" means this unit or subunit, which was proposed as critical habitat for the northern Mexican gartersnake in the July 10, 2013, pro- posed rule (78 FR 41550), is not included in this revised proposed critical habitat designation. 1Portions of Cienega Creek in the Cienega Creek Natural Preserve and Las Cienegas National Conservation Area are now included in Cienega Creek subunit. 2 All new named subunits in the Cienega Creek Subbasin unit were included in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule's Las Cienegas National Con- servation Area (NCA) subunit. 3 The gartersnake record was in Cott Tank Drainage not Redrock Canyon so is now captured in the Cott Tank Drainage subunit. 4 All new named subunits except for Sonoita Creek were included in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule's Upper Santa Cruz River Subbasin unit. 5 The named subunits of the Babocomari River Subbasin unit in the July 10, 2013, proposed rule (78 FR 41550) are now incorporated into the Upper San Pedro River Subbasin unit. 6 Portions of these two subunits are now included in Post Canyon, O'Donnell Canyon, and Unnamed Drainage and Finley Tank subunits. 23622 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

TABLE lb-CHANGES TO NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS

Length Area miles (kilometers) acres (hectares) Previous unit Previoussubunit NwPreviousNew unit New subunit Previous _ New Previous [ New

Upper Gila Upper Gila 325 (526) 104 (167) 49,903 (20,195) 5,429 (2,197) River River Subbasin. Subbasin. Gila River ...... Gila River ...... 148 (239) 46 (74) 21,135 (8,553) 3,510 (1,420) Turkey Creek Removed* ..... 37 (60) 0 2,338 (946) 0 West Fork Gila West Fork Gila 12 (19) 5,169 (2,092) 562 (228) River. River. Little Creek .... Little Creek .... 37 (60) 7 (11) 2,236 (905) 162 (65) Middle Fork Middle Fork 14 (23) 4,964 (2,009) 569 (230) Gila River. Gila River. Iron Creek ...... Iron Creek ...... 12 (20) 2 (3) 1,731 (701) 58 (23) Gillita Creek ... Gillita Creek ... 12 (20) 6 (10) 1,704 (690) 149 (60) East Fork Gila Removed* ..... 28 (44) 0 3,579 (1,148) 0 River. Black Canyon Black Canyon 26 (42) 10 (16) 3,503 (1,418) 251 (102) Diamond Diamond 25 (41) 6 (10) 3,545 (1,435) 169 (68) Creek. Creek. Middle Gila Removed* ..... 63(101) 0 8,814 (3,567) 0 River Subbasin. Gila River ...... Removed* ..... 3 (5) 0 432 (175) 0 Eagle Creek ... Eagle Creek 1 60 (97) 7 (11) 8,382 (3,392) 336 (136) San Francisco San Francisco 301 (476) 129 (207) 45,075 (18,241) 4,905 (1,985) River River Subbasin. Subbasin. San Francisco San Francisco 163 (263) 71 (115) 23,178 (9,380) 3,120 (1,263) River. River. Whitewater Whitewater 9 (14) 2,289 (1,145) 208 (84) Creek. Creek. Saliz Creek .... Saliz Creek .... 8 (13) 8 (13) 1,099 (445) 218 (88) Tularosa River Tularosa River 35 (56) 20 (32) 4,728 (1,913) 829 (336) n/a ...... Negrito Creek 0 13 (21) 0 337 (136) South Fork South Fork 11 (17) 8 (13) 1,483 (600) 192 (78) Negrito Negrito Creek. Creek. Blue River n/a 64(103) n/a 2,971 (1,202) Subbasin. Blue River ...... Blue River ...... 53 (86) 52 (84) 7,432 (3,007) 2,504 (1,013) Campbell Blue Campbell Blue 22 (26) 7 (11) 3,008 (1,217) 361 (146) Creek. Creek. Dry Blue Dry Blue 9 (15) 4 (6) 1,320 (534) 106 (43) Creek. Creek. Upper Salt Black River 352 (654) 51 (82) 58,014 (23,478) 1,607 (650) River Subbasin. Subbasin. Salt River ...... Removed* ..... 86 (139) 0 12,877 (5,211) 0 White River .... Removed* ..... 18 (29) 0 2,588 (1,047) 0 Carrizo Creek Removed* ..... 64 (104) 0 9,033 (1,229) 0 Cibecue Creek Removed* ..... 48 (77) 6,669 (2,699) Diamond Removed* ..... 22 (36) 0 3,117 (1,261) 0 Creek. Black River .... Black River .... 114 (184) 23 (37) 16,384 (6,630) 763 (309) n/a ...... Bear Wallow 0 6 (10) 0 174 (71) Creek. n/a ...... I ...... North Fork 0 2 (3) 0 61 (25) Bear Wallow Creek. n/a ...... Reservation 0 5 (8) 0 132 (54) Creek. n/a ...... Fish Creek ..... 0 4 (6) 0 107 (43) n/a ...... East Fork 0 12 (19) 0 370 (150) Black River. Canyon Creek Canyon 53 (85) 8 (13) 7,346 (2,973) 232 (94) Creek1 Tonto Creek .... Tonto Creek ... 91 (146) 41 (66) 12,795 (5,178) 1,390 (562) Tonto Creek ... Tonto Creek ... 54 (87) 28 (45) 7,712 (3,121) 1,078 (436) Houston Creek Houston Creek 15 (24) 1 (2) 2,046 (828) 18 (7) Haigler Creek Haigler Creek 22 (35) 12 (19) 3,037 (1,229) 294 (119) Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23623

TABLE lb-CHANGES TO NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS-Continued

Length Area unit Previous New unit New subunit miles (kilometers) acres (hectares) Previous subunit Previous New Previous New

Verde River ...... Verde River ...... 248 (400) 58 (93) 35,586 (14,401) 1,832 (741) Subbasin. Verde River ...... Verde River .... 128 (205) 27 (43) 18,721 (7,576) 923 (374) Oak Creek ...... Oak Creek ..... 51 (83) 24 (39) 7,369 (2,982) 748 (303) West Fork Oak ...... West Fork Oak 16 (26) 7 (11) 2,137 (865) 161 (65) Creek. Creek. East Fork ...... Removed* ..... 53 (86) 0 7,360 (2,978) 0 Verde River.

Totals ...... 1,380 (2,221) 461 (742) 210,189 (85,060) 18,701 (7,568) Note: Numbers may not sum due to rounding. *"Removed' means this unit or subunit, which was proposed as critical habitat for the narrow-headed gartersnake in the July 10, 2013, pro- posed rule (78 FR 41550), is not included in this revised proposed critical habitat designation. 1 Eagle Creek and Canyon Creek were proposed as a critical habitat subunits for the narrow-headed gartersnake in the July 10, 2013, pro- posed rule (78 FR 41550), but are their own units in this revised proposed critical habitat designation.

Physical or Biological Features may also be combinations of habitat Northern Mexican Gartersnake characteristics and may encompass the In accordance 1. Perennial or spatially intermittent with section 3(5)(A)(i) relationship between characteristics or of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR streams that provide both aquatic and the necessary amount of a characteristic 424.12(b), in determining which areas terrestrial habitat that allows for essential we will designate as critical habitat from to support the life history of immigration, emigration, and within the geographical area occupied the species. In considering whether maintenance of population connectivity by the species at the time of listing, we features are essential to the conservation of northern Mexican gartersnakes and consider the physical or biological of the species, the Service may consider contain: features that are essential to the an appropriate quality, quantity, and (A) Slow-moving water (walking conservation of the species and that may spatial and temporal arrangement of speed) with in-stream pools, off-channel require special management habitat characteristics in the context of pools, and backwater habitat; considerations or protection. The the life-history needs, condition, and (B) Organic and natural inorganic regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define status of the species. These structural features (e.g., boulders, dense "physical or biological features essential characteristics include, but are not aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf to the conservation of the species" as limited to, space for individual and litter, logs, and debris jams) within the the features that occur in specific areas population growth and for normal stream channel for thermoregulation, and that are essential to support the life- behavior; food, water, air, light, shelter, foraging opportunities, and history needs of the species, including, minerals, or other nutritional or protection from predators; but not limited to, water characteristics, physiological requirements; cover or (C) Terrestrial habitat adjacent to the soil type, geological features, sites, prey, shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, stream channel that includes riparian vegetation, symbiotic species, or other or rearing (or development) of offspring; vegetation, small mammal burrows, features. A feature may be a single and habitats that are protected from boulder fields, rock crevices, and habitat characteristic, or a more disturbance. downed woody debris for complex combination of habitat thermoregulation, shelter, foraging characteristics. Features may include Summary of Essential Physical or opportunities, brumation, and habitat characteristics that support Biological Features protection from predators; and ephemeral or dynamic habitat (D) Water quality that is absent of We derive the specific PBFs essential conditions. Features may also be pollutants or, if pollutants are present, to the conservation of northern Mexican expressed in terms relating to principles at levels low enough such that and narrow-headed gartersnakes from of conservation biology, such as patch recruitment of northern Mexican size, distribution distances, and studies of this species' habitat, ecology, gartersnakes is not inhibited. connectivity. For example, physical and life history as described above. 2. Hydrologic processes that maintain features essential to the conservation of Additional information can be found in aquatic and terrestrial habitat through: the species might include gravel of a the final listing rule published in the (A) A natural flow regime that allows particular size required for spawning, Federal Register on July 8, 2014 (79 FR for periodic flooding, or if flows are alkali soil for seed germination, 38678); the previous proposed critical modified or regulated, a flow regime protective cover for migration, or habitat rule (78 FR 41550; July 10, that allows for the movement of water, susceptibility to flooding or fire that 2013), as well as comments we received sediment, nutrients, and debris through maintains necessary early-successional on previous proposed critical habitat the stream network; and habitat characteristics. Biological rule; and information in this rule under (B) Physical hydrologic and features might include prey species, Changes from Previously Proposed geomorphic connection between a forage grasses, specific kinds or ages of Critical Habitat, above. We have stream channel and its adjacent riparian trees for roosting or nesting, symbiotic determined that the following PBFs are areas. fungi, or a particular level of nonnative essential to the conservation of northern 3. Prey base of primarily native species consistent with conservation Mexican and narrow-headed anurans, fishes, small mammals, lizards, needs of the listed species. The features gartersnakes. and invertebrate species. 23624 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

4. An absence of nonnative fish (D) Terrestrial habitat within 89 ft (27 proposing to designate critical habitat species of the families Centrarchidae m) of the active stream channel that for both gartersnake species in areas and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs (Lithobates includes boulder fields, rocks, and rock considered currently occupied. We are catesbeianus), and/or crayfish structures containing cracks and not currently proposing to designate any (Orconectes virilis, Procambarusclarki, crevices, small mammal burrows, areas outside the geographical area etc.), or occurrence of these nonnative downed woody debris, and vegetation occupied by the species because we species at low enough levels such that for thermoregulation, shelter sites, and have not identified any unoccupied recruitment of northern Mexican protection from predators. areas that meet the definition of critical gartersnakes is not inhibited and 2. Hydrologic processes that maintain habitat. We are not aware of any other maintenance of viable prey populations aquatic and riparian habitat through: areas within the historical range of the is still occurring. (A) A natural flow regime that allows species that maintain perennial water, 5. Elevations from 130 to 8,500 ft (40 for periodic flooding, or if flows are have suitable prey, and support an to 2,590 m). modified or regulated, a flow regime aquatic community that is not 6. Lentic wetlands including off- that allows for the movement of water, dominated by nonnative predators. channel springs, cienegas, and natural sediment, nutrients, and debris through Therefore, although there may be a and constructed ponds (small earthen the stream network, as well as future need to expand the area occupied impoundment) with: maintenance of native fish populations; by one or both gartersnake species to (A) Organic and natural inorganic and reach recovery, there are no unoccupied structural features (e.g., boulders, dense (B) Physical hydrologic and areas that are currently essential to the aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf geomorphic connection between the species conservation and that should be litter, logs, and debris jams) within the active stream channel and its adjacent designated as critical habitat. ordinary high water mark for terrestrial areas. To identify areas proposed for critical thermoregulation, shelter, foraging 3. Prey base of native fishes, or soft- habitat for the northern Mexican and opportunities, brumation, and rayed, nonnative fish species. narrow-headed gartersnakes, we used a protection from predators; 4. An absence of nonnative predators, variety of sources for species data (B) Riparian habitat adjacent to such as fish species of the families including riparian species survey ordinary high water mark that includes Centrarchidae and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs, reports, museum records, heritage data riparian vegetation, small mammal and crayfish, or occurrence of nonnative from State wildlife agencies, peer- burrows, boulder fields, rock crevices, predators at low enough densities such reviewed literature, agency reports, and and downed woody debris for that recruitment of narrow-headed interviews with species experts. thermoregulation, shelter, foraging gartersnakes is not inhibited and Holycross et a]. (in press, entire) was a opportunities, and protection from maintenance of viable prey populations key source of information for vouchered predators; and is still occurring. historical and current records of both (C) Water quality that is absent of 5. Elevations of 2,300 to 8,200 ft (700 gartersnake species across their pollutants or, if pollutants are present, to 2,500 m). respective ranges. Other sources for current records of the northern Mexican at levels low enough such that Special Management Considerations or gartersnake included Cotten et a]. (2014, recruitment of northern Mexican Protection gartersnakes is not inhibited. entire), Holycross et a]. (2006, entire), 7. Ephemeral channels that connect When designating critical habitat, we and Rosen et a]. (2001, entire). perennial or spatially intermittent assess whether the specific areas within Christman and Jennings (2017, entire), perennial streams to lentic wetlands in the geographical area occupied by the Hellekson (2012), Jennings et a]. (2017, southern Arizona where water resources species at the time of listing contain entire), Jennings and Christman (2019, are limited. features which are essential to the entire), and Jennings et a]. (2018) were conservation of the species and which important sources of information Narrow-Headed Gartersnake may require special management pertaining to narrow-headed gartersnake 1. Perennial streams or spatially considerations or protection. In this status in New Mexico. In addition to intermittent streams that provide both revised proposed critical habitat rule, reviewing gartersnake-specific survey aquatic and terrestrial habitat that we are not changing any of the special reports, we also focused on survey allows for immigration, emigration, and management considerations for either reports and heritage data from State maintenance of population connectivity gartersnake species' proposed critical wildlife agencies for fish and of narrow-headed gartersnakes and habitat. amphibians as they captured important contain: Criteria Used To Identify Critical data on the existing community ecology (A) Pools, riffles, and cobble and that affects the status of these Habitat boulder substrate, with low amount of gartersnakes within their ranges. In fine sediment and substrate As required by section 4(b)(2) of the addition to species data sources, we embeddedness; Act, we use the best scientific data used publicly available geospatial (B) Organic and natural inorganic available to designate critical habitat. In datasets depicting water bodies, stream structural features (e.g., cobble bars, accordance with the Act and our flow, vegetation type, and elevation to rock piles, large boulders, logs or implementing regulations at 50 CFR identify areas proposed for critical stumps, aquatic and wetland vegetation, 424.12(b), we review available habitat. logs, and debris jams) in the stream information pertaining to the habitat The maps define the critical habitat channel for basking, thermoregulation, requirements of the species and identify designation, as modified by any shelter, prey base maintenance, and specific areas within the geographical accompanying regulatory text, presented protection from predators; area occupied by the species at the time at the end of this document under (C) Water quality that is absent of of listing and any specific areas outside Proposed Regulation Promulgation. We pollutants or, if pollutants are present, the geographical area occupied by the include more detailed information on at levels low enough such that species that are essential for the species' the proposed boundaries of the critical recruitment of narrow-headed conservation to be considered for habitat designation in the preamble of gartersnakes is not inhibited; and designation as critical habitat. We are this document. We will make the Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23625 coordinates or plot points or both on comments. We removed stream reaches streams, springs, cienegas, and ponds to which each map is based available to that were documented to not contain capture the wetland and riparian habitat the public on http:// prey species. needed by the species for www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 6. We identified and removed stream thermoregulation, foraging, and FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011, on our reaches with an abundance of nonnative protection from predators. We used the internet site at http://www.fws.gov- predators including fish, crayfish, or wetland and riparian layers of the southwest/es/arizona,and at the field bullfrogs. (We used a combination of Service's National Wetlands Inventory office responsible for the designation factors to determine nonnative presence dataset and aerial photography in (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and impact to the species. This Google Earth Pro to identify these areas. above). evaluation included records from 1980 by looking at subsequent negative Narrow-headed Gartersnake Areas Occupied at the Time of Listing survey data for northern Mexican 1. We mapped records of narrow- We are proposing for designation of gartersnakes along with how the headed gartersnake from 1998 to 2019. critical habitat lands that we have nonnative predator community had We then examined these areas to determined were occupied at the time of changed since those gartersnakes were determine if narrow-headed gartersnake listing and contain one or more of the found, in addition to the habitat could still occur here, as described physical or biological features to condition and complexity. Most of the below. support life-history processes essential areas surveyed in the 1980s that had 2. We identified the streams in which to the conservation of the species. As been re-surveyed with negative results narrow-headed gartersnakes were found explained under Occupancy Records, for gartersnakes had significant changes since 1998 (used flowline layer in the above, this proposed critical habitat to the nonnative predator community, USGS National Hydrography Dataset to designation does not include all streams which also decreased prey availability represent stream centerlines). known to have been occupied by the for the gartersnakes. These areas were 3. We identified and removed species historically or the entire stream removed from revised proposed critical upstream and downstream ends of known to have been occupied by the habitat.) streams that were below 2,300 ft or species historically. Instead, it focuses 7. We identified and removed stream above 8,200 ft in elevation using USGS on occupied streams or stream reaches reaches where stocking or management National Elevation Dataset. within the historical range with positive of predatory sportfish is a priority and 4. We identified perennial, survey records from 1998 to 2019 that is conducted on a regular basis. intermittent, and ephemeral reaches of have retained the necessary PBFs that 8. We identified and included those streams. We removed end reaches of will allow for the maintenance and stream reaches on private land without streams that are ephemeral or expansion of existing populations. In public access that lack survey data but intermittent based on FCode attribute of summary, for areas within the that have positive survey records from the flowline layer in the USGS National geographic area occupied by the species 1998 forward both upstream and Hydrography Dataset or information at the time of listing, we delineated downstream of the private land and from peer review and public comments. critical habitat unit boundaries using have stream reaches with PBFs 1 and 2. 5. We identified native and nonnative the following criteria: 9. We used a surrogate species to prey species along each stream using determine potential neonate dispersal geospatial datasets, literature, peer Northern Mexican Gartersnake along a stream, which is 2.2 miles (3.5 review, and public comments. We 1. We mapped records of observations km). We then identified the most removed stream reaches that did not of northern Mexican gartersnake from upstream and downstream records of have prey species. 1998 to 2019. We then examined these northern Mexican gartersnake along 6. We identified and removed stream areas to determine if northern Mexican each continuous stream reach reaches with an abundance of nonnative gartersnake could still occur in them, as determined by criteria 1 through 8, predators including fish, crayfish, and described below. above, and extended the stream reach to bullfrogs. (We examined a combination 2. We identified streams in which include this dispersal distance. of factors to determine nonnative northern Mexican gartersnakes were 10. After identifying the stream presence and impact to the species. This found since 1980 (used flowline layer in reaches that met the above parameters, included evaluating gartersnake records the USGS National Hydrography Dataset we then connected those reaches from 1998 by looking at subsequent to represent stream centerlines). between that have the PBFs. We negative survey data for narrow-headed 3. We identified and removed consider these areas between survey gartersnakes along with how the upstream and downstream ends of records occupied because the species nonnative predator community had streams that were below 130 ft or above occurs upstream and downstream and changed since those gartersnakes were 8,500 ft elevation using USGS National multiple PBFs are present that allow the found, in addition to the habitat Elevation Dataset. species to move through these stream condition and complexity. Most of the 4. We identified perennial, reaches. areas surveyed in the 1980s that had intermittent, and ephemeral reaches of 11. We identified the springs, been re-surveyed with negative results streams. We removed end reaches of cienegas, and natural or constructed for gartersnakes had significant changes streams that are ephemeral based on ponds (livestock tanks) in which records to the nonnative predator community, FCode attribute of the flowline layer in of observations of the species from 1998 which also decreased prey availability the USGS National Hydrography Dataset to 2019 were found and included them for the gartersnakes. These areas were or information from peer review and in this revised proposed critical habitat. removed from revised proposed critical public comments. We identified native 12. We identified ephemeral reaches habitat.) prey species along each stream using of occupied perennial or intermittent 7. We identified and removed stream geospatial datasets, literature, peer streams that serve as corridors between reaches where stocking or management review, and public comments. springs, cienegas, and natural or of predatory sportfish is a priority and 5. We identified prey species along constructed ponds (livestock tanks). is conducted on a regular basis. each stream using geospatial datasets, 13. We identified and included the 8. We identified and included those literature, peer review, and public wetland and riparian area adjacent to stream reaches on private land without 23626 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules public access that lack survey data but Inventory dataset and aerial the physical or biological features in the that have positive narrow-headed photography in Google Earth Pro to adjacent critical habitat. gartersnake survey records from 1998 identify the water's edge in streams. We are proposing for designation of forward both upstream and downstream When determining proposed critical critical habitat lands that we have of the private land and have stream habitat boundaries, we made every determined were occupied at the time of reaches with PBFs 1 and 2. listing and contain one or more of the effort to avoid including developed physical or biological features that are 9. We used a surrogate species to areas such as lands covered by essential to support life-history determine potential neonate dispersal buildings, pavement, and other along a stream, which is 2.2 mi (3.5 kin). processes of the species. structures because such lands lack We then identified the most upstream physical or biological features necessary Proposed Critical Habitat Designation and downstream records of narrow- headed gartersnake along each for northern Mexican and narrow- Northern Mexican Gartersnake continuous stream reach determined by headed gartersnakes. However, constructed fish barriers in streams We are proposing 241 stream mi (388 criteria 1 through 8, above, and km) within the identified wetland and extended the reach to include this within the proposed designated critical habitat are part of the designation and riparian habitat needed for basking, dispersal distance. cover, and foraging, totaling 27,784 ac are needed to manage the exclusion of 10. After identifying the stream (11,244 ha) in nine units as the revised nonnative species. The scale of the reaches that met the above parameters, proposed critical habitat for northern we then connected those reaches maps we prepared under the parameters Mexican gartersnake. Land ownership between that had the PBFs. We consider for publication within the Code of within proposed critical habitat for the these areas between survey records Federal Regulations may not reflect the northern Mexican gartersnake in acres is occupied because the species occurs exclusion of such developed lands. Any broken down as follows: Federal (62 upstream and downstream and multiple such lands inadvertently left inside percent), State (Arizona and New PBFs are present that allow the species critical habitat boundaries shown on the Mexico) (5 percent), Tribal (0.3 percent), to move through these stream reaches. maps of this proposed rule have been and private (32 percent) (see table 2a, 11. We identified the average distance excluded by text in the proposed rule below). The critical habitat areas we narrow-headed gartersnakes moved and are not proposed for designation as describe below constitute our current laterally from the water's edge in critical habitat. Therefore, if the critical best assessment of areas that meet the streams, which is 89 ft (27 in), to habitat is finalized as proposed, a definition of critical habitat for northern capture the wetland and terrestrial Federal action involving these lands Mexican gartersnake. We consider all habitat needed by the species for would not trigger section 7 consultation units occupied at the time of listing, and thermoregulation and protection from with respect to critical habitat and the all units contain essential PBFs that may predators. We used the wetland layer of requirement of no adverse modification require special management the Service's National Wetlands unless the specific action would affect considerations or protection.

TABLE 2a-LAND OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS [Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries. County-owned lands are considered as private lands.]

Land ownership by type Total size Unit Subunit acres (hectares) acres Federal State Tribal Private (hectares)

1. Upper Gila River G ila River ...... 22 (9) 1,006 (407) 1,028 (416) Subbasin. Duck Creek ...... 104 (42) 104 (42)

Unit T otal ...... 22 (9) ...... 1,110 (449) 1,132 (458) 2. Tonto Creek ...... 3,337 (1,350) ...... 966 (391) 4,302 (1,741)

Unit T otal ...... 3,337 (1,350) ...... 966 (391) 4,302 (1,741) 3. Verde River Subbasin ..... Verde River ...... 646 (261) 570 (231) 88 (36) 2,829 (1,145) 4,133 (1,672) Oak Creek ...... 193 (78) 134 (54) ...... 687 (278) 1,014 (410) Spring Creek ...... 17 (7) 1 (<1) ...... 80 (32) 99 (40)

Unit T otal ...... 856 (346) 705 (285) 88 (36) 3,597 (1,456) 5,246 (2,123) 4. Bill Williams River Bill W illiams River ...... 1,002 (405) 202 (82) ...... 601 (243) 1,805 (730) Subbasin. Big Sandy River ...... 339 (137) ...... 593 (240) 932 (377) Santa Maria River ...... 780 (316) ...... 532 (215) 1,312 (531)

Unit T otal ...... 2,121 (858) 202 (82) ...... 1,727 (699) 4,049 (1,639) 5. Lower Colorado River ..... 4 ,4 67 (1,80 8) ...... 4 ,4 67 (1,80 8)

Unit T otal ...... 4 ,4 67 (1,80 8) ...... 4 ,46 7 (1,80 8) 6. Arivaca Cienega ...... 149 (60) 1 (<1) ...... 62 (25) 211 (86)

Unit T otal ...... 149 (60) 1 (<1) ...... 62 (25) 211 (86) 7. Cienega Creek Subbasin Cienega Creek ...... 755 (306) 308 (125) ...... 550 (222) 1,613 (653) Empire Gulch and Empire 268 (109) 57 (23) ...... 326 (132) Wildlife Pond. Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23627

TABLE 2a-LAND OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS- Continued [Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries. County-owned lands are considered as private lands.]

Land ownership by type Total size Unit Subunit acres (hectares) acres Federal State Tribal Private (hectares)

G ardner C anyon and M a- 74 (30) ...... 74 (30) ternity Wildlife Pond. U nnam ed Drainage and 15 (6) ...... 15 (6) Gaucho Tank.

Unit T otal ...... 1,112 (45 1) 366 (148) ...... 550 (222) 2 ,030 (82 1) 8. U pper Santa C ruz R iver Sonoita C reek ...... 224 (91) 224 (91) Subbasin. C ott T a nk D ra inage ...... 13 (5) ...... 13 (5) Santa C ruz R iver ...... 70 (28) ...... 91 (37) 161 (65) Unnamed Drainage and ...... 36 (15) ...... 5 (2) 42 (17) Pasture 9 Tank. Unnamed Drainage and ...... 5 (2) ...... 20 (8) 25 (10) Sheehy Spring. S cotia C anyo n ...... 3 1 (13 ) ...... 3 1 (13 ) F S 7 9 9 T a nk ...... 0 .7 (0 .3 ) ...... 0 .7 (0 .3 ) U nnam ed W ildlife Pond ...... 0 .1 (<0 .1) 0.1 (<0.1) Unit T otal ...... 45 (18) 111 (45) ...... 340 (138) 496 (20 1) 9. Upper San Pedro River San Pedro River ...... 4,911 (1,988) ...... 215 (87) 5,126 (2,074) Subbasin. Babocomari River ...... 197 (80) 8 (3) ...... 199 (81) 404 (164) O 'Donnell Canyon ...... 58 (24) ...... 181 (73) 239 (97) Post C anyon ...... 30 (12) ...... 47 (19) 77 (3 1) U nnam ed Drainage and ...... 3 (1) 3 (1) Finley Tank. H o u se P o nd ...... 0 .6 (0 .2 ) ...... 0 .6 (0 .2 )

U nit T otal ...... 5 ,197 (2,103) 8 (3) ...... 645 (26 1) 5 ,850 (2,367) Grand Total ...... 17,284 (6,995) 1,414 (572) 88(36) 8,996 (3,640) 27,784 (11,244) Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

We present brief descriptions of all diversions; channelization; potential for drying because of regional groundwater units, and reasons why they meet the high-intensity wildfires; and human pumping, while others are affected by definition of critical habitat for northern development of areas adjacent to diversions. Development along private Mexican gartersnake, below. proposed critical habitat. reaches of Tonto Creek may also affect Lands owned by Freeport McMoRan Upper Gila River Subbasin Unit terrestrial characteristics of northern in the Upper Gila River Subbasin Unit Mexican gartersnake habitat. Mercury The Upper Gila River Subbasin Unit on the Gila River and Duck Creek are has been detected in fish samples is located in southwestern New Mexico being considered for exclusion from the within Tonto Creek, and further southeast of the towns of Cliff and Gila, final rule for critical habitat under research is necessary to determine if in Grant County. This unit consists of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A total of 515 mercury is bioaccumulating in the 1,132 ac (458 ha) along 13 stream mi (21 ac (208 ha), or 45 percent, of this unit resident food chain. Theodore Roosevelt kin) in two subunits with 9 stream mi are being considered for exclusion (see Lake is a nonnative sport fishery and (14 kin) along the Gila River and 4 Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, supports predators of the northern stream mi (6 kin) along Duck Creek. The below). New Mexico Department of Game and Mexican gartersnake, so that the Fish, New Mexico State land Tonto Creek Unit northern Mexican gartersnake may be department, and private entities manage The Tonto Creek Unit is generally subject to higher mortality from lands within this unit. Several reaches located near the towns of Gisela and predation by nonnative fish at the of the Gila River have been adversely Punkin Center, Arizona, in Gila County. downstream end of this unit, especially affected by channelization and This unit consists of 4,302 ac (1,741 ha) when the lake level is at spillway diversions, which have reduced or of critical habitat along 32 stream mi (52 elevation. In general, this unit contains eliminated base flow. As a whole, this kin) of Tonto Creek. The downstream PBFs 1, 2, 3, and 5, but PBF 4 is in unit contains PBFs 1, 2, and 5, but PBFs end of critical habitat is the spillway degraded condition. PBFs 6 and 7 do 3 and 4 are in degraded condition. PBFs elevation of Theodore Roosevelt Lake not apply to this unit. The physical or 6 and 7 do not apply to this unit. The (2,120 ft (646 in)) near the confluence biological features in this unit may physical or biological features in this with Bumblebee Creek. The Tonto require special management unit may require special management National Forest is the primary land consideration due to competition with, consideration due to competition with, manager in this unit, with additional and predation by, nonnative species that and predation by, nonnative species that lands privately owned. Some reaches are present in this unit; water diversions are present in this unit; water along Tonto Creek experience seasonal causing loss of base flow; flood-control 23628 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules projects; and development of areas Bill Williams River Subbasin Unit are present in this unit and flood- adjacent to or within proposed critical The Bill Williams River Subbbasin control projects. No areas within this habitat. Unit is generally located in western unit are considered for exclusion. Verde River Subbasin Unit Arizona, northeast of Parker, Arizona, in Arivaca Cienega Unit The Verde River Subbasin Unit is La Paz and Mohave Counties. This unit consists of 4,049 ac (1,639 ha) along 29 The Arivaca Cienega Unit is generally generally located near the towns of located in southern Arizona, in and Cottonwood, Cornville, and Camp stream mi (46 km) in three subunits: 15 stream mi (24 km) of Bill Williams around the town of Arivaca in Pima Verde, Arizona, in Yavapai County. This County, Arizona. This unit consists of unit consists of 5,246 ac (2,123 ha) along River; 8 stream mi (13 km) of Big Sandy River; and 5 stream mi (9 km) of Santa 211 ac (86 ha), along 3 stream mi (5 km) 61 stream mi (98 km) in three subunits: of Arivaca Creek within Arivaca 35 stream mi (56 km) of the Verde River, Maria River. The Bill Williams River Subbasin Unit occurs on lands managed Cienega. This unit occurs on lands including Tavasci Marsh and Peck Lake; managed by the Service at Buenos Aires 23 stream mi (37 km) of Oak Creek; and by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the Rawhide Mountains National Wildlife Refuge, Arizona State 4 stream mi (6 km) of Spring Creek. The Land Department, and private Verde River Subbasin Unit occurs on Wilderness, Swansea Wilderness, and Three Rivers Riparian Area of Critical landowners. Drought, bullfrogs, and lands managed by the U.S. Forest crayfish are a concern in the Arivaca Service on Coconino and Prescott Environmental Concern (ACEC); Arizona State Parks at Alamo Lake State Cienega Unit. In general, this unit National Forests; National Park Service contains PBFs 2 and 5, but PBFs 1, 3, (NPS) at Tuzigoot National Monument; Park; Arizona State Land Department; and 4 are in degraded condition. PBFs Arizona Game and Fish Department at and private landowners. This unit 6 and 7 do not apply to this unit. The Bubbling Ponds and Page Springs fish contains lowland leopard frogs and physical or biological features in this hatcheries; Arizona State Parks at native fish appear to be largely absent, unit may require special management Deadhorse Ranch and Verde River although longfin dace have been consideration due to loss of perennial Greenway State Natural Area; Arizona detected in the Santa Maria River flow, as well as competition with, and State Trust; Yavapai-Apache Nation; Subunit. As a whole, this unit contains predation by, nonnative species that are and private entities. Crayfish, bullfrogs, PBFs 1, 2, 3, and 5, but PBF 4 is in present in this unit. No areas within this and nonnative, spiny-rayed fish are degraded condition. PBFs 6 and 7 do present in some of this unit. Proposed not apply to this unit. Crayfish and unit are considered for exclusion. groundwater pumping of the Big Chino several species of nonnative, spiny- Cienega Creek Subbasin Unit Aquifer may adversely affect future base rayed fish maintain populations in flow in the Verde River. Development reaches of the three rivers included in The Cienega Creek Subbasin Unit is along the Verde River has eliminated the Bill Williams River Subbasin Unit. generally located in southern Arizona habitat along portions of the Verde River The physical or biological features in southeast of the city of Tucson and town through the Verde Valley. As a whole, this unit may require special of Vail, north of the town of Sonoita, this unit contains PBFs 1, 2, 3, and 5, management consideration due to west of the Rincon Mountains, and east but PBF 4 is in degraded condition. The competition with, and predation by, of the Santa Rita Mountains in Pima physical or biological features in this nonnative species that are present in County. This unit consists of 2,030 ac unit may require special management this unit and flood-control projects. (821 ha) along 46 stream mi (73 km) in consideration due to competition with, Lands within the AGFD's Planet four subunits: 30 stream mi (48 km) of and predation by, nonnative species that Ranch Conservation and Wildlife Area Cienega Creek; 7 stream mi (11 km) of are present in this unit; water property in the Bill Williams River Empire Gulch, including Empire diversions; existing and proposed Subunit are being considered for Wildlife Pond; 2 stream mi (3 km) of an groundwater pumping potentially exclusion from the final rule for critical unnamed drainage to Gaucho Pond, resulting in drying of habitat; potential habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. including Gaucho Pond; and 7 stream for high-intensity wildfires; and human A total of 329 ac (133 ha), or 8 percent, mi (11 km) of Gardner Canyon, development of areas adjacent to of this unit are being considered for including Maternity Wildlife Pond. The proposed critical habitat. exclusion (see Application of Section unnamed drainage to Gaucho Pond is an Lands in the Verde River Subunit 4(b)(2) of the Act, below). ephemeral channel that may serve as a include The Nature Conservancy's movement corridor for northern Verde Springs Preserve, Verde Valley Lower Colorado River Unit Mexican gartersnakes. The Cienega property, Yavapai-Apache Nation, and The Colorado River Unit is generally Creek Subbasin Unit occurs on lands Salt River Project's Camp Verde located in western Arizona in Mojave managed by BLM on Las Cienegas Riparian Preserve. Lands owned by the County. This unit consist of 4,467 ac National Conservation Area (NCA), Yavapai-Apache Nation, and lands (1,808 ha) within the floodplain of the Arizona State Land Department, Pima within Salt River Project's Camp Verde Colorado River but does not include the County on Cienega Creek Preserve, and Riparian Preserve are being considered main channelized portion of the river. private landowners. Recent, ongoing for exclusion from the final rule for This unit falls completely within the bullfrog eradication on and around Las critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of Service's Havasu National Wildlife Cienegas NCA has reduced the threat of the Act. Lands in Oak Creek Subunit Refuge. Several species of nonnative, bullfrogs in much of this unit. As a include Arizona Game and Fish spiny-rayed fish maintain robust whole, this unit contains PBFs 1, 2, 3, Department's (AGFD) Bubbling Ponds populations in this unit. In general, this 5, 6, and 7, but PBF 4 is in degraded and Page Springs fish hatcheries, which unit contains PBFs 1, 2, and 5, but PBFs condition. Special management may be are also being considered for exclusion 3 and 4 are in degraded condition. PBFs required to maintain or develop the from the final rule for critical habitat. A 6 and 7 do not apply to this unit. The physical or biological features, total of 460 ac (186 ha), or 9 percent, of physical or biological features in this including continuing to promote the this unit are being considered for unit may require special management recovery or expansion of native leopard exclusion (see Application of Section consideration due to competition with, frogs and fish, continuing bullfrog 4(b)(2) of the Act, below). and predation by, nonnative species that management, and eliminating or Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23629 reducing other predatory nonnative biological features, including continuing San Pedro River and Babocomari species. to promote the recovery or expansion of subunits and are an ongoing threat to Lands within Pima County's Cienega native leopard frogs and fish, and northern Mexican gartersnakes. As a Creek Natural Preserve in the Cienega eliminating or reducing predatory whole, this unit contains PBFs 1, 2, 5, Creek Subunit are being considered for nonnative species. 6, and 7, but PBFs 3 and 4 are in exclusion from the final rule for critical Lands within the San Rafael Cattle degraded condition. The physical or habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Company's San Rafael Ranch in the biological features in Upper San Pedro A total of 543 ac (220 ha), or 27 percent, Santa Cruz River Subunit, Unnamed River Subbasin Unit may require special of this unit are being considered for Drainage and Pasture 9 Tank Subunit, management consideration due to exclusion (see Application of Section and Unnamed Drainage and Sheehy competition with, and predation by, 4(b)(2) of the Act, below). However, Spring Subunit are being considered for predatory nonnative species that are Pima County has requested that these exclusion from the final rule for critical present in this unit. lands not be excluded from the final habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Lands owned by The Nature rule. Lands within The Nature Conservancy's Conservancy at Canelo Hills Preserve Patagonia-Sonoita Creek Preserve in the and lands owned by the National Upper Santa Cruz River Subbasin Unit Sonoita Creek Subunit, as well as the Audubon Society at Appleton-Whittell The Santa Cruz River Subbasin Unit Unnamed Wildlife Pond Subunit, which Research Ranch in the O'Donnell is generally located in southern Arizona, are both on private lands, are also being Canyon Subunit are being considered south of the town of Sonoita and within considered for exclusion. A total of 238 for exclusion from the final rule for the town of Patagonia, southeast of the ac (96 ha), or 48 percent, of this unit are critical habitat. In addition, Fort Santa Rita Mountains, and west of the being considered for exclusion (see Huachuca has requested the Service to Patagonia Mountains in Santa Cruz and Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, consider for exclusion based on national Cochise Counties. This unit consists of below). security lands managed by BLM, 496 ac (201 ha) along 23 stream mi (36 Arizona State Land Department, and Upper San Pedro River Subbasin Unit kin) in eight subunits: FS 799 Tank; an private entities within the San Pedro unnamed wildlife pond; 3 stream mi (5 The Upper San Pedro River Subbasin River and Babocomari River subunits. A kin) of Sonoita Creek; 4 stream mi (7 Unit is generally located in southeastern total of 5,320 ac (2,152 ha), or 91 kin) of Scotia Canyon; 2 stream mi (3 Arizona, east and west of Sierra Vista percent, of this unit are being kin) of Cott Tank Drainage; 7 stream mi and south of the town of Elgin, in considered for exclusion (see (11 kin) of Santa Cruz River; 5 stream mi Cochise and Santa Cruz Counties. This Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, (7 kin) of an unnamed drainage to unit consists of 5,850 ac (2,367 ha) in below). Pasture 9 Tank, including Pasture 9 six subunits along 35 stream mi (57 kin): Tank; and 2 stream mi (3 kin) of an 22 stream mi (35 kin) of the San Pedro Narrow-Headed Gartersnake unnamed drainage to Sheehy Spring, River; 6 stream mi (10 kin) of the We are proposing 461 stream mi (742 including Sheehy Spring. The latter two Babocomari River; 4 stream mi (7 kin) in kin) within a 89-ft (27-m) lateral extent unnamed drainages are ephemeral O'Donnell Canyon; 3 stream mi (5 kin) of the active stream channel, totaling channels that may serve as movement in Post Canyon; 0.5 stream mi (0.7 kin) 18,701 ac (7,568 ha) comprising 8 units corridors for northern Mexican in an ephemeral drainage to Finley as critical habitat for the narrow-headed gartersnakes. The Upper Santa Cruz Tank, including Finley Tank; and House gartersnake in Greenlee, Graham, River Subbasin Unit occurs on lands Pond. The Upper San Pedro River Apache, Yavapai, Gila, and Coconino managed by Coronado National Forest, Subbasin Unit occurs primarily on lands Counties in Arizona, as well as in Grant, Arizona State Parks at San Rafael State managed by BLM on the San Pedro Hidalgo, and Catron Counties in New Natural Area, Arizona State Land River Riparian and Las Cienegas NCAs, Mexico. Land ownership within Department, and private landowners and also includes lands managed by the proposed critical habitat for the narrow- (including The Nature Conservancy at U.S. Forest Service on Coronado headed gartersnake is broken down as Patagonia-Sonoita Creek Preserve and National Forest, Arizona State Land follows: Federal (66 percent), State San Rafael Cattle Company at San Rafael Department, and private entities. The (Arizona and New Mexico) (2 percent), Ranch). Native fish, bullfrogs, Sonoran unit includes portions of the Canelo Tribal (3 percent), and private (29 tiger salamanders, and Chiricahua Hills Preserve owned by The Nature percent) (see table 2b, below). The leopard frogs provide prey for northern Conservancy and portions of the critical habitat areas we describe below Mexican gartersnakes in the Santa Cruz Appleton-Whittell Research Ranch constitute our current best assessment of River Subbasin Unit. Bullfrogs and managed by several private and Federal areas that meet the definition of critical nonnative spiny-ray fish remain an landowners. Native fish and leopard habitat for narrow-headed gartersnake. issue in this unit. As a whole, this unit frogs occur in House Pond and We consider all units occupied at the contains PBFs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, but O'Donnell Canyon subunits and provide time of listing, and all units contain PBF 4 is in degraded condition. Special a prey base for northern Mexican essential PBFs that may require special management may be required to gartersnakes. Crayfish, bullfrogs, and management considerations or maintain or develop the physical or nonnative, spiny-rayed fish occur in the protection.

TABLE 2b-LAND OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS [Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries. County-owned lands are considered as private lands.]

Land ownership by type Unit Subunit acres (hectares) Size of unit Federal State Tribal Private

1. Upper Gila River Gila River ...... 1,123 (455) 2,267 (917) 3,510 (1,420) Subbasin. 119 (48) ...... 23630 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

TABLE 2b-LAND OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS- Continued [Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries. County-owned lands are considered as private lands.]

Land ownership by type Unit Subunit acres (hectares) Size of unit Federal State Tribal Private

West Fork Gila River ...... 358 (145) 154 (62) ...... 51 (20) 562 (228) Little Creek ...... 157 (64) 5 (2) ...... 162 (65) Middle Fork Gila River ...... 569 (230) ...... 569 (230) Iro n C ree k ...... 58 (23) ...... 58 (23) Gilita Creek ...... 149 (60) ...... 149 (60) Black Canyon ...... 245 (99) ...... 6 (2) 251 (102) Diamond Creek ...... 169 (68) ...... 169 (68)

Unit Total ...... 2,827 (1,144) 278 (113) ...... 2,323 (940) 5,429 (2,197) 2. San Francisco River San Francisco River ...... 1,679 (680) ...... 1,441 (583) 3,121 (1,263) Subbasin. Whitewater Creek ...... 112 (45) ...... 96 (39) 208 (84) Saliz Creek ...... 182 (74) ...... 36 (15) 218 (88) Tularosa River ...... 338 (137) ...... 492 (199) 829 (336) Negrito Creek ...... 272 (110) ...... 65 (26) 337 (136) South Fork Negrito Creek .. 171 (69) ...... 21 (9) 192 (78)

Unit Total ...... 2,753 (1,114) ...... 2,152 (871) 4,905 (1,985) 3. Blue River Subbasin ...... B lue R ive r ...... 2,105 (852) ...... 399 (162) 2,504 (1,013) Campbell Blue Creek ...... 300 (121) ...... 61 (25) 361 (146) Dry Blue Creek ...... 10 6 (4 3 ) ...... 10 6 (4 3 )

Unit Total ...... 2,510 (1,016) ...... 460 (186) 2,971 (1,202) 4. Eagle Creek ...... 99 (40) ...... 236 (96) 1 (<1) 336 (136)

Unit Total ...... 99 (40) ...... 236 (96) 1 (<1) 336 (136) 5. Black River Subbasin ..... B lack R ive r ...... 653 (264) ...... 111 (45) ...... 763 (309) Bear Wallow Creek ...... 127 (51) ...... 47 (19) ...... 174 (71) North Fork Bear Wallow 6 1 (2 5 ) ...... 6 1 (2 5 ) Creek. Reservation Creek ...... 96 (39) ...... 36 (14) ...... 132 (54) Fish C reek ...... 10 7 (4 3 ) ...... 10 7 (4 3 ) East Fork Black River ...... 370 (150) ...... 370 (150)

Unit Total ...... 1,414 (572) ...... 194 (78) ...... 1,607 (650) 6. Canyon Creek ...... 155 (63) ...... 77 (31) ...... 232 (94)

Unit Total ...... 155 (63) ...... 77 (31) ...... 232 (94) 7. Tonto Creek Subbasin .... Tonto Creek ...... 1,003 (406) ...... 75 (30) 1,078 (436) Houston Creek ...... 16 (6) ...... 2 (1) 18 (7) Haigler Creek ...... 266 (108) ...... 28 (11) 294 (119)

Unit Total ...... 1,285 (520) ...... 105 (43) 1,390 (562) 8. Verde River Subbasin ..... Verde River ...... 823 (333) ...... 101 (41) 923 (374) Oak Creek ...... 360 (146) 51 (21) ...... 337 (136) 748 (303) West Fork Oak Creek ...... 16 1 (6 5 ) ...... 16 1 (6 5 )

Unit Total ...... 1,343 (544) 51 (21) ...... 437 (177) 1,832 (741)

T o ta l ...... 12,386 (5,013) 329 (133) 507 (205) 5,479 (2,217) 18,701 (7,568) Tote:Areal...... Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

We present brief descriptions of all subunits along 104 stream mi (167 km): the Gila National Forest; BLM within units, and reasons why they meet the 46 stream mi (74 km) of the Gila River, the Lower Box and Middle Gila Box definition of critical habitat for narrow- 12 stream mi (19 kin) of West Fork Gila ACECs and Gila Lower Box Wilderness headed gartersnake, below. River, 14 stream mi (23 kin) of Middle Study Area; NPS on Gila Cliff Dwellings Fork Gila River, 10 stream mi (16 kin) Gila River Subbasin Unit National Monument; New Mexico of Black Canyon, 6 stream mi (10 kin) Department of Game and Fish on Heart The Gila River Subbasin Unit is of Diamond Creek, 6 stream mi (10 kin) Bar Wildlife Area, Redrock State generally located in southwestern New of Gilita Creek, 2 stream mi (3 kin) of Wildlife Experimental Area, and Gila Mexico, east of Glenwood, and west and Iron Creek, and 7 stream mi (11 kin) of Bird Area; State Trust lands; and private north of Silver City in Grant and Little Creek. The Gila River Subbasin ownership, including lands owned by Hidalgo Counties, New Mexico. This Unit consists of lands primarily Freeport McMoRan Corporation. unit consists of 5,429 ac (2,197 ha) in 8 managed by the U.S. Forest Service on Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23631

Some reaches of the Gila River have subunits along 129 stream mi (207 km): nonnative fish are present. Native fish been adversely affected by 71 stream mi (115 km) of San Francisco restoration is actively occurring in the channelization and water diversions. In River, 9 stream mi (14 km) of Blue River, including construction of a November 2014, the New Mexico Whitewater Creek, 8 stream mi (13 km) fish barrier, mechanical removal of Interstate Stream Commission provided of Saliz Creek, 20 stream mi (32 km) of nonnative fish, and repatriation and notice to the Secretary of the Interior Tularosa River, 13 stream mi (21 km) of monitoring of federally listed warm- that the State of New Mexico intends to Negrito Creek, and 8 stream mi (13 km) water fishes (Robinson and Crowder construct the New Mexico Unit of the of South Fork Negrito Creek. The San 2015, p. 24; Robinson and Love-Chezem Central Arizona Project as authorized by Francisco River Subbasin Unit consists 2015, entire). Wildfires have burned at the Colorado River Basin Project Act of of lands managed primarily by the U.S. both moderate and high severity within 1968 (Central Arizona Project 2015, p. Forest Service on Gila National Forest the unit and likely resulted in 5-6). The New Mexico Unit of the and private landowners. significant flooding with excessive ash Central Arizona Project will divert up to Water diversions have dewatered and sediment loads. These sediment 14,000 ac-ft per year from the upper Gila sections of the San Francisco River and ash-laden floods can reduce River and its tributaries for consumptive Subunit in the upper Alma Valley and populations of both nonnative predatory use in New Mexico. However, the at Pleasanton, New Mexico. The San species and native prey species for Secretary of the Interior denied an Francisco River Subunit also has narrow-headed gartersnakes in affected extension to divert additional funding, historically maintained populations of streams for many years. The Blue River and no record of decision for a project bullfrogs, crayfish, and nonnative, and Dry Blue Creek subunits have PBFs design was issued by a December 31, spiny-rayed fish at various densities 1, 2, 3, and 5, but PFB 4 is in degraded 2019, deadline. Therefore, the future of along its course. Wildfires have burned condition. Campbell Blue Creek Subunit the project is unknown. Historically, the at both moderate and high severity has PBFS 1, 2, 4, and 5, but PBF 3 may West and Middle Forks Gila River within the unit and likely resulted in be in degraded condition. The physical maintained large populations of significant flooding with excessive ash or biological features in this unit may bullfrogs and nonnative, spiny-rayed and sediment loads. These sediment require special management fish. Wildfires have burned at both and ash-laden floods can reduce consideration to maintain or develop moderate and high severity within the populations of both nonnative predatory physical or biological features, unit and likely resulted in significant species and native prey species for including preventing reinvasion of flooding with excessive ash and narrow-headed gartersnakes in affected nonnative species, and continuing to sediment loads. These sediment and streams for many years. San Francisco reestablish native prey species. No areas ash-laden floods can reduce populations River Subunit has PBFs 1, 2, and 5, but within this unit are considered for of both nonnative predatory species and PBFs 3 and 4 are in degraded condition. exclusion. native prey species for narrow-headed Whitewater Creek Subunit has PBFs 1, Eagle Creek Unit gartersnakes in affected streams for 2, 4, and 5, but PBF 3 is in degraded many years. The Gila River, West Fork condition. Tularosa River, Saliz Creek, The Eagle Creek Unit is generally Gila River, Little Creek, Iron Creek, Negrito Creek, and subunits have PBFs located in eastern Arizona near Morenci Black Canyon, and Diamond Creek 1, 2, 3, and 5, but PBF 4 is in degraded and includes portions of Graham and subunits have PBFs 1, 2, 3, and 5, but condition. South Fork Negrito Creek Greenlee Counties. This unit consists of PBF 4 is in degraded condition. The Subunit has adequate PBFs. The a total of 336 ac (136 ha) along 7 stream Middle Fork Gila River Subunit has PBF physical or biological features in this mi (11 km) of Eagle Creek. The majority 1, 2, 4, and 5 but PBF 3 is in degraded unit may require special management of lands within this unit are managed by condition. The physical or biological consideration due to competition with, the San Carlos Apache Tribe and the features in this unit may require special and predation by, nonnative species that U.S. Forest Service on the Gila National management consideration due to are present in this unit; water diversions Forest. This unit has PBFs 1, 2, 3, and competition with, and predation by, that reduce base flow; potential for high- 5, but PBF 4 is deficient. Special nonnative species that are present in intensity wildfires; and human management in this unit may be this unit; water diversions; recreation and development of areas required to maintain or develop the channelization; potential for high- adjacent to proposed critical habitat. No physical or biological features, intensity wildfires; and human areas within this unit are considered for including the elimination or reduction development of areas adjacent to exclusion. of crayfish and nonnative, spiny-rayed proposed critical habitat. Blue River Subbasin Unit fish, as well as maintenance of adequate Lands owned by Freeport McMoRan base flow in Eagle Creek. Corporation along the Gila River in the The Blue River Subbasin Unit is Lands owned by the San Carlos Gila River Subunit are being considered generally located near the east central Apache Tribe in the Eagle Creek Unit for exclusion from the final rule for border of Arizona northeast of Clifton in are being considered for exclusion from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of Greenlee County, and just into west- the final rule for critical habitat under the Act. A total of 563 ac (228 ha), or central New Mexico in Catron County. section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A total of 236 10 percent, of this unit are being This unit consists of a total of 2,971 ac ac (96 ha), or 70 percent, of this unit are considered for exclusion (see (1,202 ha) along 64 stream mi (103 km): being considered for exclusion (see Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, 52 stream mi (84 km) of Blue River, 7 Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, below). stream mi (11 km) of Campbell Blue below). Creek, and 4 stream mi (6 km) of Dry San Francisco River Subbasin Unit Blue Creek. Blue River Subbasin Unit Black River Subbasin Unit The San Francisco River Subbasin consists of lands managed primarily by The Black River Subbasin Unit is Unit is generally located in the U.S. Forest Service on Gila and generally located along the Mogollon southwestern New Mexico near the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests, and Rim in east-central Arizona, east of towns of Glenwood and Reserve, and private landowners. The fish Maverick and west of Hannigan east of Luna, in Catron County. This community of the Blue River is highly Meadow, and includes portions of unit consists of 4,905 ac (1,985 ha) in 6 diverse and largely native, but Apache, Graham, and Greenlee 23632 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Counties. This unit consists of a total of Lands owned by the White Mountain private entities. Proposed groundwater 1,607 ac (650 ha) in 6 subunits along 51 Apache Tribe in the Canyon Creek Unit pumping of the Big Chino Aquifer may stream mi (82 kin): 23 stream mi (37 kin) are being considered for exclusion from adversely affect future base flow in the of Black River, 6 stream mi (10 kin) of the final rule for critical habitat under Verde River. In general, the physical or Bear Wallow Creek, 2 stream mi (3 kin) section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A total of 77 biological features in this unit are of North Fork Bear Wallow Creek, 5 ac (31 ha), or 33 percent, of this unit are sufficient, but may require special stream mi (8 kin) of Reservation Creek, being considered for exclusion (see management consideration due to 4 stream mi (6 kin) of Fish Creek, and Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, competition with, and predation by, 12 stream mi (19 kin) of East Fork Black below). nonnative species that are present; River. The majority of lands within this Tonto Creek Subbasin Unit water diversions; groundwater pumping unit are managed by the U.S. Forest potentially resulting in drying of Service on Apache-Sitgreaves National The Tonto Creek Subbasin Unit is habitat; potential for high-intensity Forest, with additional lands managed generally located southeast of Payson, wildfires; and human development of by the White Mountain Apache and San Arizona, and northeast of the Phoenix areas adjacent to proposed critical Carlos Apache Tribes. metropolitan area, in Gila County. This habitat. No areas within this unit are Water in the Black River Subbasin is unit consists of a total of 1,390 ac (562 considered for exclusion. diverted for use at the Morenci Mine, ha) in 3 subunits along 41 stream mi (66 kin): 28 Effects of Critical Habitat Designation which may affect base flow. Wildfires stream mi (45 kin) of Tonto have burned at both moderate and high Creek, 1 stream mi (2 kin) of Houston Section 7 Consultation severity within the unit and likely Creek, and 12 stream mi (19 kin) of Haigler Creek. Land ownership or land Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires resulted in significant flooding with management within this unit consists of Federal agencies, including the Service, excessive ash and sediment loads. These lands managed by the U.S. Forest to ensure that any action they fund, sediment and ash-laden floods can Service on Tonto National Forest in the authorize, or carry out is not likely to reduce populations of both nonnative Hellsgate Wilderness and privately jeopardize the continued existence of predatory species and native prey owned lands. any endangered species or threatened species for narrow-headed gartersnakes Some reaches along Tonto Creek species or result in the destruction or in affected streams for many years. In experience seasonal drying as a result of adverse modification of designated general, this unit has PBFs 1, 2, 3, and regional groundwater pumping, while critical habitat of such species. In 5, but PBF 4 is in degraded condition. others are or may be affected by addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act The physical or biological features in diversions or existing or planned flood requires Federal agencies to confer with this unit may require special control projects. Development along the Service on any agency action which management consideration due to private reaches of Tonto Creek may also is likely to jeopardize the continued competition with, and predation by, affect terrestrial characteristics of existence of any species proposed to be nonnative species that are present in narrow-headed gartersnake habitat. listed under the Act or result in the this unit; water diversions; potential for Mercury has been detected in fish destruction or adverse modification of high-intensity wildfires; and human samples within Tonto Creek, and further proposed critical habitat. development of areas adjacent to research is necessary to determine if We published a final rule with a proposed critical habitat. mercury is bioaccumulating in the revised definition of destruction or Lands owned by the White Mountain resident food chain. In general, this unit adverse modification on August 27, Apache and San Carlos Apache Tribes has PBFs 1, 2, 3, and 5, but PBF 4 is in 2019 (84 FR 44976). Destruction or along the Black River, Bear Wallow degraded condition. The physical or adverse modification means a direct or Creek, and Reservation Creek of the biological features in this unit may indirect alteration that appreciably Black River Subbasin Unit are being require special management diminishes the value of critical habitat considered for exclusion from the final consideration due to competition with, as a whole for the conservation of a rule for critical habitat under section and predation by, nonnative species that listed species. 4(b)(2) of the Act. A total of 195 ac (79 are present in this unit; water If a Federal action may affect a listed ha), or 12 percent, of this unit are being diversions; flood-control projects; species or its critical habitat, the considered for exclusion (see potential for high-intensity wildfires; responsible Federal agency (action Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and development of areas adjacent to or agency) must enter into consultation below). within proposed critical habitat. No with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the section 7 consultation Canyon Creek Unit areas within this unit are considered for exclusion. process are actions on State, tribal, The Canyon Creek Unit is generally local, or private lands that require a located along the Mogollon Rim in east- Verde River Subbasin Unit Federal permit (such as a permit from central Arizona, and falls within Gila The Verde River Subbasin Unit is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under County. This unit consists of 232 ac (94 generally located near Perkinsville and section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 ha) along 8 stream mi (13 km) of Canyon Sedona, Arizona, west of Paulden, U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Creek. The Tonto National Forest Arizona, in Coconino and Yavapai Service under section 10 of the Act) or manages the majority of lands within Counties. This unit consists of 1,832 ac that involve some other Federal action this unit; however, the White Mountain (741 ha) in 3 subunits along 58 stream (such as funding from the Federal Apache Tribe also has land within this mi (93 kin): 27 stream mi (43 kin) of Highway Administration, Federal unit. This unit contains sufficient Verde River, 24 stream mi (39 kin) of Aviation Administration, or the Federal physical or biological features, but these Oak Creek, and 7 stream mi (11 kin) of Emergency Management Agency). features may require special West Fork Oak Creek. Verde River Federal actions not affecting listed management consideration including Subbasin Unit occurs on lands managed species or critical habitat-and actions preventing invasion by nonnative by the U.S. Forest Service on Prescott on State, tribal, local, or private lands predatory species as well as the and Coconino National Forests, Arizona that are not federally funded, potential for high-intensity wildfires. State Parks at Redrock State Park, and authorized, or carried out by a Federal Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23633 agency-do not require section 7 requirement to reinitiate consultation on or one or more of their prey species consultation. specific land management plans after within the range of either gartersnake Compliance with the requirements of subsequently listing a new species or species. Such activities could include, section 7(a)(2) of the Act is documented designating new critical habitat. See the but are not limited to: Poorly managed through our issuance of: regulations for a description of those livestock grazing; road construction; (1) A concurrence letter for Federal exceptions. commercial or urban development; actions that may affect, but are not channel alteration; timber harvest; likely to adversely affect, listed species Application of the "Adverse Modification" Standard prescribed fires or wildfire suppression; or critical habitat; or off-road vehicle or recreational use; and (2) A biological opinion for Federal The key factor related to the other alterations of watersheds and actions that may affect and are likely to destruction or adverse modification floodplains. These activities could adversely affect, listed species or critical determination is whether adversely affect the potential for habitat. implementation of the proposed Federal gartersnake prey species to survive or When we issue a biological opinion action directly or indirectly alters the breed. They may also reduce the concluding that a project is likely to designated critical habitat in a way that likelihood that their prey species, jeopardize the continued existence of a appreciably diminishes the value of the leopard frogs for northern Mexican listed species and/or destroy or critical habitat as a whole for the gartersnake for example, could move adversely modify critical habitat, we conservation of the listed species. As among subpopulations in a functioning provide reasonable and prudent discussed above, the role of critical metapopulation. This would, in turn, alternatives to the project, if any are habitat is to support physical or decrease the viability of identifiable, that would avoid the biological features essential to the metapopulations and their component likelihood of jeopardy and/or conservation of a listed species and local populations of prey species. provide for the conservation of the destruction or adverse modification of (3) Actions that would alter water critical habitat. We define "reasonable species. Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us chemistry beyond the tolerance limits of and prudent alternatives" (at 50 CFR a gartersnake prey base. Such activities 402.02) as alternative actions identified to briefly evaluate and describe, in any proposed or final regulation that could include, but are not limited to: during consultation that: Release of chemicals, biological (1) Can be implemented in a manner designates critical habitat, activities pollutants, or effluents into the surface consistent with the intended purpose of involving a Federal action that may water or into connected groundwater at the action, violate 7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying (2) Can be implemented consistent or adversely modifying such habitat, or a point source or by dispersed release with the scope of the Federal agency's that may be affected by such (non-point source); aerial deposition of legal authority and jurisdiction, designation. known toxicants, such as mercury, that (3) Are economically and Activities that the Services may, are positively correlated to regional technologically feasible, and during a consultation under section exceedances of water quality standards (4) Would, in the Service Director's 7(a)(2) of the Act, find are likely to for these toxicants; livestock grazing opinion, avoid the likelihood of destroy or adversely modify critical that results in waters heavily polluted jeopardizing the continued existence of habitat include, but are not limited to: by feces; runoff from agricultural fields; the listed species and/or avoid the (1) Actions that would alter the roadside use of salts; aerial pesticide likelihood of destroying or adversely amount, timing, or frequency of flow overspray; runoff from mine tailings or modifying critical habitat. within a stream or the quantity of other mining activities; and ash flow Reasonable and prudent alternatives available water within wetland habitat and fire retardants from fires and fire can vary from slight project such that the prey base for either suppression. These actions could modifications to extensive redesign or gartersnake species, or the gartersnakes adversely affect the ability of the habitat relocation of the project. Costs themselves, are appreciably diminished to support survival and reproduction of associated with implementing a or threatened with extirpation. Such gartersnake prey species. reasonable and prudent alternative are activities could include, but are not (4) Actions that would remove, similarly variable. limited to: Water diversions; diminish, or significantly alter the Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth channelization; construction of any structural complexity of key natural requirements for Federal agencies to barriers or impediments within the structural habitat features in and reinitiate formal consultation on active river channel; removal of flows in adjacent to aquatic habitat. These previously reviewed actions. These excess of those allotted under a given features may be organic or inorganic, requirements apply when the Federal water right; construction of permanent may be natural or constructed, and agency has retained discretionary or temporary diversion structures; include (but are not limited to) boulders involvement or control over the action groundwater pumping within aquifers and boulder piles, rocks such as river (or the agency's discretionary associated with the river; or dewatering cobble, downed trees or logs, debris involvement or control is authorized by of isolated within-channel pools or jams, small mammal burrows, or leaf law) and, subsequent to the previous stock tanks. These activities could result litter. Such activities could include, but consultation, we have listed a new in the reduction of the distribution or are not limited to: Construction projects; species or designated critical habitat abundance of important gartersnake flood control projects; vegetation that may be affected by the Federal prey species, as well as reduce the management projects; or any project that action, or the action has been modified distribution and amount of suitable requires a 404 permit from the U.S. in a manner that affects the species or physical habitat on a regional landscape Army Corps of Engineers. These critical habitat in a way not considered for the gartersnakes themselves. activities could result in a reduction of in the previous consultation. In such (2) Actions that would significantly the amount or distribution of these key situations, Federal agencies sometimes increase sediment deposition or habitat features that are important for may need to request reinitiation of scouring within the stream channel or gartersnake thermoregulation, shelter, consultation with us, but the regulations pond that is habitat for the northern protection from predators, and foraging also specify some exceptions to the Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake, opportunities. 23634 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

(5) Actions and structures that would component of the narrow-headed critical habitat. We describe below the physically block movement of gartersnake prey base within occupied process that we undertook for taking gartersnakes or their prey species within habitat for a period of 7 days or longer. into consideration each category of or between regionally proximal In general, these actions typically occur impacts and our analyses of the relevant populations or suitable habitat. Such in association with fisheries impacts. actions and structures include, but are management, such as the application of Consideration of Economic Impacts not limited to: Urban, industrial, or piscicides in conjunction with fish agricultural development; reservoirs barrier construction. These activities are Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its stocked with predatory fishes, bullfrogs, designed to completely remove target implementing regulations require that or crayfish; highways that do not fish species from a treatment area and, we consider the economic impact that include reptile and amphibian fencing if the area is fishless for an extended may result from a designation of critical and culverts; and walls, dams, fences, period of time, could result in starvation habitat. To assess the probable canals, or other structures that could of a resident narrow-headed gartersnake economic impacts of a designation, we physically block movement of population. must first evaluate specific land uses or gartersnakes. These actions and activities and projects that may occur in Exemptions structures could reduce or eliminate the area of the critical habitat. We then immigration and emigration among Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act must evaluate the impacts that a specific critical habitat designation may have on gartersnake populations, or that of their Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 restricting or modifying specific land prey species, reducing the long-term U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that: uses or activities for the benefit of the viability of populations. "The Secretary shall not designate as species and its habitat within the areas (6) Actions that would directly or critical habitat any lands or other proposed. We then identify which indirectly result in the introduction, geographical areas owned or controlled conservation efforts may be the result of spread, or augmentation of predatory by the Department of Defense, or the species being listed under the Act nonnative species in gartersnake habitat, designated for its use, that are subject to versus those attributed solely to the or in habitat that is hydrologically an integrated natural resources designation of critical habitat for this connected, even if those segments are management plan [INRMP] prepared particular species. The probable occasionally intermittent, or under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 economic impact of a proposed critical introduction of other species that U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines habitat designation is analyzed by compete with or prey on either in writing that such plan provides a comparing scenarios both "with critical gartersnake species or their prey base, or benefit to the species for which critical habitat" and "without critical habitat." introduce pathogens such as habitat is proposed for designation." The "without critical habitat" scenario Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis,which There are no Department of Defense represents the baseline for the analysis, is a serious threat to the amphibian prey lands with a completed INRMP within which includes the existing regulatory base of northern Mexican gartersnakes. the proposed critical habitat and socio-economic burden imposed on Possible actions could include, but are designation. not limited to: Introducing or stocking landowners, managers, or other resource nonnative, spiny-rayed fishes, bullfrogs, Exclusions users potentially affected by the designation of critical habitat (e.g., crayfish, tiger salamanders, or other Considerationof Impacts Under Section under the Federal listing as well as predators of the prey base of northern 4(b)(2) of the Act Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes; other Federal, State, and local creating or sustaining a sport fishery Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that regulations). The baseline, therefore, that encourages use of nonnative live the Secretary shall designate and make represents the costs of all efforts fish, crayfish, tiger salamanders, or frogs revisions to critical habitat on the basis attributable to the listing of the species as bait; maintaining or operating of the best available scientific data after under the Act (i.e., conservation of the reservoirs that act as source populations taking into consideration the economic species and its habitat incurred for predatory nonnative species within impact, national security impact, and regardless of whether critical habitat is a watershed; constructing water any other relevant impact of specifying designated). The "with critical habitat" diversions, canals, or other water any particular area as critical habitat. scenario describes the incremental conveyances that move water from one The Secretary may exclude an area from impacts associated specifically with the place to another and through which critical habitat if he determines that the designation of critical habitat for the inadvertent transport of predatory benefits of such exclusion outweigh the species. The incremental conservation nonnative species into northern benefits of specifying such area as part efforts and associated impacts would Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake of the critical habitat, unless he not be expected without the designation habitat may occur; and moving water, determines, based on the best scientific of critical habitat for the species. In mud, wet equipment, or vehicles from data available, that the failure to other words, the incremental costs are one aquatic site to another, through designate such area as critical habitat those attributable solely to the which inadvertent transport of will result in the extinction of the designation of critical habitat, above and pathogens may occur. These activities species. In making the determination to beyond the baseline costs. These are the directly or indirectly cause unnatural exclude a particular area, the statute on costs we use when evaluating the competition with and predation from its face, as well as the legislative history, benefits of inclusion and exclusion of nonnative predators on these are clear that the Secretary has broad particular areas from the final gartersnake species, leading to discretion regarding which factor(s) to designation of critical habitat should we significantly reduced recruitment use and how much weight to give to any choose to conduct a discretionary within gartersnake populations and factor. 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. diminishment or extirpation of their The first sentence in section 4(b)(2) of For this particular designation, we prey base. the Act requires that we take into developed an incremental effects (7) Actions that would deliberately consideration the economic, national memorandum (IEM) considering the remove, diminish, or significantly alter security or other relevant impacts of probable incremental economic impacts the native or nonnative, soft-rayed fish designating any particular area as that may result from this proposed Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23635 designation of critical habitat. The screening analysis, we considered the considered each industry or category information contained in our IEM was types of economic activities that are individually. Additionally, we then used to develop a screening likely to occur within the areas likely considered whether their activities have analysis of the probable effects of the affected by the critical habitat any Federal involvement. Critical designation of critical habitat for the designation. In our evaluation of the habitat designation generally will not northern Mexican gartersnake and the probable incremental economic impacts affect activities that do not have any narrow-headed gartersnake (Industrial that may result from the proposed Federal involvement; under the Act, Economics 2019, entire). We began by designation of critical habitat for the designation of critical habitat only conducting a screening analysis of the northern Mexican gartersnake and the affects activities conducted, funded, proposed designation of critical habitat narrow-headed gartersnake, first we permitted, or authorized by Federal in order to focus our analysis on the key identified, in the IEM dated October 10, agencies. In areas where the northern factors that are likely to result in 2019, probable incremental economic Mexican gartersnake or the narrow- incremental economic impacts. The impacts associated with the following headed gartersnake is present, Federal purpose of the screening analysis is to categories of activities: (1) Federal lands agencies already are required to consult filter out the geographic areas in which management (National Park Service, with the Service under section 7 of the the critical habitat designation is U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Act on activities they fund, permit, or unlikely to result in probable Management, Service, Department of implement that may affect the species. incremental economic impacts. In Defense); (2) grazing (U.S. Forest If we finalize this revised proposed particular, the screening analysis Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, critical habitat designation, considers baseline costs (i.e., absent Bureau of Land Management); (3) consultations to avoid the destruction or critical habitat designation) and groundwater pumping (U.S. Forest adverse modification of critical habitat includes probable economic impacts Service, Bureau of Land Management, would be incorporated into the existing consultation process. where land and water use may be Department (4) of Defense); in-stream In our IEM, we attempted to clarify subject to conservation plans, land dams and diversions (Bureau of Land the distinction between the effects that management plans, best management Management, Bureau of Reclamation, will result from the species being listed practices, or regulations that protect the Service, Department of Defense); (5) and those attributable to the critical habitat area as a result of the Federal dredging (Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. habitat designation (i.e., difference listing status of the species. The Forest Service, Bureau of Land screening analysis filters out particular between the jeopardy and adverse Management, Natural Resources modification standards) for the northern areas of critical habitat that are already Conservation Service, National Park subject to such protections and are, Mexican gartersnake's and the narrow- Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs); (6) headed gartersnake's critical habitat. therefore, unlikely to incur incremental water supply (Bureau of Reclamation, economic impacts. Ultimately, the The following specific circumstances Army Corps of Engineers, Service, help to inform our evaluation: (1) The screening analysis allows us to focus Bureau of Indian Affairs); (7) our analysis on evaluating the specific essential physical or biological features conservation and restoration (Natural identified for critical habitat are the areas or sectors that may incur probable Resources Conservation Service, incremental economic impacts as a same features essential for the life Service, U.S. Forest Service, Department requisites of the species, and (2) any result of the designation. The screening of Defense, Bureau of Land analysis also assesses whether units are actions that would result in sufficient Management, National Park Service); (8) harm or harassment to constitute unoccupied by the species and may mining (U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of jeopardy to the northern Mexican require additional management or Land Management); (9) fire management conservation efforts as a result of the gartersnake and the narrow-headed (National Park Service, U.S. Forest gartersnake would also likely adversely critical habitat designation for the Service, Bureau of Land Management, affect the essential physical or biological species which may incur incremental Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of features of critical habitat. The IEM economic impacts. This screening Defense); (10) vegetation and forest outlines our rationale concerning this analysis, combined with the information management (National Park Service, limited distinction between baseline contained in our IEM, are what we U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land conservation efforts and incremental consider our draft economic analysis Management); (11) transportation, impacts of the designation of critical (DEA) of the proposed critical habitat including road and bridge construction habitat for this species. This evaluation designation for the northern Mexican and maintenance (Department of of the incremental effects has been used gartersnake and the narrow-headed Transportation, Department of Defense, as the basis to evaluate the probable gartersnake. The DEA is summarized in Bureau of Land Management, National incremental economic impacts of this the narrative below. Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, proposed designation of critical habitat. Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and Customs and Border Protection, Bureau The proposed critical habitat 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess of Indian Affairs, Army Corps of designation for the northern Mexican the costs and benefits of available Engineers); (12) recreation, including, gartersnake 27,784 ac (11,244 ha) regulatory alternatives in quantitative but not limited to, sport fishing, sport- comprising 9 units. Land ownership (to the extent feasible) and qualitative fish stocking, and off-highway vehicle within proposed critical habitat for the terms. Consistent with the E.O. use (National Park Service, U.S. Forest northern Mexican gartersnake in acres is regulatory analysis requirements, our Service, Bureau of Land Management); broken down as follows: Federal (62 effects analysis under the Act may take (13) border protection and national percent), State (Arizona and New into consideration impacts to both security (U.S. Customs and Border Mexico) (5 percent), Tribal (0.3 percent), directly and indirectly affected entities, Protection, Department of Defense); (14) and private (32 percent) (see table 2a, where practicable and reasonable. If renewable energy (Bureau of Indian above). All units are considered sufficient data are available, we assess Affairs, Department of Transportation, occupied. to the extent practicable the probable Bureau of Land Management); and (15) The proposed critical habitat impacts to both directly and indirectly commercial or residential development designation for the narrow-headed affected entities. As part of our (Army Corps of Engineers). We gartersnake 18,701 ac (7,568 ha) 23636 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules comprising 8 units. Land ownership single year and, therefore, would not be period, and as such areas may be within proposed critical habitat for the significant. excluded from the final critical habitat narrow-headed gartersnake in acres is To predict which units of proposed designation under section 4(b)(2) of the broken down as follows: Federal (66 critical habitat are likely to experience Act and our implementing regulations at percent), State (Arizona and New the highest estimated incremental costs, 50 CFR 424.19. Mexico) we consider both the geographic (2 percent), Tribal (3 percent), Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts and private (29 percent) (see table 2b, distribution of historical formal above). All units are considered consultations as well as the geographic The first sentence of section 4(b)(2) of occupied. distribution of land area. The units with the Act requires the Service to consider In these areas, any actions that may the most historical formal consultations the economic impacts (as well as the affect the species would also affect as well as the most acres of proposed impacts on national security and any designated critical habitat because the critical habitat-and therefore the other relevant impacts) of designating species is so dependent on habitat to highest probability of intersecting with critical habitat. In addition, economic fulfill its life-history functions. projects or activities with a Federal impacts may, for some particular areas, Therefore, any conservation measures to nexus that require consultation-are play an important role in the address impacts to the species would be most likely to result in the highest discretionary 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis the same as those to address impacts to incremental costs. Based on these under the second sentence of section critical habitat. Consequently, it is criteria, Units 3 and 9 for the northern 4(b)(2). In both contexts, the Service unlikely that any additional Mexican gartersnake are likely to result will consider the probable incremental economic impacts of the designation. conservation efforts would be in the highest costs, with 30 percent and When the Service undertakes a recommended to address the adverse 15 percent of the 5.4 annual formal discretionary 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis modification standard over and above consultations occurring respectively in with respect to a particular area, we will those recommended as necessary to these units (Industrial Economics 2019, weigh the economic benefits of avoid jeopardizing the continued p. 16). In Unit 3, this would result in a exclusion (and any other benefits of existence of the both gartersnakes. cost of approximately $15,500; of this, exclusion) against any benefits of Further, every unit of proposed critical the third-party cost is estimated to be less than 20 percent, or approximately inclusion (primarily the conservation habitat overlaps with the ranges of a $3,100. In Unit 9, this would result in value of designating the area). The number of currently listed species and conservation value may be influenced designated critical habitats. Therefore, a cost of approximately $7,700; of this, the third-party cost is estimated to be by the level of effort needed to manage the actual number of section 7 less than 20 percent, or approximately degraded habitat to the point where it consultations is not expected to increase $1,500. could support the listed species. The at all. The consultation would simply For the narrow-headed gartersnake, Service will use its discretion in have to consider an additional species Units 1 and 2 are likely to result in the determining how to weigh probable or critical habitat unit. While this highest costs, with 6 percent and 11 incremental economic impacts against additional analysis will require time percent of the 5.4 annual formal conservation value. The nature of the and resources by the Federal action consultations occurring respectively in probable incremental economic impacts agency, the Service, and third parties, these units (Industrial Economics 2019, and not necessarily a particular the probable incremental economic p. 17). In Unit 1, this would result in a threshold level triggers considerations impacts of the critical habitat cost of approximately $3,100; of this, of exclusions based on probable designation are expected to be limited to the third-party cost is estimated to be incremental economic impacts. For additional administrative costs and less than 20 percent, or approximately example, if an economic analysis would not be significant (Industrial $600. In Unit 2, this would result in a indicates high probable incremental Economics 2019, entire). This is due to cost of approximately $5,700; of this, impacts of designating a particular all units being occupied by either the the third-party cost is estimated to be critical habitat unit of low conservation northern Mexican gartersnake or the less than 20 percent, or approximately value (relative to the remainder of the narrow-headed gartersnake. $1,100. Therefore, impacts that are designation), the Services may consider Based on consultation history for the concentrated in any geographic area or exclusion of that particular unit. gartersnakes, the number of future sector would not be likely because of ConsiderationsBased on National consultations, including technical this critical habitat designation. assistances, is likely to be no more than As we stated earlier, we are soliciting Security Impacts 21 per year. The additional data and comments from the public on Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act may administrative cost of addressing the draft economic analysis, as well as not cover all Department of Defense adverse modification in these all aspects of this revised proposed rule (DoD) lands or areas that pose potential consultations is likely to be less than and our required determinations. We national-security concerns (e.g., a DoD $61,000 in a given year, including costs may revise the proposed rule or installation that is in the process of to the Service, the Federal action supporting documents to incorporate or revising its INRMP for a newly listed agency, and third parties (Industrial address information we receive during species or a species previously not Economics 2019 p. 14), with the public comment period. In covered). If a particular area is not approximately $28,000 for formal particular, we may exclude an area from covered under section 4(a)(3)(B)(i), consultations, $32,000 for informal critical habitat if we determine that the national-security or homeland-security consultations, and $1,100 for technical benefits of excluding the area outweigh concerns are not a factor in the process assistances. This is based on an the benefits of including the area, of determining what areas meet the individual technical assistance costing provided the exclusion will not result in definition of "critical habitat." $410, informal consultation costing the extinction of this species. Nevertheless, when designating critical $2,500, and formal consultation costing During the development of a final habitat under section 4(b)(2), the Service $9,600. Therefore, the incremental costs designation, we will consider any must consider impacts on national associated with critical habitat are additional economic impact information security, including homeland security, unlikely to exceed $100 million in any we receive through the public comment on lands or areas not covered by section Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23637

4(a)(3)(B)(i). Accordingly, we will mandated the installation of additional recovery of the listed species; and any always consider for exclusion from the fencing, barriers, roads, lighting, benefits that may result from a designation areas for which DoD, cameras, and sensors on the southwest designation due to State or Federal laws Department of Homeland Security border. Finally, in section 102(c) of that may apply to critical habitat. (DHS), or another Federal agency has IIRIRA, Congress granted to the When considering the benefits of requested exclusion based on an Secretary of Homeland Security the exclusion, we consider, among other assertion of national-security or authority to waive all legal requirements things, whether exclusion of a specific homeland-security concerns. that he determines are necessary to area is likely to result in conservation, We cannot automatically exclude ensure the expeditious construction of or in the continuation, strengthening, or requested areas. When DoD, DHS, or barriers and roads authorized by section encouragement of partnerships. another Federal agency requests 102 of IIRIRA. On May 15, 2019, the In the case of northern Mexican and exclusion from critical habitat on the Secretary of Homeland Security issued narrow-headed gartersnakes, the basis of national-security or homeland- waivers for legal requirements covering benefits of critical habitat include security impacts, it must provide a border barrier activities directly in the public awareness of the presence of reasonably specific justification of an vicinity of the garternsnakes' known northern Mexican and narrow-headed incremental impact on national security range and proposed critical habitat (84 gartersnakes and the importance of that would result from the designation FR 21798). habitat protection, and, where a Federal of that specific area as critical habitat. nexus exists, increased habitat That justification could include Exclusions Based on National Security protection for northern Mexican and demonstration of probable impacts, Impacts narrow-headed gartersnakes due to such as impacts to ongoing border- We received comments from the U.S. protection from destruction or adverse security patrols and surveillance Army installation at Fort Huachuca modification of critical habitat. activities, or a delay in training or requesting that we exclude from the Additionally, continued facility construction, as a result of final designation of critical habitat the implementation of an ongoing compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the San Pedro River and Babocomari River management plan that provides equal to Act. If the agency requesting the subunits within the San Pedro River or more conservation than a critical exclusion does not provide us with a Subbasin Unit that fall within the San habitat designation would reduce the reasonably specific justification, we will Pedro Riparian National Conservation benefits of including that specific area contact the agency to recommend that it Area (SPRNCA) managed by the BLM, in the critical habitat designation. provide a specific justification or as well as the lands owned by the We evaluate the existence of a clarification of its concerns relative to Arizona State Land Department and conservation plan when considering the the probable incremental impact that private landowners. This includes 92 benefits of inclusion. We consider a could result from the designation. If the percent of the San Pedro River Subunit variety of factors, including, but not agency provides a reasonably specific and all of the Babocomari River limited to, whether the plan is finalized; justification, we will defer to the expert Subunit. how it provides for the conservation of judgment of DoD, DHS, or another the essential physical or biological San Pedro River Subunit and Federal agency as to: (1) Whether features; whether there is a reasonable Babocomari River Subunit activities on its lands or waters, or its expectation that the conservation activities on other lands or waters, have The area being requested for management strategies and actions national-security or homeland-security exclusion is part of the SPRNCA and is contained in a management plan will be implications; (2) the importance of those managed by the BLM and comprised of implemented into the future; whether implications; and (3) the degree to Federal, State, and private lands. The the conservation strategies in the plan which the cited implications would be Army's rationale for the exclusion was are likely to be effective; and whether adversely affected in the absence of an that any additional restrictions to the plan contains a monitoring program exclusion. In that circumstance, in ground-water pumping and water usage or adaptive management to ensure that conducting a discretionary 4(b)(2) could affect their ability to increase the conservation measures are effective exclusion analysis, we will give great staffing when needed, or carry out and can be adapted in the future in weight to national-security and missions critical to national security. response to new information. homeland-security concerns in The Army also stated that designation of After identifying the benefits of analyzing the benefits of exclusion. lands within the SPRNCA would inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, Congress has provided to the increase its regulatory burden and we carefully weigh the two sides to Secretary of Homeland Security a disrupt its operations related to national evaluate whether the benefits of number of authorities necessary to carry security. The Army pointed to its exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. out the Department's border security continued land stewardship actions and If our analysis indicates that the benefits mission. One of those authorities is its commitment to protecting natural of exclusion outweigh the benefits of found at section 102 of the Illegal resources on the base. We are inclusion, we then determine whether Immigration Reform and Immigrant considering this area for exclusion exclusion would result in extinction of Responsibility Act of 1996, as amended based on impacts to national security. the species. If exclusion of an area from ("IIRIRA"). In section 102(a) of IIRIRA, critical habitat will result in extinction, Considerationsof Other Relevant Congress provided that the Secretary of we will not exclude it from the Impacts Homeland Security shall take such designation. actions as may be necessary to install When identifying the benefits of additional physical barriers and roads inclusion for an area, we consider the Exclusions Based on Other Relevant (including the removal of obstacles to additional regulatory benefits that area Impacts detection of illegal entrants) in the would receive due to the protection Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we vicinity of the United States border to from destruction of adverse consider any other relevant impacts, in deter illegal crossings in areas of high modification as a result of actions with addition to economic impacts and illegal entry into the United States. In a Federal nexus; the educational impacts on national security. We section 102(b) of IIRIRA, Congress benefits of mapping essential habitat for consider a number of factors including 23638 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules whether there are permitted or biological features (if present) for the new gartersnake ponds as funds become conservation plans covering the species species; available (Jones 2019). The AGFD also in the area such as HCPs, safe harbor (ii) Whether there is a reasonable has an operational management plan for agreements, or candidate conservation expectation that the conservation the Planet Ranch Conservation and agreements with assurances, or whether management strategies and actions Wildlife Area that they acquired in 2015 there are non-permitted conservation contained in a management plan or (AGFD 2018, entire). This property is agreements and partnerships that would agreement will be implemented; along the Bill Williams River and within be encouraged by designation of, or (iii) The demonstrated the Bill Williams River subunit of exclusion from, critical habitat. In implementation and success of the proposed critical habitat for northern addition, we look at the existence of chosen conservation measures; Mexican gartersnake. The operational tribal conservation plans and (iv) The degree to which the record of management plan includes habitat partnerships and consider the the plan supports a conclusion that a improvements that will be implemented government-to-government relationship critical habitat designation would and funded by the Lower Colorado of the United States with tribal entities. impair the realization of benefits River Multi-Species Conservation We also consider any social impacts that expected from the plan, agreement, or Program described above that could might occur because of the designation. partnership; benefit the northern Mexican Based on the information provided by (v) The extent of public participation gartersnake (AGFD 2018, pp. 12-18). In entities seeking exclusion, as well as in the development of the conservation addition, AGFD has a fully funded any additional public comments we plan; gartersnake biologist and has drafted a receive, we will evaluate whether any (vi) The degree to which there has "Gartersnake Research and Management lands in the proposed critical habitat been agency review and required Strategy" for Arizona (Cotten et a]. areas are appropriate for exclusion from determinations (e.g., State regulatory 2014, entire). the final designation under section requirements), as necessary and 4(b)(2) of the Act. If the analysis appropriate; Freeport McMoRan Corporation (FMC) indicates that the benefits of excluding (vii) Whether National Environmental Management Plans lands from the final designation Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et The FMC currently has a management outweigh the benefits of designating seq.) compliance was required; and plan that focuses on conservation for those lands as critical habitat, then the (viii) Whether the plan or agreement listed spikedace and loach minnow on Secretary may exercise his discretion to contains a monitoring program and the middle section of the upper Gila exclude the lands from the final adaptive management to ensure that the River that confers benefits to northern designation. conservation measures are effective and Mexican and narrow-headed can be modified in the future in gartersnakes (FMC 2011, p. 7). Freeport Private or Other Non-Federal response to new information. McMoRan owns 515 ac (208 ha) of Conservation Plans or Agreements and We are considering exclusions related proposed critical habitat for northern Partnerships, in General to the following non-permitted (e.g., no Mexican gartersnake on the Gila River We sometimes exclude specific areas safe harbor agreement or habitat and Duck Creek in the Upper Gila River from critical habitat designations based conservation plan under the Act) Subbasin Unit, and 563 ac (228 ha) of in part on the existence of private or voluntary plans that afford some proposed critical habitat for narrow- other non-Federal conservation plans or protections to one or both gartersnakes headed gartersnakes on the Gila River in agreements and their attendant species: The AGFD management plans the Gila River Subbasin Unit that are partnerships. A conservation plan or for Bubbling Ponds and Page Springs included in this management plan. agreement describes actions that are State Fish Hatcheries and for Planet Here, FMC manages more than 7.2 mi designed to provide for the conservation Ranch Conservation and Wildlife Area, (11.6 km) along this section of the Gila needs of a species and its habitat, and and Freeport McMoRan Corporation River, much of which is owned by the may include actions to reduce or management plans for spikedace and Pacific Western Land Company (PWLC), mitigate negative effects on the species loach minnow. We also recognize our a subsidiary of FMC, and is included in caused by activities on or adjacent to the strong conservation partner in The the U-Bar Ranch. FMC's land and water area covered by the plan. Conservation Nature Conservancy, who manages rights in the Gila/Cliff Valley support plans or agreements can be developed exclusively for native aquatic species on operations at the Tyrone Mine in by private entities with no Service their properties but do not have addition to its agricultural operations involvement, or in partnership with the conservation management plans in along the Gila River. Under FMC's Service. place, per se. existing management system, the We evaluate a variety of factors to riparian zone adjacent to the Gila River determine how the benefits of any AGFD Management Plans has expanded in width, benefitting the exclusion and the benefits of inclusion The AGFD owns lands included in endangered southwestern willow are affected by the existence of private proposed critical habitat for northern flycatcher and other riparian species or other non-Federal conservation plans Mexican gartersnake within the Oak including the two gartersnakes. Surveys or agreements and their attendant Creek Subunit (142 ac (57 ha)) in the show that there are low levels of partnerships when we undertake a Verde River Subbasin Unit, and within nonnative fishes in the Gila/Cliff Valley discretionary 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. the Bill Williams River Subunit (329 ac segment of the Gila River stream reach A non-exhaustive list of factors that we (133 ha)) in the Bill Williams River as well. Specific conservation measures will consider for non-permitted plans or Subbasin Unit. The AGFD has in the Gila River Subbasin Unit of agreements is shown below. These implemented management actions at its critical habitat that confer protections to factors are not required elements of Bubbling Ponds and Page Springs State both gartersnakes include a voluntary plans or agreements, and all items may Fish Hatcheries that benefit northern water conservation program in which not apply to every plan or agreement. Mexican gartersnakes, including FMC has enrolled 1,450 cubic feet per (i) The degree to which the plan or research on home range and habitat use second (cfs) (2,876 ac-ft) of its annual agreement provides for the conservation of the species, maintaining fallow ponds average diversion rights through 2018, of the species or the essential physical as habitat for the species, and creating and maintenance of a minimum of 25 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23639 cfs (18,099 ac-ft per year) flow levels in designation of critical habitat if three Audubon Society for <1 acre (<2.5 ha) the Gila River during periods of drought conditions are met: of the Appleton-Whittell Research (FMC 2011, p. 10) 1. The permittee is properly Ranch. The San Rafael Cattle Company implementing the CCAA/SHA/HCP, and maintains permanent water in 44 The Nature Conservancy is expected to continue to do so for the earthen stocktanks on the San Rafael The Nature Conservancy owns three term of the agreement. A CCAA/SHA/ Ranch that also serve as habitat for properties that include 597 ac (242 ha) HCP is properly implemented if the native aquatic species. The private of proposed critical habitat for northern permittee is, and has been, fully rancher maintains permanent water in Mexican gartersnake in Arizona. These implementing the commitments and an earthen pond on his property that properties include the Verde Valley provisions in the CCAA/SHA/HCP, serves as habitat for native aquatic Preserve with 16 ac (6 ha) of proposed implementing agreement, and permit. species. Appleton-Whittell Research critical habitat for northern Mexican 2. The species for which critical Ranch is managed for the benefit of gartersnake in the Verde River subunit, habitat is being designated is a covered native species through a cooperative Canelo Hills Cienega Preserve with 1.8 species in the CCAA/SHA/HCP, or very partnership among the National ac (0.7 ha) of the O'Donnell Canyon similar in its habitat requirements to a Audubon Society, U.S. Forest Service Subunit, and the Patagonia-Sonoita covered species. The recognition that (USFS), BLM, The Nature Conservancy, Creek Preserve with 123 ac (50 ha) of the Services extend to such an Swift Current Land & Cattle Co., LLC, the Sonoita Creek Subunit. The Nature agreement depends on the degree to and the Research Ranch Foundation. Conservancy manages these properties which the conservation measures There are 116 ac (47 ha) of private for the benefit of aquatic and riparian undertaken in the CCAA/SHA/HCP lands on the San Rafael Ranch and 0.1 species, although not all of them have would also protect the habitat features ac (<0.1 ha) of private lands on the management plans. of the similar species. second private ranch included in 3. The CCAA/SHA/HCP specifically Private or Other Non-Federal proposed critical habitat for the addresses the habitat of the species for ConservationPlans Related to Permits northern Mexican gartersnake within which critical habitat is being Under Section 10 of the Act the Upper Santa Cruz River Subbasin designated and meets the conservation Unit. There are 214 ac (87 ha) of private HCPs for incidental take permits needs of the species in the planning lands within Appleton-Whittell under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act area. Research Ranch that are proposed as provide for partnerships with non- We are aware of the following plans critical habitat for northern Mexican Federal entities to minimize and related to permits under section 10 of gartersnake within the Upper San Pedro mitigate impacts to listed species and the Act that fulfill the above criteria, River Subbasin Unit. Details of subunit their habitat. In some cases, HCP and are considering the exclusion of breakdown are in table 2a, above. San permittees agree to do more for the non-Federal lands covered by these Rafael Cattle Company, the second conservation of the species and their plans that provide for the conservation private rancher, and Audubon Research habitats on private lands than of northern Mexican or narrow-headed Ranch must maintain aquatic habitats designation of critical habitat would gartersnakes from the final designation: free of nonnative predators, including provide alone. We place great value on AGFD's SHA for topminnow and desert bullfrogs and warmwater sportfish, in the partnerships that are developed pupfish in Arizona (AGFD and USFWS accordance with each certificate of during the preparation and 2007), AGFD's SHA for Chiricahua inclusion. To date, Gila topminnow implementation of HCPs. leopard frog in Arizona (AGFD and have been released into two stock tanks Candidate conservation agreements USFWS 2006), Lower Colorado River on the San Rafael Ranch, and desert with assurances (CCAAs) and safe Multi-Species HCP (Lower Colorado pupfish have been released into a harbor agreements (SHAs) are voluntary Multi-Species Conservation Program wildlife pond on the Appleton-Whittell agreements designed to conserve 2018), Pima County Multi-Species HCP Research Ranch. All of these sites also candidate and listed species, (Pima County 2016), Salt River Project provide habitat for northern Mexican respectively, on non-Federal lands. In (SRP) Roosevelt HCP (SRP 2002) and gartersnake. exchange for actions that contribute to Horseshoe-Bartlett HCP (SRP 2008), and the conservation of species on non- San Rafael Ranch Low-effect HCP AGFD's SHA for Chiricahua Leopard Federal lands, participating property (Harlow 2015). Frog in Arizona owners are covered by an "enhancement Signed in 2006, the AGFD SHA for of survival" permit under section AGFD's SHA for Topminnow and Desert Chiricahua leopard frog is an umbrella 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act, which authorizes Pupfish in Arizona document under which individual incidental take of the covered species Signed in 2007, the AGFD's SHA for landowners in the entire Arizona range that may result from implementation of topminnow and desert pupfish is an of this species on non-Federal and tribal conservation actions, specific land uses, umbrella document under which lands may participate. Chiricahua and, in the case of SHAs, the option to individual landowners in the entire leopard frogs are a primary prey species return to a baseline condition under the Arizona range of these native fish of the northern Mexican gartersnake. agreements. The Service also provides species on non-Federal and tribal lands Four private landowners within the enrollees assurances that we will not may participate. Topminnow and desert range of the northern Mexican impose further land-, water-, or pupfish are prey species of the northern gartersnake hold certificates of inclusion resource-use restrictions, or require Mexican gartersnake. Three private in this SHA: San Rafael Cattle Company, additional commitments of land, water, landowners within the range of the The Nature Conservancy, National or finances, beyond those agreed to in northern Mexican gartersnake hold Audubon Society, and an additional the agreements. certificates of inclusion in this SHA: private ranch. Under each certificate of When we undertake a discretionary San Rafael Cattle Company for the inclusion in the SHA, the four 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, we will 18,365-acre (7,482-ha) San Rafael Ranch landowners must maintain aquatic always consider areas covered by an in the San Rafael Valley, a private habitats free of nonnative predators, approved CCAA/SHA/HCP, and rancher for a <1 acre (<2.5 ha) property including bullfrogs and warmwater generally exclude such areas from a in the San Rafael Valley, and National sportfish. The San Rafael Cattle 23640 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Company holds a certificate of inclusion issued a 50-year incidental take permit restrictions, covenants, and conditions for two pastures on 2,673 ac of the San to the Bureau of Reclamation to address by the Pima County Board of Rafael Ranch in the San Rafael Valley. take of 6 species listed under the Act Supervisors in 1987 (Pima County Flood There are 5 ac (2 ha) within one of these and 21 other species from water Control District 1987, p. 1). Management pastures included in the unnamed delivery and power generation along the objectives of this preserve include drainage and Pasture 9 Tank subunit of Lower Colorado River. At this time, the preservation and protection of the proposed critical habitat for northern northern Mexican gartersnake was perennial stream flow and existing Mexican gartersnake in the Upper Santa considered extirpated from the lower riparian vegetation of Cienega Creek and Cruz River Subunit. This area is also Colorado River and is not included in its associated floodplain (Pima County covered by the San Rafael Ranch HCP, the LCR MSCP. In 2018, the Bureau of Department of Transportation and Flood which is described below. To date, Reclamation amended the LCR MSCP to Control District 1994, p. 2-1). Chiricahua leopard frogs have been address effects to the northern Mexican Protections to northern Mexican released into one stock tank on the San gartersnake, which was subsequently gartersnakes on this property exists Rafael Ranch that also provides habitat found in 2015 at Beal Lake on Havasu through chapter 30 of title 16 of the for northern Mexican gartersnakes. This National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), which Pima County Floodplain Management is in addition to the stock tank where is included in the permit area. The LCR Ordinance (Pima County Code Gila topminnows have been released on MSCP includes conservation measures Ordinance Number 2010-FC5). Chapter the ranch. to avoid and minimize direct effects of 30 of the Floodplain Management National Audubon Society holds a implementing covered activities and the Ordnance effectively minimizes habitat certificate of inclusion for 1,409 ac on LCR MSCP on the northern Mexican loss for northern Mexican gartersnake the Appleton-Whittell Research Ranch. gartersnake, and the potential effects of by protecting riparian habitat from There are 191 ac (77 ha) on this property habitat loss expected to be minimized development and requiring mitigation included in O'Donnell Canyon, Post with the creation of 1,496 ac (605 ha) of for disturbances to riparian habitat that Canyon, and Unnamed drainage & replacement habitat. Lands within the exceed one-third of an acre. Pima Finley Tank subunits of proposed Lower Colorado River Unit are covered County requested that lands within the critical habitat for northern Mexican by the LCR MSCP, but are all Federal Cienega Creek Natural Preserve remain gartersnake. To date, Chiricahua leopard lands and are not proposed for in critical habitat for the northern frogs have been released into two exclusion from critical habitat Mexican gartersnake. locations on this property that also designation. However, conservation Salt River Project Roosevelt and provide habitat for northern Mexican measures also include funding for Horseshoe-Bartlett HCPs gartersnakes. habitat improvements on Planet Ranch Another private rancher a holds a within the Bill Williams River Subunit In 2003, the Service issued an certificate of inclusion for 79 ac (32 ha) that could benefit the northern Mexican incidental take permit for the SRP on lands adjacent to the Appleton- gartersnake. Roosevelt HCP (SRP 2002) to address Whittell Research Ranch. There are 15 incidental take from operation of ac (6 ha) within this ranch included in Pima County Sonoran Desert Roosevelt Dam and Lake for four the Post Canyon Subunit of proposed Conservation Plan and Multi-Species riparian bird species, including critical habitat for the northern Mexican HCP southwestern willow flycatcher, bald gartersnake. Through its Sonoran Desert eagle, Yuma clapper rail, and western The Nature Conservancy holds a Conservation Plan (SDCP), Pima yellow-billed cuckoo. As part of its certificate of inclusion for its Ramsey County, Arizona, has been mitigation measures for these bird Canyon Preserve in Ramsey Canyon, implementing measures that benefit the species under the Roosevelt HCP, SRP which is adjacent to proposed critical northern Mexican gartersnake since has acquired and will manage in habitat for the gartersnake in the House 2001. In 2016, the Service issued a 30- perpetuity 471 ac (191 ha) of riparian Pond Subunit. Both Ramsey Canyon year incidental take permit for the Pima and adjacent upland habitat offsite Preserve and House Pond are occupied County Multi-Species Habitat along the Gila and Verde Rivers, some by a Chiricahua leopard frog Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to address of which may also confer benefits to the metapopulation that is likely prey for incidental take from residential and two gartersnakes (SRP 2002, p. 143; SRP the northern Mexican gartersnake in this non-residential development, renewable 2013, p. 17). area. Although the gartersnake has yet to energy projects, relocation of utilities, Subsequently in 2008, the Service be detected in Ramsey Canyon, it is ranch-management activities, recreation, issued another incidental take permit to currently extant in House Pond Subunit and conservation and mitigation SRP for the SRP Horseshoe-Bartlett HCP in Brown Canyon, the canyon activities. The MSHCP is part of the to address incidental take from the immediately north of Ramsey Canyon. SDCP and addresses 44 species, operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett including the northern Mexican reservoirs of listed species as well as Lower Colorado River Multi-Species gartersnake. Under the SDCP and MSCP, both gartersnakes, which were not listed HCP Pima County manages lands that fall at the time of permit issuance. The Lower Colorado River Multi- within proposed critical habitat for the Mitigation measures in the Verde River species Conservation Program (LCR northern Mexican gartersnake. There are watershed included in the Horseshoe- MSCP) is a joint effort by 6 Federal 12 mi (19 km) of Cienega Creek within Bartlett HCP designed to benefit the two agencies, 3 States, 6 Tribes, 36 cities, 543 ac (220 ha) of proposed critical gartersnakes include reducing nonnative and water and power authorities with habitat for northern Mexican fish reproduction, recruitment, and management authority for storage, gartersnake within the Cienega Creek movement at Horseshoe Reservoir; delivery, and diversion of water; Subunit of the Cienega Creek Subbasin increasing native fish populations, hydropower generation, marketing, and Unit. The 3,797-acre Cienega Creek distribution, and relative abundance in delivery; and land management or Natural Preserve is owned by the Pima the Verde River; and working to Native American Trust responsibilities County Flood Control District and is maintain water flows in the Verde River along 400 mi (644 km) of the Lower protected as a "unique riparian above Horseshoe Reservoir through Colorado River. In 2005, the Service ecosystem" by a declaration of watershed management activities (SRP Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23641

2008, pp. 193-196). Mitigation also habitat. Maintenance of stock tanks will expressly states that it does not modify included acquisition and management also help address nonnative predator the Secretaries' statutory authority. in perpetuity of 50 ac (20 ha) of riparian populations in proposed critical habitat. Fort Apache Native Fish Management habitat along the Verde River and 150 ac Tribal Lands Plan (61 ha) of riparian habitat offsite along the Gila River, some of which may Several Executive Orders, Secretarial The White Mountain Apache Tribe's benefit the two gartersnakes (SRP 2008, Orders, and policies relate to working Fort Apache Indian Reservation (Fort pp. 179-184). Private lands, as well as with Tribes. These guidance documents Apache) encompasses approximately acquisitions or conservation easements generally confirm our trust 1,680,000 ac (679,872 ha) in east-central made to date for both of SRP's HCPs that responsibilities to Tribes, recognize that Arizona. Fort Apache includes 6 percent fall within proposed critical habitat for Tribes have sovereign authority to of the Black River Subbasin Unit (92 ac northern Mexican gartersnake, include control tribal lands, emphasize the (37 ha)) and 33 percent of Canyon Creek 515 ac (208 ha) of private lands in the importance of developing partnerships Unit (77 ac (31 ha)) of proposed critical Gila River and Duck Creek subunits, and with tribal governments, and direct the habitat for narrow-headed gartersnake. 96 ac (39 ha) of private lands in the Service to consult with Tribes on a The Salt River and Black River serve as Verde River Subunit (SRP 2014, pp. 27- government-to-government basis. the boundary between Fort Apache and 30; SRP 2014a, p. 11). SRP-owned lands A joint Secretarial Order that applies the San Carlos Apache Reservations. In that fall within proposed critical habitat to both the Service and the National May 2014, the White Mountain Apache for narrow-headed gartersnake include Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Tribe and the Service drafted a native 563 ac (228 ha) of the Gila River Secretarial Order 3206, American fish's management plan for Fort Apache that includes the federally endangered Subunit. Management actions on the Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal loach minnow, federally threatened Camp Verde Riparian Preserve property Trust Responsibilities,and the Apache trout, and four other native fish on the Verde River that may benefit the Endangered Species Act (June 5, 1997) species currently extant on Fort Apache two gartersnakes include acquiring (S.O. 3206), is the most comprehensive (White Mountain Apache Tribe and water rights; creating conservation of the various guidance documents Service 2014, p. 2). This plan easements; maintaining fencing around related to tribal relationships and Act riparian areas, including log-jams that supersedes their 2000 Loach Minnow implementation, and it provides the Management Plan (White Mountain allow normal hydrologic processes to most detail directly relevant to the continue unimpeded while excluding Apache Tribe 2000, entire). The draft designation of critical habitat. In 2014 management plan identifies livestock; planting native species above addition to the general direction riparian areas to improve watershed several Tribal regulation and discussed above, S.O. 3206 explicitly management efforts they think are conditions; and monitoring groundwater recognizes the right of Tribes to and stream flow levels. beneficial to loach minnow and would participate fully in the listing process, also confer benefits to the gartersnakes, San Rafael Ranch Low-Effect HCP including designation of critical habitat. including Resolution 89-149, which In 2016, the Service issued a 30-year The Order also states, "Critical habitat designates streams and riparian zones as incidental take permit for the San Rafael shall not be designated in such areas Sensitive Fish and Wildlife areas, Ranch low-effect HCP (Harlow 2015) to unless it is determined essential to requiring that authorized programs address incidental take from cattle conserve a listed species. In designating ensure these zones remain productive ranching operations of Sonoran tiger critical habitat, the Services shall for fish and wildlife. The White salamander, northern Mexican evaluate and document the extent to Mountain Apache Tribe additionally gartersnake, Gila chub, and Huachuca which the conservation needs of the adopted a Water Quality Protection springsnail. Measures to minimize take listed species can be achieved by Ordinance in 1999 to "promote the emphasize the use of riparian pastures limiting the designation to other lands." health of Tribal waters and the people, and dispersed grazing, maintaining In light of this instruction, when we plants and wildlife that depend on them existing and developing new livestock undertake a discretionary 4(b)(2) through holistic management and ponds that also serve as habitat for exclusion analysis, we will always sustainable use." The draft 2014 covered species including the northern consider exclusions of tribal lands management plan also includes an Mexican gartersnake, and undertaking under section 4(b)(2) of the Act prior to objective to identify Native Fish recovery actions for listed species in finalizing a designation of critical Management Units within each of the cooperation with the Service and AGFD. habitat, and will give great weight to watersheds on Fort Apache and develop The incidental take permit boundary tribal concerns in analyzing the benefits initial management recommendations includes the 18,500-acre San Rafael of exclusion. for each Native Fish Management Unit, Ranch. Portions of the Santa Cruz River, However, S.O. 3206 does not preclude considering native fish and aquatic and Unnamed drainage and Pasture 9 Tank, us from designating tribal lands or riparian obligates, including, but not and Unnamed drainage and Sheehy waters as critical habitat, nor does it limited to, species such as leopard frogs Spring subunits (116 ac (47 ha)) of state that tribal lands or waters cannot and gartersnakes (White Mountain proposed critical habitat for northern meet the Act's definition of "critical Apache Tribe and AFWCO 2014, p. 21). Mexican gartersnake fall within the habitat." We are directed by the Act to incidental take permit boundary. identify areas that meet the definition of San Carlos Apache Tribe Fishery Implementation of winter grazing only "critical habitat" (i.e., areas occupied at Management Plan in riparian pastures along the Santa the time of listing that contain the The San Carlos Apache Reservation Cruz River and managed grazing of essential physical or biological features encompasses approximately 1,850,000 upland pastures would maintain habitat that may require special management or ac (748,668 ha) in east-central Arizona. for northern Mexican gartersnakes. protection and unoccupied areas that This reservation includes 6 percent (102 Maintaining fencing and managing are essential to the conservation of a ac (41 ha)) of the Black River Subbasin trespass cattle limits grazing of riparian species), without regard to Unit and 70 percent (236 ac (96 ha)) of pastures to the non-growing season and landownership. While S.O. 3206 the Eagle Creek Unit of proposed critical lessens impacts to proposed critical provides important direction, it habitat for narrow-headed gartersnake. 23642 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

The Salt River and Black River serve as to support all Tribal conservation and rule to give them as much time as the boundary between the San Carlos management activities for all native possible to comment. Apache Reservation and Fort Apache. fishes and their habitats (San Carlos The San Carlos Apache Tribe Fishery Apache Tribe 2005, pp. 63-71). Summary of Exclusion We Are Considering Management Plan (FMP; San Carlos Yavapai-Apache Nation Tribal Apache Tribe 2005, entire) was adopted Resolution 46-2006 Based on the information provided by in 2005, via Tribal Resolution SEP-05- entities seeking exclusion, as well as 178. This management plan addresses The Yavapai-Apache Nation includes 207 ac (84 ha) of proposed critical any additional public comments we both sportfish and native fish receive, we will evaluate whether management on the San Carlos Apache habitat for northern Mexican gartersnake in the Verde River Subunit. certain lands in the proposed critical Reservation. Although sportfish have habitat are appropriate for exclusion not been intentionally stocked in Yavapai-Apache Nation approved Tribal Resolution 46-2006, "confirming and from the final designation under section streams on the reservation since 1975, 4(b)(2) of the Act. If the analysis sportfish continue to be stocked in declaring a riparian conservation corridor and management plan for the indicates that the benefits of excluding lentic waters including lakes, ponds, lands from the final designation and stocktanks throughout the San Verde River" that affords protections to both gartersnakes. This resolution outweigh the benefits of designating Carlos Apache Reservation. The FMP requires the Yavapai-Apache Nation to those lands as critical habitat, then the has several goals relevant to native fish "preserve the physical and biological Secretary may exercise his discretion to management, which may confer benefits features found within the riparian exclude the lands from the final to the gartersnakes by supporting corridor of the Verde River essential to designation. The areas described above conservation of their prey species. native wildlife species, including that we are considering excluding under These goals include development and species listed as endangered or section 4(b)(2) of the Act from the final implementation of integrated, threatened by the federal government critical habitat designation 7,405 ac watershed-based approaches to fishery under the Endangered Species Act" (2,997 ha) for northern Mexican resource management; conserving, (Yavapai-Apache Nation 2006, p. 1). gartersnake and 1,072 ac (434 ha) for enhancing, and maintaining existing The riparian corridor is defined as a narrow-headed gartersnake, which native fish populations and their 300-ft (91-m) buffer from centerline of represents 27 percent and 6 percent of habitats as part of the natural diversity the Verde River on their lands (Yavapai- the proposed designation for each of the San Carlos Apache Reservation, Apache Nation 2006, p. 1). Within this gartersnake species, respectively. Tables and preventing, minimizing, or corridor, the Yavapai-Apache resolves 3a and 3b, below, provide approximate mitigating adverse impacts to all native to coordinate with the Service on areas (ac, ha) of lands that meet the fishes, especially threatened or actions that may adversely impact definition of critical habitat for each endangered species, and their habitats habitat essential to the conservation gartersnake species but are under our when consistent with the Reservation as and/or recovery of federally listed consideration for possible exclusion a permanent home and abiding place for species (Yavapai-Apache Nation 2006, under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from the San Carlos Apache Tribal members; p. 2). In addition, stocking of nonnative final critical habitat rule. Additionally, restoring extirpated native fishes and fishes is specifically prohibited by the we will consider excluding any other degraded natural habitats when resolution (Yavapai-Apache Nation areas where we determine that the appropriate and economically feasible; 2006, p. 2). benefits of exclusion outweigh the increasing Tribal awareness of native We scheduled a meeting with these benefits of inclusion based upon the fish conservation and values; and tribes and other interested tribes prior to information we have when we finalize aggressively pursuing funding adequate publication of this revised proposed a critical habitat designation.

TABLE 3a-AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR POSSIBLE EXCLUSION FOR THE NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT AND SUBUNIT

Unit subunit Landowner, property name Ownership type Area(hectares) in acres Portionor subunit of unit

Upper Gila River Subbasin Unit

Gila River ...... Freeport McMoRan (Freeport McMoRan Cor- Private ...... 500 (202) 48% poration management plans). Duck Creek ...... Freeport McMoRan (Freeport McMoRan Cor- Private ...... 15 (6) 14% poration management plans).

U nit tota l being co nside red fo r ...... 5 15 (208) 45% exclusion.

Verde River Subbasin Unit

Verde River ...... The Nature Conservancy, Verde Valley Pre- Private ...... 16 (6) 0.4% serve and Verde Valley property. Salt River Project, Camp Verde Riparian Private ...... 96 (39) 2% Preserve (Roosevelt and Horseshoe-Bart- left HCPs). Yavapai-Apache Nation ...... T ribal ...... 207 (84) 5% Oak Creek ...... Arizona Game and Fish Department, Bub- State ...... 142 (57) 14% bling Ponds Hatchery and Page Springs Hatchery (State Wildlife Action Plan). Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23643

TABLE 3a-AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR POSSIBLE EXCLUSION FOR THE NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT AND SUBUNIT-Continued

Area in acres Portion of unit Unit subunit Landowner, property name Ownership type (hectares) or subunit

U nit tota l be ing co nside red fo r ...... 46 0 (186) 9 % exclusion.

Bill Williams River Subbasin Unit

Bill W illiams River ...... Arizona Game and Fish Department, Planet State ...... 329 (133) 18% Ranch Conservation and Wildlife Area (State Wildlife Action Plan). U nit tota l be ing co nside red fo r ...... 32 9 (133) 8 % exclusion.

Cienega Creek Subbasin Unit

Cienega Creek ...... Pima County, Cienega Creek Natural Pre- Private ...... 543 (220) 34% serve (Pima County MSCP).

U nit tota l being co nside red fo r ...... 543 (220) 27% exclusion.

Upper Santa Cruz River Subbasin Unit

Sonoita Creek ...... The Nature Conservancy, Patagonia-Sonoita Private ...... 123 (50) 55% Creek Preserve. Santa Cruz River ...... San Rafael Cattle Company, San Rafael Private ...... 91 (37) 57% Ranch (San Rafael Ranch Low-effect HCP). Unnamed Drainage and Pas- San Rafael Cattle Company, San Rafael Private ...... 5 (2) 12% ture 9 Tank. Ranch (AGFD's SHA, San Rafael Ranch Low Effect HCP). Unnamed Drainage and San Rafael Cattle Company, San Rafael Private ...... 20 (8) 80% Sheehy Spring. Ranch (AGFD's SHA, San Rafael Ranch Low Effect HCP). Unnamed W ildlife Pond ...... Private Ranch (AGFD's SHA) ...... Private ...... 0.07 (0.03) 100% U nit tota l be ing co nside red fo r ...... 2 3 8 (96) 48 % exclusion.

Upper San Pedro River Subbasin Unit

San Pedro River (Fort Bureau of Land Management, San Pedro Ri- Federal ...... 4,496 (1,820) 88% Huachuca requested exclu- parian National Conservation Area (na- sion). tional security). Private (national security) ...... P rivate ...... 215 (87) 4% Babocomari River (Fort Bureau of Land Management, San Pedro Ri- Federal ...... 195 (79) 49% Huachuca requested exclu- parian National Conservation Area (na- sion). tional security). Arizona State Land Department (national se- State ...... 8 (3) 2% curity). Private (national security) ...... Private ...... 199 (81) 49% O'Donnell Canyon ...... National Audubon Society, Appleton-W hittell Private ...... 173 (70) 72% Research Ranch (AGFD's SHA). The Nature Conservancy, Canelo Hills Pre- Private ...... 1.8 (0.7) 0.8 serve. Post Canyon ...... National Audubon Society, Appleton-W hittell Private ...... 15 (6) 19% Research Ranch (AGFD's SHA). Private Ranch (AG FD's SHA) ...... Private ...... 15 (6) 19% Unnamed Drainage and Finley National Audubon Society, Appleton-Whittell Private ...... 3 (1) 100% Tank. Research Ranch (AGFD's SHA). Unit total being considered for ...... 5,320 (2,152) 91% exclusion.

Grand Total ...... 7,405 (2,997) 27% 23644 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

TABLE 3b-AREAS CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION FOR THE NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT AND SUBUNIT

Unit subunit Landowner, property name Ownership type Area(hectares) in acres Portionor subunit of unit

Upper Gila River Subbasin Unit

Gila River ...... Freeport McMoRan (Freeport McMoRan Cor- Private ...... 563 (228) 10% poration management plans).

U nit tota l being co nside red fo r ...... 563 (228) 10% exclusion.

Eagle Creek Unit

Eagle C reek ...... San Carlos A pache Tribe ...... T ribal ...... 236 (96) 70%

U nit tota l be ing co nside red fo r ...... 2 3 6 (96) 70 % exclusion.

Black River Subbasin Unit

Black R iver ...... *San C arlos A pache T ribe ...... T ribal ...... 55 (22) 7%

W hite Mountain Apache Tribe ...... Tribal ...... 56 (23) 7% Bear W allow Creek ...... San Carlos Apache Tribe ...... Tribal ...... 48 (19) 27% W hite Mountain Apache Tribe ...... Tribal ...... <.01 (<.01) <.01% Reservation Creek ...... W hite Mountain Apache Tribe ...... Tribal ...... 36 (15) 27%

Unit total being considered for ...... 195 (79) 12% exclusion.

Canyon Creek Unit

Canyon Creek ...... W hite Mountain Apache Tribe ...... Tribal ...... 77 (31) 33%

U nit tota l be ing co nside red fo r ...... 7 7 (31) 33 % exclusion.

G ra nd T o ta l ...... 1 ,0 7 2 (43 4 ) 6 %

We specifically request comments on comments should be as specific as feasible, and consistent with regulatory the inclusion or exclusion of such areas possible. For example, you should tell objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes in our final designation of critical us the numbers of the sections or further that regulations must be based habitat for the northern Mexican paragraphs that are unclearly written, on the best available science and that gartersnake and narrow-headed which sections or sentences are too the rulemaking process must allow for gartersnake (see Public Comments under long, the sections where you feel lists or public participation and an open Request for Information, above). tables would be useful, etc. exchange of ideas. We have developed Required Determinations Regulatory Planning and Review this proposed rule in a manner (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) consistent with these requirements. Clarity of the Rule Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 Executive Order 12866 provides that We are required by Executive Orders et seq.) 12866 and 12988 and by the the Office of Information and Regulatory Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 1998, to write all rules in plain Management and Budget will review all (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended language. This means that each rule we significant rules. OIRA has determined by the Small Business Regulatory publish must: that this rule is not significant. Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (1) Be logically organized; Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), (2) Use the active voice to address reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 whenever an agency is required to readers directly; while calling for improvements in the publish a notice of rulemaking for any (3) Use clear language rather than nation's regulatory system to promote proposed or final rule, it must prepare jargon; predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and make available for public comment (4) Be divided into short sections and and to use the best, most innovative, a regulatory flexibility analysis that sentences; and and least burdensome tools for describes the effects of the rule on small (5) Use lists and tables wherever achieving regulatory ends. The entities (i.e., small businesses, small possible. executive order directs agencies to organizations, and small government If you feel that we have not met these consider regulatory approaches that jurisdictions). However, no regulatory requirements, send us comments by one reduce burdens and maintain flexibility flexibility analysis is required if the of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To and freedom of choice for the public head of the agency certifies the rule will better help us revise the rule, your where these approaches are relevant, not have a significant economic impact Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23645 on a substantial number of small are not small entities. Therefore, condition of Federal assistance." It also entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA because no small entities would be excludes "a duty arising from to require Federal agencies to provide a directly regulated by this rulemaking, participation in a voluntary Federal certification statement of the factual the Service certifies that, if made final program," unless the regulation "relates basis for certifying that the rule will not as proposed, the revised proposed to a then-existing Federal program have a significant economic impact on critical habitat designation will not have under which $500,000,000 or more is a substantial number of small entities. a significant economic impact on a provided annually to State, local, and According to the Small Business substantial number of small entities. tribal governments under entitlement Administration, small entities include In summary, we have considered authority," if the provision would small organizations such as whether this revised proposed "increase the stringency of conditions of independent nonprofit organizations; designation would result in a significant assistance" or "place caps upon, or small governmental jurisdictions, economic impact on a substantial otherwise decrease, the Federal including school boards and city and number of small entities. For the above Government's responsibility to provide town governments that serve fewer than reasons and based on currently available funding," and the State, local, or tribal 50,000 residents; and small businesses information, we certify that, if made governments "lack authority" to adjust (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses final, the revised proposed critical accordingly. At the time of enactment, include manufacturing and mining habitat designation will not have a these entitlement programs were: concerns with fewer than 500 significant economic impact on a Medicaid; Aid to Families with employees, wholesale trade entities substantial number of small business Dependent Children work programs; with fewer than 100 employees, retail entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social and service businesses with less than $5 flexibility analysis is not required. Services Block Grants; Vocational million in annual sales, general and Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, heavy construction businesses with less Executive Order 13771-Reducing Adoption Assistance, and Independent than $27.5 million in annual business, Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Living; Family Support Welfare special trade contractors doing less than Costs Services; and Child Support $11.5 million in annual business, and This proposed rule is not an Enforcement. "Federal private sector agricultural businesses with annual Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 mandate" includes a regulation that sales less than $750,000. To determine ("Reducing Regulation and Controlling "would impose an enforceable duty if potential economic impacts to these Regulatory Costs") (82 FR 9339, upon the private sector, except (i) a small entities are significant, we February 3, 2017) regulatory action condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a considered the types of activities that because this rule is not significant under duty arising from participation in a might trigger regulatory impacts under E.O. 12866. voluntary Federal program." this designation as well as types of The designation of critical habitat project modifications that may result. In Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use- does not impose a legally binding duty Order 13211 general, the term "significant economic Executive on non-Federal Government entities or impact" is meant to apply to a typical Executive Order 13211 (Actions private parties. Under the Act, the only small business firm's business Concerning Regulations That regulatory effect is that Federal agencies operations. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, must ensure that their actions do not Under the RFA, as amended, and as Distribution, or Use) requires agencies destroy or adversely modify critical understood in the light of recent court to prepare Statements of Energy Effects habitat under section 7. While non- decisions, Federal agencies are required when undertaking certain actions. In Federal entities that receive Federal to evaluate the potential incremental our economic analysis, we did not find funding, assistance, or permits, or that impacts of rulemaking only on those that the proposed critical habitat otherwise require approval or entities directly regulated by the designation would significantly affect authorization from a Federal agency for rulemaking itself and, therefore, are not energy supplies, distribution, or use. an action, may be indirectly impacted required to evaluate the potential Therefore, this action is not a significant by the designation of critical habitat, the impacts to indirectly regulated entities. energy action, and no Statement of legally binding duty to avoid The regulatory mechanism through Energy Effects is required. destruction or adverse modification of which critical habitat protections are critical habitat rests squarely on the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 realized is section 7 of the Act, which Federal agency. Furthermore, to the U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires Federal agencies, in extent that non-Federal entities are consultation with the Service, to ensure In accordance with the Unfunded indirectly impacted because they that any action authorized, funded, or Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et receive Federal assistance or participate carried out by the agency is not likely seq.), we make the following finding: in a voluntary Federal aid program, the to destroy or adversely modify critical (1) This proposed rule would not Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would habitat. Therefore, under section 7, only produce a Federal mandate. In general, not apply, nor would critical habitat Federal action agencies are directly a Federal mandate is a provision in shift the costs of the large entitlement subject to the specific regulatory legislation, statute, or regulation that programs listed above onto State requirement (avoiding destruction and would impose an enforceable duty upon governments. adverse modification) imposed by State, local, or tribal governments, or the (2) We do not think that this rule critical habitat designation. private sector, and includes both would significantly or uniquely affect Consequently, it is our position that "Federal intergovernmental mandates" small governments. The lands being only Federal action agencies would be and "Federal private sector mandates." proposed for critical habitat designation directly regulated if we adopt this These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. are owned by Pima County, private revised proposed critical habitat 658(5)-(7). "Federal intergovernmental landowners, Tribes, the States of New designation. There is no requirement mandate" includes a regulation that Mexico and Arizona, and the Federal under the RFA to evaluate the potential "would impose an enforceable duty Government (U.S. Forest Service, impacts to entities not directly upon State, local, or tribal governments" National Park Service, Bureau of Land regulated. Moreover, Federal agencies with two exceptions. It excludes "a Management, and U.S. Fish and 23646 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Wildlife Service). In addition, based in Federalism-ExecutiveOrder 13132 Act. To assist the public in part on an analysis conducted for the In accordance with E.O. 13132 understanding the habitat needs of the previous proposed designation of (Federalism), this proposed rule does species, this proposed rule identifies the critical habitat and extrapolated to this not have significant Federalism effects. elements of physical or biological designation, we do not expect this rule A federalism summary impact statement features essential to the conservation of to significantly or uniquely affect small is not required. In keeping with the species. The proposed designated governments. Small governments will Department of the Interior and areas of critical habitat are presented on be affected only to the extent that any Department of Commerce policy, we maps, and the proposed rule provides programs or actions requiring or using requested information from, and several options for the interested public Federal funds, permits, or other coordinated development of this to obtain more detailed location authorized activities must ensure that proposed critical habitat designation information, if desired. their actions will not adversely affect with, appropriate State resource Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 the critical habitat. Further, we do not agencies. From a federalism perspective, U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) believe that this rule would significantly the designation of critical habitat This rule does not contain or uniquely affect small governments directly affects only the responsibilities information collection requirements, because it will not produce a Federal of Federal agencies. The Act imposes no and a submission to the Office of mandate of $100 million or greater in other duties with respect to critical Management and Budget (OMB) under any year, that is, it is not a "significant habitat, either for States and local the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 regulatory action" under the Unfunded governments, or for anyone else. As a (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required. Mandates Reform Act. The designation result, the proposed rule does not have We may not conduct or sponsor and you of critical habitat imposes no obligations substantial direct effects either on the are not required to respond to a on State or local governments and, as States, or on the relationship between collection of information unless it such, a Small Government Agency Plan the national government and the States, displays a currently valid OMB control is not required. Therefore, a Small or on the distribution of powers and number. responsibilities among the various Government Agency Plan is not National Environmental Policy Act (42 required. levels of government. The proposed designation may have some benefit to U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) Takings-Executive Order 12630 these governments because the areas It is our position that, outside the that contain the features essential to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals In accordance with E.O. 12630 conservation of the species are more for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to (Government Actions and Interference clearly defined, and the physical or prepare environmental analyses with Constitutionally Protected Private biological features of the habitat pursuant to the National Environmental Property Rights), we have analyzed the necessary for the conservation of the Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et potential takings implications of species are specifically identified. This seq.) in connection with designating designating critical habitat for northern information does not alter where and critical habitat under the Act. We Mexican gartersnake and narrow-headed what federally sponsored activities may published a notice outlining our reasons gartersnake in a takings implications occur. However, it may assist State and for this determination in the Federal assessment. The Act does not authorize local governments in long-range Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR the Service to regulate private actions planning because they no longer have to 49244). This position was upheld by the on private lands or confiscate private wait for case-by-case section 7 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth property as a result of critical habitat consultations to occur. Circuit (DouglasCounty v. Babbitt, 48 designation. Designation of critical Where State and local governments F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied habitat does not affect land ownership, require approval or authorization from a 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when or establish any closures, or restrictions Federal agency for actions that may the range of the species includes States on use of or access to the designated affect critical habitat, consultation within the Tenth Circuit, such as that of areas. Furthermore, the designation of under section 7(a)(2) of the Act would northern Mexican and narrow-headed critical habitat does not affect be required. While non-Federal entities gartersnakes, under the Tenth Circuit landowner actions that do not require that receive Federal funding, assistance, ruling in Catron County Board of Federal funding or permits, nor does it or permits, or that otherwise require Commissioners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife preclude development of habitat approval or authorization from a Federal Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), conservation programs or issuance of agency for an action, may be indirectly we undertake a NEPA analysis for incidental take permits to permit actions impacted by the designation of critical critical habitat designation. We invite habitat, the legally binding duty to that do require Federal funding or the public to comment on the extent to avoid destruction or adverse permits to go forward. However, Federal which this proposed critical habitat modification of critical habitat rests agencies are prohibited from carrying designation may have a significant squarely on the Federal agency. impact on the human environment, or out, funding, or authorizing actions that fall within one of the categorical would destroy or adversely modify Civil Justice Reform-Executive Order exclusions for actions that have no critical habitat. A takings implications 12988 individual or cumulative effect on the assessment has been completed for the In accordance with Executive Order quality of the human environment. proposed designation of critical habitat 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office for northern Mexican gartersnake and of the Solicitor has determined that the Government-to-Government narrow-headed gartersnake, and it rule would not unduly burden the Relationship With Tribes concludes that, if adopted, this judicial system and that it meets the In accordance with the President's designation of critical habitat does not requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) memorandum of April 29, 1994 pose significant takings implications for of the Order. We have proposed (Government-to-Government Relations lands within or affected by the designating critical habitat in with Native American Tribal designation. accordance with the provisions of the Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23647

Order 13175 (Consultation and gartersnakes for listing purposes under Authors Coordination with Indian Tribal the Act. We will consider these areas for The primary authors of this proposed Governments), and the Department of exclusion from the final critical habitat rulemaking are the staff members of the the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we designation to the extent consistent with readily acknowledge our responsibility the requirements of section 4(b)(2) of the Arizona Ecological Services Field to communicate meaningfully with Act. We sent notification letters on Office. federally recognized Tribes on a March 12, 2013, to each tribe that List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 government-to-government basis. In described the exclusion process under accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 section 4(b)(2) of the Act and invited Endangered and threatened species, of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal them to meet to discuss the listing Exports, Imports, Reporting and Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust process and engage in conversation with recordkeeping requirements, Responsibilities, and the Endangered us about the proposal to the extent Transportation. Species Act), we readily acknowledge possible without disclosing pre- Proposed Regulation Promulgation our responsibilities to work directly decisional information. During an April with tribes in developing programs for 2, 2019, coordination meeting with Accordingly, we propose to amend healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that these tribes, we informed them that we part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title tribal lands are not subject to the same were revising the proposed critical 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, controls as Federal public lands, to habitat designation for the two as set forth below: remain sensitive to Indian culture, and gartersnakes and would have meetings PART 17-ENDANGERED AND to make information available to tribes. with them as early as legally possible THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS The tribal lands in Arizona included regarding the revisions. We plan to meet in this proposed designation of critical with these tribes and any other m 1. The authority citation for part 17 habitat are the lands of the White interested tribes in early April 2020 so continues to read as follows: Mountain Apache Tribe, San Carlos that we can provide ample time to Apache Tribe, and Yavapai Apache comment. We will continue to work Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531- Nation. We used the criteria described with tribal entities during the 1544; and 4201-4245, unless otherwise noted. above under Criteria Used To Identify development of a final rule for the Critical Habitat to identify tribal lands designation of critical habitat for the * 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by revising the that are occupied by the northern northern Mexican and narrow-headed entries for "Gartersnake, narrow- Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnakes headed" and "Gartersnake, northern gartersnakes that contain the features Mexican" under REPTILES in the List of References Cited essential for the conservation of these Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to species. We began government-to- A complete list of references cited in read as follows: government consultation with these this rulemaking is available on the tribes on November 29, 2011, in a pre- internet at http://ww.regulations.gov § 17.11 Endangered and threatened notification letter informing the tribes and upon request from the Arizona wildlife. that we had begun an evaluation of the Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR northern Mexican and narrow-headed FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). (h) * * *

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

REPTILES

Gartersnake, narrow-headed ... Thamnophis rufipunctatus ...... Wherever found ...... T 79 FR 38677, 7/8/2014; 50 CFR 17.95(c).cH Gartersnake, northern Mexican Thamnophis eques megalops Wherever found ...... T 79 FR 38677, 7/8/2014; 50 CFR 17.42(g);4d 50 CFR c 17.95(C). H

* 3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (c) by Narrow-Headed Gartersnake (i) Perennial streams or spatially adding, in the same alphabetical order (Thamnophis rufipunctatus) intermittent streams that provide both that the species appear in the table at aquatic and terrestrial habitat that (1) § 17.11(h), entries for "Narrow-headed Critical habitat units are depicted allows for immigration, emigration, and for Apache, Coconino, Gila, Graham, Gartersnake (Thamnophis maintenance of population connectivity Greelee, and Yavapai Counties in rufipunctatus)" and "Northern Mexican of narrow-headed gartersnakes and Arizona, and Catron, Grant, and Hidalgo contain: Gartersnake (Thamnophis eques Counties in New Mexico, on the maps megalops)" to read as follows: (A) Pools, riffles, and cobble and in this entry. boulder substrate, with low amount of §17.95 Critical habitat-fish and wildlife. (2) Within these areas, the physical or fine sediment and substrate * * * * * biological features essential to the embeddedness; (c) Reptiles. conservation of narrow-headed (B) Organic and natural inorganic gartersnake consist of the following structural features (e.g., cobble bars, components: rock piles, large boulders, logs or 23648 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules stumps, aquatic and wetland vegetation, (iv) An absence of nonnative resolved using aerial imagery from logs, and debris jams) in the stream predators, such as fish species of the Google Earth Pro. Elevation range is channel for basking, thermoregulation, families Centrarchidae and Ictaluridae, masked using the "Elev Contour" shelter, prey base maintenance, and bullfrogs, and crayfish, or occurrence of feature class of the National Elevation protection from predators; nonnative predators at low enough Dataset. The administrative boundaries (C) Water quality that is absent of densities such that recruitment of for Arizona and New Mexico were pollutants or, if pollutants are present, narrow-headed gartersnakes is not obtained from the Arizona Land at levels low enough such that inhibited and maintenance of viable Resource Information Service and New recruitment of narrow-headed prey populations is still occurring. Mexico Resource Geographic gartersnakes is not inhibited; and (v) Elevations of 2,300 to 8,200 feet Information System, respectively. This (D) Terrestrial habitat within 89 feet (700 to 2,500 meters). includes the most current (as of the (27 meters) of the active stream channel (3) Critical habitat does not include effective date of this rule) geospatial that includes boulder fields, rocks, and manmade structures (such as buildings, data available for land ownership, rock structures containing cracks and aqueducts, runways, roads, and other counties, States, and streets. Locations crevices, small mammal burrows, paved areas) and the land on which they depicting critical habitat are expressed downed woody debris, and vegetation are located existing within the legal as decimal degree latitude and longitude for thermoregulation, shelter sites, and boundaries on the effective date of this in the World Geographic Coordinate protection from predators. rule. System projection using the 1984 datum (4) Criticalhabitat map units. Data (WGS84). The maps in this entry, as (ii) Hydrologic processes that layers defining map units included the modified by any accompanying maintain aquatic and riparian habitat U.S. Geological Survey's 7.5' regulatory text, establish the boundaries through: quadrangles, National Hydrography of the critical habitat designation. The (A) A natural flow regime that allows Dataset and National Elevation Dataset; coordinates or plot points or both on for periodic flooding, or if flows are the Service's National Wetlands which each map is based are available modified or regulated, a flow regime Inventory dataset; and aerial imagery to the public at the Service's internet that allows for the movement of water, from Google Earth Pro. Line locations site at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/esl sediment, nutrients, and debris through for lotic streams (flowing water) and arizona/,at http://www.regulations.gov the stream network, as well as drainages are depicted as the at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011, maintenance of native fish populations; "Flowline" feature class from the and at the field office responsible for and National Hydrography Dataset this designation. You may obtain field (B) Physical hydrologic and geodatabase. The active channel along a office location information by geomorphic connection between the stream is depicted as the "Wetlands" contacting one of the Service regional active stream channel and its adjacent feature class from the Service's National offices, the addresses of which are listed terrestrial areas. Wetlands Inventory dataset. Any at 50 CFR 2.2. (iii) Prey base of native fishes, or soft- discrepancies between the "Flowline" (5) Note: Index map follows: rayed, nonnative fish species. and "Wetlands" feature classes were BILLING CODE P Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23649

0 *Nrrw-- ad- Gatrnk Crtia Hbta

0n~ex.Ma

I Area En

(6) Unit 1: Upper Gila River Subbasin and Hidalgo Counties, and is composed north of Silver City, and South of Gila Unit, Grant and Hidalgo Counties, New of lands in Federal (2,827 ac (1,144 ha)), and Cliff. Mexico. State (278 ac (113 ha)), and private (ii) Map of Unit 1 follows: (i) General description:Unit 1 (2,323 ac (940 ha)) ownership in eight consists of 5,429 ac (2,197 ha) in Grant subunits west of the town of Glenwood, 23650 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

0# S 01hadd.ats ak Crtia Haia

6I d-GlR

4

Ic,

I

Won Creek Subunit I GLE~WOO~ q U I I -Ves Fork Gia River nf ~

I

I ? Ue Creek Suburnt

I I

I

CLIFF I I

14 * SILER CIT 3 I a

1~I G~a R~rer Suburnt

1'

I .o~b05 10l5Mdes AZ NM Stream Highway 0 5 10 15 ,.~~,.State Boundary

(7) Unit 2: San Francisco River (i) General description:Unit 2 (2,152 ac (871 ha)) ownership in six Subbasin Unit, Catron County, New consists of 4,905 ac (1,985 ha) in Catron subunits near the towns of Glenwood Mexico. County, and is composed of lands in and Reserve. Federal (2,753 ac (1,114 ha)) and private (ii) Map of Unit 2 follows: Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23651

Naro-e~~ded.GatrsnaeCrtia Hbia Se.FadIS-Rr S ubai.unt

0a,n Tu s Rcver Suunit r RESERV

...... ,, Wh ater CRee Subui ., II AZ NNgN1

i [- t-1J a

- 'HighwayStream Q0 4 8Q 12 Km 2Me -_"CountvBound~ay I1,='lilI[[ll[,, State Boundary.(

(8) Unit 3: Blue River Subbasin Unit, Greenlee County, Arizona, and Catron in three subunits near the towns of Blue, Greenlee County, Arizona, and Catron County, New Mexico, and is composed Arizona, and Luna, New Mexico. County, New Mexico. of lands in Federal (2,510 ac (1,016 ha)) (ii) Map of Unit 3 follows: (i) General description:Unit 3 and private (460 ac (186 ha)) ownership consists of 2,971 ac (1,202 ha) in 23652 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Narro-headd.Gatersnke Citicl Habia 816BiverSubbtin nit.

RESr V' Dry Blue Greek Subu .i Campbell Blue Creek Suburnt ) A ~A~~GAN MEA~O~ U

Ble River Subunit ~O~EYMOO N

W~OLAR OC I -L.WO Ii i?

GRA/1LLE Sl

f l W Critical Habitat AZStream 0 3 6 9Mes .... wa 0 3 6 9Kin •: -',County Boundary 0 ;.. StateL Boundary

(9) Unit 4: Eagle Creek Unit, Graham and Greenlee Counties, and is composed (<1 ha)) ownership near the town of and Greenlee Counties, Arizona. of lands in Federal (99 ac (40 ha)), Morenci. (i) General description:Unit 4 Tribal (236 ac (96 ha)), and private (1 ac (ii) Map of Unit 4 follows: consists of 336 ac (136 ha) in Graham Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23653

a le - ek. -

0 t UmWOOLAROC

CritcaI Habta' 0 05 1 1 Mtese5 AZ N FStream Highway 0 15Kn 05 County Boundar 0

(10) Unit 5: Black River Subbasin Graham, and Greenlee Counties, and is towns of Maverick and Hannigan Unit, Apache, Graham, and Greenlee composed of lands in Federal (1,414 ac Meadow. Counties, Arizona. (572 ha)) and Tribal (194 ac (78 ha)) (ii) Map of Unit 5 follows: (i) General description:Unit 5 ownership in six subunits near the consists of 1,607 ac (650 ha) in Apache, 23654 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Naro -- ae..Gatr k Crtia Haia

East Fork Black River Subunit

MAVERI Back River S bunit UI

Fjjh Subuni-LI

HA~GAN MEADO~ U

U ~

AZ NM% Crtica Habitat 0 2 4 6Mes Stream, F'_-Jcounty Boundary 0 2 4 6Fn Hig wayll0

(11) Unit 6: Canyon Creek Unit, Gila County, and is composed of lands in ac (31 ha)) ownership southwest of the County, Arizona. Federal (155 ac (63 ha)) and Tribal (77 town of Heber. (i) General description:Unit 6 (ii) Map of Unit 6 follows: consists of 232 ac (94 ha) in Gila Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23655

Na S -eade..aresnk. Critic-al Haiat

- -6 -

\~ *j-~ K__ ) U -3 I

F-

/ 5 I / I

0

(P

Az NM Secat Hat a 0 5 1.5 MaIes

Highway 0 0.5 1 15Km ______---couno onoao (

(12) Unit 7: Tonto Creek Subbasin County, and is composed of lands in subunits near the towns of Jakes Corner Unit, Gila County, Arizona. Federal (1,285 ac (520 ha)) and private and Gisela. (i) General description:Unit 7 (105 ac (42 ha)) ownership in three (ii) Map of Unit 7 follows: consists of 1,390 ac (562 ha) in Gila 23656 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

a loe 6

I.

HL~RA~CI-* TONTO~V LAeE U ~O

PAY,ON B STAR ALEY

C>

0 I

U'N

ES

87

AZ NM crdt.ca Habitat ...... Stream 0 2 4 6Mies

Highway 0 2 4 6Km

(13) Unit 8: Verde River Subbasin Coconino and Yavapai Counties, and is three subunits near the towns of Sedona Unit, Coconino and Yavapai Counties, composed of lands in Federal (1,343 ac and Perkinsville. Arizona. (544 ha)), State (51 ac (21 ha)), and (ii) Map of Unit 8 follows: (i) General description:Unit 8 private (437 ac (177 ha)) ownership in consists of 1,832 ac (741 ha) in Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23657

IIVe:d Rie:-bsn n

IH ta

Verde River Subunit

MUND POND

F- -_E PRINS

U

BRIDGE ART U: lL

AZ NMUn Hata ....Stream 0 3 6 9Mires County Bou dary Highway 00

BILLING CODE C terrestrial habitat that allows for (C) Terrestrial habitat adjacent to the Northern Mexican Gartersnake immigration, emigration, and stream channel that includes riparian (Thamnophis eques megalops) maintenance of population connectivity vegetation, small mammal burrows, of northern Mexican gartersnakes and (1) Critical habitat units are depicted boulder fields, rock crevices, and contain: for La Paz, Mohave, Yavapai, Gila, downed woody debris for Cochise, Santa Cruz, and Pima Counties (A) Slow-moving water (walking thermoregulation, shelter, foraging in Arizona, and Grant County in New speed) with in-stream pools, off-channel opportunities, brumation, and Mexico, on the maps in this entry. pools, and backwater habitat; protection from predators; and (2) Within these areas, the physical or (B) Organic and natural inorganic (D) Water quality that is absent of biological features essential to the structural features (e.g., boulders, dense pollutants or, if pollutants are present, conservation of northern Mexican aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf at levels low enough such that gartersnake consist of the following litter, logs, and debris jams) within the recruitment of northern Mexican components: stream channel for thermoregulation, gartersnakes is not inhibited. (i) Perennial or spatially intermittent shelter, foraging opportunities, and streams that provide both aquatic and protection from predators; 23658 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

(ii) Hydrologic processes that (B) Riparian habitat adjacent to surrounding lotic streams and lentic maintain aquatic and terrestrial habitat ordinary high water mark that includes sites is depicted by the greater of the through: riparian vegetation, small mammal "Wetlands" and "Riparian" features (A) A natural flow regime that allows burrows, boulder fields, rock crevices, classes of the Service's national for periodic flooding, or if flows are and downed woody debris for Wetlands Inventory dataset and further modified or regulated, a flow regime thermoregulation, shelter, foraging refined using aerial imagery from that allows for the movement of water, opportunities, and protection from Google Earth Pro. Elevation range is sediment, nutrients, and debris through predators; and masked using the "Elev Contour" the stream network; and (C) Water quality that is absent of feature class of the National Elevation (B) Physical hydrologic and pollutants or, if pollutants are present, Dataset. Administrative boundaries for geomorphic connection between a at levels low enough such that Arizona and New Mexico were obtained stream channel and its adjacent riparian recruitment of northern Mexican from the Arizona Land Resource areas. gartersnakes is not inhibited. Information Service and New Mexico (iii) Prey base of primarily native (vii) Ephemeral channels that connect Resource Geographic Information anurans, fishes, small mammals, lizards, perennial or spatially interrupted System, respectively. This includes the and invertebrate species. perennial streams to lentic wetlands in most current (as of the effective date of southern Arizona where water resources (iv) An absence of nonnative fish this rule) geospatial data available for are limited. species of the families Centrarchidae land ownership, counties, States, and (3) Critical habitat does not include streets. Locations depicting critical and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs (Lithobates manmade structures (such as buildings, catesbeianus), and/or crayfish habitat are expressed as decimal degree aqueducts, runways, roads, and other latitude and longitude in the World (Orconectes virilis, Procambarusclarki, paved areas) and the land on which they etc.), or occurrence of these nonnative Geographic Coordinate System are located existing within the legal projection using the 1984 datum species at low enough levels such that boundaries on the effective date of this recruitment of northern Mexican (WGS84). The maps in this entry, as rule. modified by any accompanying gartersnakes is not inhibited and (4) Criticalhabitat map units. Data maintenance of viable prey populations layers defining map units included the regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. is still occurring. U.S. Geological Survey's 7.5' The (v) Elevations from 130 to 8,500 feet quadrangles, National Hydrography coordinates or plot points or both on (40 to 2,590 meters). Dataset, and National Elevation Dataset; which each map is based are available (vi) Lentic wetlands including off- the Service's National Wetlands to the public at the Service's internet channel springs, cienegas, and natural Inventory dataset; and aerial imagery site at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/esl and constructed ponds (small earthen from Google Earth Pro. Line locations arizona/,at http://www.regulations.gov impoundment) with: for lotic streams (flowing water) and at Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0011, (A) Organic and natural inorganic drainages are depicted as the and at the field office responsible for structural features (e.g., boulders, dense "Flowline" feature class from the this designation. You may obtain field aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf National Hydrography Dataset office location information by litter, logs, and debris jams) within the geodatabase. Point locations for lentic contacting one of the Service regional ordinary high water mark for sites (ponds) are depicted as offices, the addresses of which are listed thermoregulation, shelter, foraging "NHDPoint" feature class from the at 50 CFR 2.2. opportunities, brumation, and National Hydrography Dataset (5) Note: Index map follows: protection from predators; geodatabase. Extent of riparian habitat BILLING CODE P Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23659

WS ode Mexca Gatrnk Critica- SbitC

.- ex~a

I Area EnIa

(6) Unit 1: Upper Gila River Subbasin County, and is composed of lands in ac (449 ha)) ownership in two subunits Unit, Grant County, New Mexico. State (22 ac (9 ha)), and private (1,110 near the towns of Cliff and Gila. (i) General description:Unit 1 (ii) Map of Unit 1 follows: consists of 1,132 ac (458 ha) in Grant 23660 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

- Upe Qia.ie-. bai Uni -isC

DtIck Creek StLbuNlt

G Rwer Subun~t

Sytc am° Creek

i Criticala Habitat 0 0 1 AZ N St ea m Highway 00.511.5K -yI ;:':~j ont Budry

(7) Unit 2: Tonto Creek Unit, Gila County, and is composed of lands in private (966 ac (391 ha)) ownership near County, Arizona. Federal (3,337 ac (1,350 ha)), and the towns of Gisela and Punkin Center. (i) General description:Unit 2 (ii) Map of Unit 2 follows: consists of 4,302 ac (1,741 ha) in Gila Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23661

J F77Northe Meca:artrnk Criict6 .ta T * . d . Inf

/ HoustonCreek

A RYE ~

2 & ) 87 $

) k

SUNFLOWER P:::N KIN / CENTER

Theodore Rooseveit Lake Spdlwa Elevation Z220feet

N

AIAZ fNMLake 1 critical Habitat 0 25 5 75Mies SStream

SlCountyBounda-y 2

(8) Unit 3: Verde River Subbasin Unit, Yavapai County, and is composed of ownership in three subunits near the Yavapai County, Arizona. lands in Federal (856 ac (346 ha)), State towns of Cottonwood, Cornville, Page (i) General description:Unit 3 (705 ac (285 ha)), Tribal (88 ac (36 ha), Springs, and Camp Verde. consists of 5,246 ac (2,123 ha) in and private (3,597 ac (1,456 ha)) (ii) Map of Unit 3 follows: 23662 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

NorthernMexican ~ GatrnkeCiial ~ , aia

Verd Rivf.ZubasiUhI

COTTO WO D

U CLARKDALE

BRtD GEPORT

Oak Creek Subunit

SCrERRYr 0

AZJ- NM ICoica =abtiat

Stream... 0 2 4 6Mies Hi-ghway i County Boundary0 2 4 K (

(9) Unit 4: Bill Williams River (i) General description:Unit 4 State (202 ac (82 ha)), and private (1,727 Subbasin Unit, La Paz and Mohave consists of 4,049 ac (1,639 ha) in La Paz ac (699 ha)) ownership in three subunits Counties, Arizona. and Mohave Counties, and is composed near the towns of Parker and Signal. of lands in Federal (2,121 ac (858 ha)), (ii) Map of Unit 4 follows: Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23663

Sil Rie-a~am tbaiU

I ra Ent

(10) Unit 5: Lower Colorado River (i) General description:Unit 5 Federal ownership within the Havasu Unit, Mojave County, Arizona. consists of 4,467 ac (1,808 ha) in Mojave National Wildlife Refuge. County and is composed of lands in (ii) Map of Unit 5 follows: 23664 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Nit'er - _ .C ffeIHgi~

UI er do\ I a.0 Rie:V i

% I

\U GOLDEN SHORES

I

" . . ",-ii -

.--- I_ I ,

-ar

c a l if o rn i a ,'A rir2 nf ...... - --..' l Criticat Habitat

AZ NM ...,Stream 0 1 2 3 Mies . ._.-_qHavusu NWR Boundary 2 3K- -Hghway u0 2 3 Km ( l IrI~~r-ImI~ i[ ~ =--iCounty Boundary

(11) Unit 6: Arivaca Cienega Unit, County and is composed of lands in ha)), and private (62 ac (25 ha)) Pima County, Arizona. Federal (149 ac (60 ha)), State (1 ac (<1 ownership near the town of Arivaca. (i) General description:Unit 6 (ii) Map of Unit 6 follows: consists of 211 ac (86 ha) in Pima Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23665

Northem,- Meicn - -atrsnkGria.6 aia

ia c ..a i ea

7%

Critc0 Habita AZ....Stream 0 0_4 08 1_2Mies BuenosAires NWR Boundary 4 081 1 2 Km

(12) Unit 7: Cienega Creek Subbasin County and is composed of lands in ownership in four subunits near the Unit, Pima County, Arizona. Federal (1,112 ac (451 ha)), State (366 ac towns of Tucson, Vail, and Sonoita. (i) General description:Unit 7 (148 ha)), and private (550 ac (220 ha)) (ii) Map of Unit 7 follows: consists of 2,030 ac (821 ha) in Pima 23666 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

N Ow eia . -Gd . Mak Crtcl' aia t: cie a.Cre .k.Sbbsi6*n

Cienega Creek Subunit

Empire Guch & Empire Wildlife Pond Subunit

Gardner Canyon &B a Maternity Wildlife Unnamed Drainage & Pond Subunit Gaucho1ank Subunitse

Highay 0 2 4 K

(13) Unit 8: Upper Santa Cruz River (i) General description:Unit 8 (ill ac (45 ha)), and private (340 ac (138 Subbasin Unit, Santa Cruz and Cochise consists of 496 ac (201 ha) in Santa Cruz ha)) ownership in eight subunits near Counties, Arizona. and Cochise Counties, and is composed the towns of Sonoita and Patagonia. of lands in Federal (45 ac (18 ha)), State (ii) Map of Unit 8 follows: Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules 23667

n 0 701S lb- k- O-e

wSNOiTA

J3IN

I 0

too/... 'K

United States Mexico

/ Crtticat H abitat AZ NMStream 0 2 4 6Mies Highway [- County Boundary 0 2 4 6Km O) ( InternatonaI Boundary

(14) Unit 9: Upper San Pedro River Cochise and Santa Cruz Counties, and is six subunits near the towns of Sierra Subbasin Unit, Cochise and Santa Cruz composed of lands in Federal (5,197 ac Vista and Elgin. Counties, Arizona. (2,103 ha)), State (8 ac (3 ha)), and (ii) Map of Unit 9 follows: (i) General description:Unit 9 private (645 ac (261 ha)) ownership in consists of 5,850 ac (2,367 ha) in 23668 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 82/Tuesday, April 28, 2020/Proposed Rules

Not o.-Mei -~rernk - - - abta -.

.,Upper Sa Ped-U0.Sbe "I

c~'~4 ~ 4

I Babocoman River Subunit

Unnaui N Finleyci.

Post Canyon 2 HJAC~L~ZACIT~ ~ Subunit

ODonnell Canyon Subunit " T RU R R V HA sTA

&NENE

< U ePond Subunit O 8

CYSVLLE HEREFOR ,

M CrtcaI HabLitat AZ NM Stream 0 2 4 6Mes Higw0 2 4 W!iT -I[='-I] [t Ii ' C ounty Boundaiv 4 )

BILLING CODE C

Aurelia Skipwith, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doe. 2020-08069 Filed 4-27-20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P Essential Physical or Biological Features of Proposed Critical Habitat Northern Mexican Gartersnake April 28, 2020

1. Perennial or spatially intermittent streams that provide both aquatic and terrestrial habitat that allows for immigration, emigration, and maintenance of population connectivity of northern Mexican gartersnakes and contain: (A) Slow-moving water (walking speed) with in-stream pools, off-channel pools, and backwater habitat; (B) Organic and natural inorganic structural features (e.g., boulders, dense aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf litter, logs, and debris jams) within the stream channel for thermoregulation, shelter, foraging opportunities, and protection from predators; (C) Terrestrial habitat adjacent to the stream channel that includes riparian vegetation, small mammal burrows, boulder fields, rock crevices, and downed woody debris for thermoregulation, shelter, foraging opportunities, brumation, and protection from predators; and (D) Water quality that is absent of pollutants or, if pollutants are present, at levels low enough such that recruitment of northern Mexican gartersnakes is not inhibited. 2. Hydrologic processes that maintain aquatic and terrestrial habitat through: (A) A natural flow regime that allows for periodic flooding, or if flows are modified or regulated, a flow regime that allows for the movement of water, sediment, nutrients, and debris through the stream network; and (B) Physical hydrologic and geomorphic connection between a stream channel and its adjacent riparian areas. 3. Prey base of primarily native anurans, fishes, small mammals, lizards, and invertebrate species. 4. An absence of nonnative fish species of the families Centrarchidae and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), and/or crayfish (Orconectes virilis, Procambarus clarki, etc.), or occurrence of these nonnative species at low enough levels such that recruitment of northern Mexican gartersnakes is not inhibited and maintenance of viable prey populations is still occurring. 5. Elevations from 130 to 8,500 ft (40 to 2,590 m). 6. Lentic wetlands including off-channel springs, cienegas, and natural and constructed ponds (small earthen impoundment) with: (A) Organic and natural inorganic structural features (e.g., boulders, dense aquatic and wetland vegetation, leaf litter, logs, and debris jams) within the ordinary high water mark for thermoregulation, shelter, foraging opportunities, brumation, and protection from predators; (B) Riparian habitat adjacent to ordinary high water mark that includes riparian vegetation, small mammal burrows, boulder fields, rock crevices, and downed woody debris for thermoregulation, shelter, foraging opportunities, and protection from predators; and (C) Water quality that is absent of pollutants or, if pollutants are present, at levels low enough such that recruitment of northern Mexican gartersnakes is not inhibited.

7. Ephemeral channels that connect perennial or spatially intermittent perennial streams to lentic wetlands in southern Arizona where water resources are limited.

Essential Physical or Biological Features of Proposed Critical Habitat Narrow-headed Gartersnake April 28, 2020

1. Perennial streams or spatially intermittent streams that provide both aquatic and terrestrial habitat that allows for immigration, emigration, and maintenance of population connectivity of narrow- headed gartersnakes and contain: (A) Pools, riffles, and cobble and boulder substrate, with low amount of fine sediment and substrate embeddedness; (B) Organic and natural inorganic structural features (e.g., cobble bars, rock piles, large boulders, logs or stumps, aquatic and wetland vegetation, logs, and debris jams) in the stream channel for basking, thermoregulation, shelter, prey base maintenance, and protection from predators; (C) Water quality that is absent of pollutants or, if pollutants are present, at levels low enough such that recruitment of narrow-headed gartersnakes is not inhibited; and (D) Terrestrial habitat within 89 ft (27 m) of the active stream channel that includes boulder fields, rocks, and rock structures containing cracks and crevices, small mammal burrows, downed woody debris, and vegetation for thermoregulation, shelter sites, and protection from predators. 2. Hydrologic processes that maintain aquatic and riparian habitat through: (A) A natural flow regime that allows for periodic flooding, or if flows are modified or regulated, a flow regime that allows for the movement of water, sediment, nutrients, and debris through the stream network, as well as maintenance of native fish populations; and (B) Physical hydrologic and geomorphic connection between the active stream channel and its adjacent terrestrial areas. 3. Prey base of native fishes, or soft-rayed, nonnative fish species. 4. An absence of nonnative predators, such as fish species of the families Centrarchidae and Ictaluridae, bullfrogs, and crayfish, or occurrence of nonnative predators at low enough densities such that recruitment of narrow-headed gartersnakes is not inhibited and maintenance of viable prey populations is still occurring. 5. Elevations of 2,300 to 8,200 ft (700 to 2,500 m). / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Questions and Answers: Two Gartersnakes - Revision to Proposed Critical Habitat

Arizona Ecological Services Field Office https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/

Contacts: Alejandro Morales 602-889-5954

Q: What is this proposal? A: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is publishing a revised proposed critical habitat rule for the northern Mexican gartersnake and the narrow-headed gartersnake. In our revised proposed rule, we recommend designating 27,784 acres of critical habitat for the northern Mexican gartersnake and 18,701 acres of critical habitat for the narrow-headed gartersnake. This is a 93.4% and 91.1% reduction in acreage, respectively, compared to the original proposed critical habitat rule published in 2013. This recommended reduction from the 2013 proposed rule follows our consideration of the best available scientific information for areas identified within the critical habitat rule, including a revised rule set based on information obtained subsequent to the 2013 proposed rule. This revision better reflects the areas that provide habitat for these species consistent with the definition of critical habitat. We have a court ordered settlement agreement to submit a proposed rule by April 13, 2020.

Q: Why is critical habitat necessary? A: Critical habitat identifies geographic areas that contain features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species. The proposal is only for currently occupied habitat in areas that may require special management considerations or protection. Some of the benefits of critical habitat include conserving the most essential areas and features for the species, helping to educate state and county governments and private entities; and reducing the likelihood of people causing inadvertent harm to the species.

Q: What accounts for the reduction in acreage in the revised proposed critical habitat rule for the two gartersnakes? A: During the comment period for the 2013 proposed rule, we received substantive comments regarding the proposed critical habitat for both gartersnakes. Commenters and peer reviewers disagreed with the way that we determined occupancy at the time of listing and included areas that were not habitat for either species: evidence indicated that our criteria were likely to lead to a critical habitat designation that did not meet the regulatory definition of critical habitat. . We also received additional information including locations of each species at the time of listing, the biological needs, and corresponding habitat characteristics of each species. It is likely that recovery of both species would require additional habitat; however, we were unable to identify additional habitat that has the physical and biological features essential to the species, or where those features would be likely to be found in the future. Historically occupied sites that are no longer occupied are dominated by nonnative species, and/or lack native prey in sufficient densities to support the species, making it unlikely that these areas could serve as habitat for these species. We have considered all the best scientific information for areas identified within the revised proposed critical habitat rule and acreage has been reduced to reflect the areas that provide habitat for these species that are consistent with the definition of critical habitat.

Q: Where do these snakes live? A: Narrow-headed gartersnakes are strictly fish-eaters found in rocky higher-elevation streams along the Mogollon Rim, from northern and eastern Arizona into southwestern New Mexico. Northern Mexican gartersnakes have a varied diet consisting primarily of amphibians but also fish, lizards, small rodents, worms, and leaches. Northern Mexican gartersnakes live in dense vegetation along the banks or in the shallows of wetlands (cienegas and stock tanks), and stream pool or backwater habitats in Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and northern Mexico. Both gartersnake species are fairly secretive and spend much of their time on land under cover of vegetation and rock piles in habitat adjacent to aquatic habitats.

Q: Aren’t gartersnakes common? What’s endangering these snakes? A: Many species of gartersnake occur throughout much of North America, and gartersnakes are often a child's first exposure to reptiles in the wild. Northern Mexican gartersnake and narrow- headed gartersnake populations have declined primarily from interactions with predatory nonnative species such as warm-water sportfish, brown trout, bullfrogs, and crayfish. These nonnative species compete with and prey upon both the gartersnakes themselves and their native prey species causing both mortality of gartersnakes and starvation within populations. Drought and large-scale wildfires that diminish surface water or degrade streamside (riparian) vegetation are also significant threats, particularly where they co-occur in the presence of nonnative species. Collectively, threats to the snakes have reduced and fragmented their populations, and those of most of their native prey species, such that the gartersnakes’ resiliency, redundancy and representation across their ranges have been significantly compromised. Efforts to control nonnative predators and restore native aquatic and riparian communities could significantly benefit both gartersnakes and all native aquatic or riparian vertebrates throughout their range.

Q: Does critical habitat mean you can’t build anything? A: This proposed critical habitat designation identifies areas that are particularly important to the conservation of these two gartersnakes and are consistent with the definition of critical habitat, where actions of federal agencies are analyzed to prevent the incidental adverse modification of their habitat. It does not mean no development can occur in the area, only that federal agencies must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service if they are conducting, funding, or permitting activities that may affect the species. Designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership, establish a refuge or preserve, and has no impact on private landowners taking actions on their land that do not require federal funding or permits.

Q: What other benefits will this critical habitat designation have? A: Healthy, native, aquatic ecosystems contain some of the highest levels of biodiversity in the Southwest. Aquatic ecosystem protection and conservation is an American value, and critical to many species of aquatic insects, fish, amphibians, reptiles, waterfowl and other wildlife, as well as humans. Efforts to manage threats and protect the habitat of the two gartersnakes will require coordination with partners, states, and tribes in order to encourage healthy aquatic communities and preserve our unique natural heritage for future generations to enjoy.

Q: What is the purpose of the draft economic analysis that accompanies this proposal?

A: We are required to take into consideration the economic impact, and any other relevant impact, of designating particular areas as critical habitat. We may exclude areas from critical habitat designation when the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of including the areas within critical habitat, provided the exclusion will not result in extinction of the species. We have prepared a draft economic analysis to inform our consideration of excluding areas that have been proposed for critical habitat designation. The draft economic analysis estimates $61,000 in economic impacts resulting from critical habitat designation each year. These costs are largely attributed to incremental administrative costs associated with addressing “adverse modification” during formal consultations with federal agencies.

Q: How are you working with the states? A: The Service is working closely with the Arizona Game and Fish Department and New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to develop species status assessments for the narrow- headed and northern Mexican gartersnake that will lead to recovery planning to address threats to these two species. We recognize that management of nonnative sportfish as a resource is important for the States and we will continue to work with them to balance this resource and the conservation needs of the two gartersnake species.

Q: How are you working with tribes? A: The Service will continue to work closely with tribes to address concerns or issues related to excluding critical habitat on tribal lands. We recognize the sovereign authorities of tribes and are committed to abiding by our agreements and working with them to address their needs and the conservation needs of the two gartersnake species.

Q: How are you working with other partners? A: The Service works with a variety of partners on conservation efforts for both gartersnake species. In addition to the state wildlife agencies, these partners include academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, zoos, counties, and other non-Federal partners. As a result, there are several conservation plans in place that benefit one or both of the species in Arizona and New Mexico. These efforts also address some of the special management needs of habitat for the species. .

Q: How are you working with private landowners? A: Projects or activities that occur on private land would not be affected by the proposed critical habitat unless they require a federal permit or funding. All units proposed as critical habitat were occupied at the time of listing by the northern Mexican gartersnake or narrow-headed gartersnake. Federal projects occurring in these areas, such as a federal permit or funding for efforts on private land that could affect the two gartersnake species would likely require consultation with the Service, regardless of critical habitat designation. A number of private landowners have long-term conservation plans in place that provide benefits to one or both of the gartersnakes.

Q: How do I provide my input or comment on the proposed critical habitat rule for the gartersnakes? A: All comments can be submitted here.